Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: xzins
Everyone points out that infallibility only counts when the Pope is speaking on the Church....or something like that.

The four conditions are:

  1. The Pope must be speaking in his supreme apostolic authority, not as a private doctor, as the bishop of Rome, etc.
  2. He must be addressing the whole church. This is why condemnations of individuals are not eligible. Neither is a private letter written to a single individual.
  3. He must be intending to teach definitively. Speculation doesn't apply; he must be setting forth a single position that he intends to bind the whole church to believe.
  4. He must be addressing a doctrine concerning faith or morals. A mere disciplinary issue, like suppressing the Jesuits or who may distribute communion at Mass, doesn't qualify. It has to be a definition of doctrine.
Pretty much everyone is agreed that the Papal decrees dogmatizing the IC and the Assumption were infallible, ex cathedra statements.
71 posted on 01/26/2007 2:25:21 PM PST by Campion ("I am so tired of you, liberal church in America" -- Mother Angelica, 1993)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies ]


To: xzins

Oh, I forgot. The four conditions are all required; 3 out of 4 doesn't make the grade. Conditions #2 and #4 happen rather frequently; #1 is less common, and #3 is very rare.


72 posted on 01/26/2007 2:28:16 PM PST by Campion ("I am so tired of you, liberal church in America" -- Mother Angelica, 1993)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies ]

To: Campion; All

--The four conditions are:
--1...

Does this legalese seem as silly to anyone as it does to me? The pope can only be correct IF these four niggling conditions must be met. And the pope will wiggle and squirm to make sure at least one does not get met so they will not be blamed for the downfall of the papacy. So lets make all these rules and laws and claim they are handed down from the Holy Spirit, Mary and whoever the saint of the day is. Is this Scriptural? Don't answer, you are RCC, you don't need the Scripture. Okay, show me where it is Traditional. Did Augustine, Athenasius, or perhaps Mileto of Sardis come up with these rules?


Did Jesus Himself say that Peter must be addressing the whole church, or Peter must be expressing his Supereme Apostolic Authority when He gave Peter and his unmentioned successors the Keys? Did the Binding and Loosing come with all these strings attached?

"Hey Pete, you are the Supreme Authority, but you gotta be standing on one foot, rubbing your head and patting your belly or it doesn't count..."

Nah, IF the Matthew 16 verse is looked at, it surely does not say anything about fine print.


83 posted on 01/27/2007 8:55:53 AM PST by Ottofire (O great God of highest heaven, Glorify Your Name through me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson