CatholicPlanet.Net discussion group  

Go Back   CatholicPlanet.Net discussion group > Catholic Continuing Education > Teaching Series - dogmatic theology
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 23rd April 2007, 07:37 PM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,759
Default TS 3: the Ordinary Papal Magisterium

Since First Vatican Council infallibly defined the criteria under which a Pope teaches infallibly, when those criteria are not met, the teaching of the Pope is not infallible. To say otherwise is to nullify or contradict an infallible definition by an Ecumenical Council.

The Pope most often teaches the Church through the ordinary non-infallible Magisterium. Such teachings are most often found in encyclicals and other papal documents. And even a document which contains an infallible papal teaching, may also contain other teachings which are non-infallible.

Non-infallible teachings of the ordinary Papal Magisterium are subject to the possibility of error, but never to such an extent as to lead the faithful away from the path of salvation.

The Pope can also teach under the ordinary non-infallible Magisterium verbally. However, when the Pope is speaking to a small group, such as to a group of Bishops, or to those present at a Mass (during a sermon), he generally is not teaching the whole Church, and so his words are more by way of exhortation, and might not be an act of the Magisterium itself.

Similarly, when the Pope chooses to publish a book as a private person, such a book is not an act of the Magisterium, instead falling in the area of theological speculation, which is fallible and not binding on the faithful.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 23rd April 2007, 07:39 PM
Padraig
 
Posts: n/a
Smile

So, when the five criteria are not met, it is non-infallible?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 23rd April 2007, 08:20 PM
untamed_angel
 
Posts: n/a
Default

His teachings and encyclica's are infallible then and general meetings and discussions with different bodies are fallible? I am just trying to simplify this.

God bless
Untamed.

Hey Padraig I have just noticed you are a Belfast man. Born and Bred?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 24th April 2007, 01:11 AM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,759
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Padraig View Post
So, when the five criteria are not met, it is non-infallible?

When the five criteria are not met, it is either:
a non-infallible teaching
or, in the realm of speculative theology and pious opinion.

The Pope can teach at any of three levels:

1. infallible Sacred Magisterium
2. non-infallible ordinary Magisterium
3. fallible theological opinion (like the Pope's recently released book)

If it is not 1. then it is 2. or 3.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 24th April 2007, 01:13 AM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,759
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by untamed_angel View Post
His teachings and encyclica's are infallible then and general meetings and discussions with different bodies are fallible?

No.
Most of the time, in the usual case, his teachings are non-infallible.
He can also expression personal pious opinion, which is fallible.

Meetings and discussions are not really teachings at all, so these
would never be infallible (if I've understood what you are saying).
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 24th April 2007, 02:37 PM
Love The Fisherman
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Hi Ron,
Can you tell me please the specific differences between Dogmas and Infallible Teachings. A Dogma seems to me to be altogether more Formal and comprehensive. I could be wrong about this because I have only ever read the one you gave us. Thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 24th April 2007, 03:53 PM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,759
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Love The Fisherman View Post
Hi Ron,
Can you tell me please the specific differences between Dogmas and Infallible Teachings. A Dogma seems to me to be altogether more Formal and comprehensive. I could be wrong about this because I have only ever read the one you gave us. Thanks.

The word dogma is used with different meanings by different theologians.
There is no one standard meaning.

I use dogma to refer to any infallible teaching of the Magisterium,
including those taught under:
1. papal infallibility
2. solemn definitions of Ecumenical Councils
3. teachings of the universal Magisterium

Some persons narrow the meaning of dogma only to # 1 and 2 above,
but this is not supported by the definition given in the Catechism.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 25th April 2007, 01:06 PM
Love The Fisherman
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Thanks Ron,
The Creed we say at Mass (Council of Nicea?) contains a summary of Our Faith. Can it ever be revised to include things like the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin? Do Dogmas belong in the Creed? Also what did the Pope mean by "Universal Church" to whom he addressed this Dogma (Assumption). Sorry for all the questions!
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 25th April 2007, 01:26 PM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,759
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Love The Fisherman View Post
Thanks Ron,
The Creed we say at Mass (Council of Nicea?) contains a summary of Our Faith. Can it ever be revised to include things like the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin? Do Dogmas belong in the Creed? Also what did the Pope mean by "Universal Church" to whom he addressed this Dogma (Assumption). Sorry for all the questions!

The Church has the authority to amend the Creed.
The Creed itself is not a dogma, although it certainly refers to some
teachings which are dogmas. The Creed need not contain every
dogma of the Church.

The Universal Church is the whole Church, as opposed to a particular
diocese or religious order or Rite.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 11th December 2017, 01:02 AM
Joey Joey is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: PA
Posts: 629
Default

Ron,
Is Pope Francis teaching non-infallibly under Ordinary Magisterium when he states that some divorced and remarried Catholics without annulments may receive Communion? I am confused and somewhat disheartened and wondered if you could/would shed some light. Thank you and God bless you for your time and knowledge.
Joey
__________________
"Closer to You bid me, that with Your saints I may be praising Your name, forever and ever."

Joey
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:05 PM.


Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.