Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 67

Author Topic: The Heretical Pope Fallacy  (Read 73727 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: The Heretical Pope Fallacy
« Reply #5 on: January 02, 2018, 10:06:51 AM »
Quote
If the pope is taken as the rule of faith, then he must be preserved from even material heresy because for the faithful following his example it would make no difference. 

Only in his Magisterium.  His personal views are NOT a "rule of faith".  Period.  God never guaranteed that popes would be good examples in their personal lives ... just take the gross immoralities of some popes as examples.
Logged

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: The Heretical Pope Fallacy
« Reply #6 on: January 02, 2018, 10:08:15 AM »
Quote from: Cantarella on January 02, 2018, 09:50:53 AM
I agree that the Pope is not the rule of Faith; but the whole Traditionalist movement is based upon errors found in nothing less than an ecuмenical Council.

Yep.  That's the problem now, isn't it?  And people are trying to come up with explanations for how this could have happened ... including SVism.  I've always said that the argument isn't about infallibility but about indefectibility.  Catholics can quibble about the precise limits of infallibility, but to post that an Ecuмenical Council could have gone so badly off the rails that Catholics would be forced to repudiate it in order to keep their faith intact, that crosses the line squarely into indefectibility.
Logged

Offline Stubborn

  • Supporter
Re: The Heretical Pope Fallacy
« Reply #7 on: January 02, 2018, 10:14:53 AM »
Quote from: An even Seven on January 02, 2018, 09:13:29 AM
I remember Drew on here. His little tagline was "you make the Pope your rule of faith" (paraphrasing) as opposed to Dogma. He was correct that Dogma is the rule of faith but that has little to do with the problems with Vatican II and what divine law will allow the Pope to do.
There is no divine law that allows the pope to not do certain things, the only promise, or law if you want to call it that,  is the protection by the Holy Ghost from the possibility of error when the pope speaks ex cathedra. Outside of that specific circuмstance as dictated by Pope Pius IX at V1, there is nothing, certainly no divine law, stopping any pope from doing what the conciliar popes have done.


Logged

Offline Cantarella

Re: The Heretical Pope Fallacy
« Reply #8 on: January 02, 2018, 10:19:31 AM »
Quote
Furthermore, there is not logical contradiction between Infallibility and a pope being a heretic and more than the heretic, Caiaphas being the high priest, who was a Sadducee and denied the doctrine of the resurrection, prophesized being the High Priest, that Christ should die for the nation.

Interesting you mentioned that. In the very same scriptural commentary on Luke 22:32, right after the paragraph posted above, we find this:

Quote
And no marvel that our Master would have his Vicar's Consistory and Seat infallible, seeing even in the old Law the high Priesthood and the Chair of Moses wanted not great privilege in this case, though nothing like the church's prerogative. But in both, any man of sense may see the difference between the person, and the Office, as well in doctrine as life. Liberius in persecution might yield. Marcellinus for fear might commit Idolatry, Honorious might fall into Heresy, and more than all this, some Judas might creep into the Office: and yet all this without prejudice of the Office and the Seat, in which saith St. Augustine Our Lord hath set the doctrine of Truth, Caiphas by privilege of his office prophesied right of Christ, but according to his own knowledge and faith, knew not Christ.  

I agree that there is not enough evidence in Magisterial teaching which would entirely rule out the possibility of a heretical pope. The possibility may be there, few theologians have discussed it, and it matters not if the heresy is material or formal. However, I disagree with the possibility of a pope (even if he himself guilty of heresy) being able to teach judicially or definitively errors inconsistent or contradictory with the Faith (for example, promulgating errors in an ecuмenical Council), because then that would compromise the promise of infallibility to the Seat and Office of Peter. I think the key here is the teaching part ... the pontifical right and function to rule and teach... 
Logged

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
Re: The Heretical Pope Fallacy
« Reply #9 on: January 02, 2018, 10:22:11 AM »
Quote
The annotation above ( Luke 22:32 ) is very explicit in describing when the Pope may not judicially err, even when he errs in his private capacity. 
First off, scriptural commentary isn't infallible, so you have to take it with a grain of salt, especially when it is dealing with theological speculation, which is by definition, a guess.

Secondly, Vatican I, in defining the limits of infallibility of the pope, referred to Luke 22:32 a few lines before it issued it's dogmatic decree.  So we cannot say any longer that +Bellarmine's opinion matters because Vatican I "settled the matter" and gave limits on Luke 22:32.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 67
« previous next »