Yes, No, I Don’t Know, You Figure It Out. The Fluid Magisterium of Pope Francis [Catholic Caucus]

Chisea ^ | May 13, 2016 | Sandro Magister

[ebb tide]

You apparently understand neither the severe limitations where papal infallibility is in effect nor the broad definition of Catholic doctrine as described in the Catholic Encyclopedia.

Finally, it is you, not I, who describes herself as a papist on her home page.

[Mrs. Don-o]

I am a papist! Not a papolator! I do not believe, for instance, that a pope can change the perennial dogmas and doctrines of the Church upon any pretext. He hasn't the authority.

I am rather well versed on the extent and the limitations of papal authority.

You rather surprise me. It's you who have been insisting, repeatedly, that the pope can change Catholic doctrine.

[ebb tide]

I am rather well versed on the extent and the limitations of papal authority.

I disagree. In your first sentence, you lump doctrine and dogma together. There's a big difference between the two.

Again, I urge to refer to the Catholic Encyclopedia on the definition of "doctrine".

[ebb tide]

It's you who have been insisting, repeatedly, that the pope can change Catholic doctrine.

Rather, it's you who has not recognized that Francis has already changed doctrine; such as no need for Jews to convert to Catholicism to be saved.

[Mrs. Don-o]

So, you think that’s Catholic doctrine now?

[ebb tide]

For the third time, please look up “doctrine”.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Once again, you don’t answer one simple question, and one which only you could answer, since what I was asking was your opinion.

The word doctrine -— like most words -— is polysemic. It could mean that which is part of the official and prrennisl teaching, called the “deposit of doctrine”, or it could mean just anything that happens to come from the pen or mouth of a teacher who identifies as Catholic.

I habitually refer to the former, because it can be documented in the catechisms. As for the latter, it’s too loose to be useful. It offers of no way to distinguish between, for instance, Magisterial teaching and papal opinion.

[ebb tide]

So why ask me what I think, if the word could mean anything?

I think francischurch has it's own francis doctrine and I'm not buying it.

"Look, I wrote an encyclical—true enough, it was by four hands [with Benedict XVI]—and an apostolic exhortation. I’m constantly making statements, giving homilies. That’s magisterium". Pope Francis.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Ebb tide, honestly. Please re-read what I wrote. That’s what I just said: that the doctrine-can-mean-anything definition is worthless, because it offers no basis for distinguishing between the Deposit of Doctrine and mere papal opinion.

[ebb tide]

Where do you think the encyclical, Laudato Si, falls? Is it equivalent to an airplane interview?

[ebb tide]

I refer you back to your post #9:

“No. He’s not changing doctrine.”

[Mrs. Don-o]

Oh I am SO glad you asked!

Here you go!

Laudato Si
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/3318660/posts

And here's another item of possible interest:

Theory and Practice
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3180798/posts?page=60#60

Keep the thurible flying!

[Mrs. Don-o]

Right.

He can't.

[ebb tide]

I didn’t bother finishing the first paragraph; but I do agree with you that you have a fevered brain.

[ebb tide]

But you just stated that doctrine can mean many things.

[Mrs. Don-o]

I said it is polysemic. I also said I invariably prefer the more exact and restrictive meaning.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Good night and God bless.

[ebb tide]

Do you think Francis is exact and restrictive in anything he says or writes?

[ebb tide]

Good night.

Dominus tecum.

[piusv]

Nor must it be thought that what is expounded in Encyclical Letters does not of itself demand consent, since in writing such Letters the Popes do not exercise the supreme power of their Teaching Authority. For these matters are taught with the ordinary teaching authority, of which it is true to say: "He who heareth you, heareth me";[3] and generally what is expounded and inculcated in Encyclical Letters already for other reasons appertains to Catholic doctrine. But if the Supreme Pontiffs in their official documents purposely pass judgment on a matter up to that time under dispute, it is obvious that that matter, according to the mind and will of the Pontiffs, cannot be any longer considered a question open to discussion among theologians. - Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis, 1950

Laudatio Si is an Encyclical so it demands consent since it is considered part of the ordinary teaching of the Church/Pope. Amoris Laetitia and Evangelii Gaudium are not encyclical letters but they are Apostolic Exhortations which are also part of the ordinary teaching of the Church. Therefore, according to Church teaching they also demand consent.

The problem (which has been with us for 50+ years)arises when the teaching contradicts previous teaching.