Your Email:

Subject:

Message:
Entry: Who's Infallible Here, Anyway? The Human Life Review Chooses Party Over Church Link: http://www.takimag.com/site/article/wars_and_rumors_of_war#5476 Post contents: Sid, just a few additional notes on "infallibility." In addition to the definition of Vatican I (about faith and morals, to all of mankind, and stated as such), Catholic dogma is also "infallible" when it reflects a doctrine that has been consistently taught and consistently believed. It does not have to be explicitly defined per se to be "infallible" in that sense. Perhapos a better word, and one used by traditional theologians, is "indefectible," in the sense that a teaching is beyond any doubt truthful, without error, and binding in conscience. Let me cite just one example: on religious liberty. There is a consistent and unchanging teaching of the Popes and the Fathers of the Church that "error has no rights," metaphysically and by natural law. In the past two hundred years, just to take more recent times, Popes Gregory XVI (in MIRARI VOS), Blessed Pius IX (in QUANTA CURA), Leo XIII (in DIUTERNUM, LIBERTAS, and IMMORTALE DEI), St.Pius X (in PASCENDI), Pius IX, and Pius XII have reaffirmed that (1) there is only one true Church (Benedict XVI just restated that back in July of this year), (2) that expressions of error do not enjoy a natural right of free expression, but (3) that through charity and/or prudence a Catholic state may choose to tolerate error (the hypothesis) on those occasions when intolerance might be inadvisable or imprudent. But NEVER has the Church taught that all religions deserve equal rights or are of equal status. Previously in Catholic countries such as Spain, Poland, Ireland, and Italy,the Church has fought legislation that would have legalized "equality of religions." Now, more explicitly the Blessed Pius IX in QUANTA CURA expressly states that he is invoking all the full power of the Magisterium, that his declaration reflects an unbroken teaching with all the weight associated with it, that he is addressing the whole world, and that QUANTA CURA applies both in practice and in conscience. In my research (e.g. Choupin's classic VALEURS DOCTRINALES, Fernand Mourret, the DTC, etc.) almost every theologian attributes the weight of infallibility to the Blessed Pius' pronouncement. Even Yves Congar, who disliked the traditional teaching, admitted as much, stating (about the declaration DIGNITATIS HUMANAE of Vatican II): that "it presents an almost word for word substantial contradiction in paragraph 7 of the traditional teaching of the Church, which is considered by many to be infallible." This, by the way, is one of the reason I have previously stated that there were ambiguities in some of the pastoral "declarations" of Vatican II; and even Benedict XVI now seems to recognize some of these. The dogmas of the Assumption and the Immaculate Conception, true, were explicitly defined, but they reflect a constant teaching of the magisterium, the popes, and belief of the faithful previous to those definitions. The specific definition by the Popes reflects only the final step in a process---but they were definitely held to be true and indefectible long prior to 1870 and 1950. [They are not, let it be said, just devotional, but involve also profoundly deep theological doctrines regarding the Incarnation and translation of grace, which have definite impact on all the faithful.] Sent at: 2008 09 06