Dating of papal infalibility
Thank you for your support as we endeavor to “support, defend, and advance the efforts of the teaching Church.” United in the Faith, Eric Stoutz Information Specialist Catholics United for the Faith 827 North Fourth Street Steubenville, OH 43952 800-MY-FAITH (800-693-2484) Editor's Note: To submit a faith question to Catholic Exchange, email [email protected]
Please note that all email submitted to Catholic Exchange becomes the property of Catholic Exchange and may be published in this space.
The Council stated: This loyal submission of the will and intellect must be given, in a special way, to the authentic teaching authority of the Roman Pontiff, even when he does not speak ex cathedra in such wise, indeed, that his supreme teaching authority be acknowledged with respect, and that one sincerely adhere to the decisions made by him, conformably with his manifest mind and intention, which is made known principally either by the character of the documents in question, or by the frequency with which a certain doctrine is proposed, or by the manner in which the doctrine is formulated. Rahner's belief, that the popes had made errors when teaching from their ordinary magisterium, was the most likely basis for his thinking.
Karl Rahner, however, stated that this teaching in No. After all, how could the Church require people to give a submission of will and intellect (assent) to the ordinary decisions of the popes on faith and morals if the popes could err in these matters? require obedience at the time they are issued but are subject to revision." That these judgments were not a matter of defined faith and morals was certainly clear to the Pontifical Biblical Commission itself. S., "Church Pronouncements," Jerome Biblical Commentary, 72:3 (New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1968), p.
Email addresses of viewers will not normally be published.
This article discusses the theological character of the documents issued by the Pontifical Biblical Commission and then the non-infallible expressions of the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff to disprove Karl Rahner's belief that the papal magisterium had made errors in doctrinal matters. Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "Instruction on the Ecclesial Vocation of the Theologian," June 26, 1990, No.
The Council was even more specific about submitting to the Pope. is not to be propounded in such a way that in practice an absolute assent is still demanded or that there were no instance in which one might withhold assent." When applying this teaching to a case in which a person had conscientiously decided to use contraception, against the decision of Paul VI in Humanae Vitae, Rahner commented: "Such a Catholic need not fear that he has incurred any subjective guilt or regard himself as in a state of formal disobedience to the Church's authority." So, Karl Rahner believed that one could licitly dissent from the faith and moral decisions of the ordinary magisterium of the popes. Holy Office, "Joannine Comma," June 2, 1927, Official Catholic Teaching: biblical interpretation, edited by James J. It is generally understood to have only occurred twice: Pope Pius IX’s definition of the dogma of Mary’s Immaculate Conception in 1854 and Pope Pius XII’s definition of the dogma of Mary’s Assumption in 1950.In both of these cases, the Pope was not teaching something new.Published letters may be edited for length and clarity.Names and cities of letter writers may also be published.