1. Standard memberBosse de Nage
    Zellulärer Automat
    Spiel des Lebens
    Joined
    27 Jan '05
    Moves
    83887
    23 Sep '05 07:381 edit
    Is the following case (originally posted by frogstomp) a good example?

    Giordano Bruno

    Filosofo, arso vivo a Roma,
    PER VOLONTA DEL PAPA
    IL 17 FEBBRAIO 1600
  2. London
    Joined
    02 Mar '04
    Moves
    36083
    23 Sep '05 08:42
    Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
    Is the following case (originally posted by frogstomp) a good example?

    Giordano Bruno

    Filosofo, arso vivo a Roma,
    PER VOLONTA DEL PAPA
    IL 17 FEBBRAIO 1600
    Good example of what?
  3. Standard memberBosse de Nage
    Zellulärer Automat
    Spiel des Lebens
    Joined
    27 Jan '05
    Moves
    83887
    23 Sep '05 08:49
    Originally posted by lucifershammer
    Good example of what?
    Papal infallibility...
  4. London
    Joined
    02 Mar '04
    Moves
    36083
    23 Sep '05 09:20
    Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
    Papal infallibility...
    What is your understanding of 'Papal Infallibility'; i.e. what is your definition of the term?
  5. Standard memberBosse de Nage
    Zellulärer Automat
    Spiel des Lebens
    Joined
    27 Jan '05
    Moves
    83887
    23 Sep '05 09:22
    Originally posted by lucifershammer
    What is your understanding of 'Papal Infallibility'; i.e. what is your definition of the term?
    I'll go with the dictionary definition of "infallible": incapable of failure or error.
  6. Donationbbarr
    Chief Justice
    Center of Contention
    Joined
    14 Jun '02
    Moves
    17381
    23 Sep '05 09:24
    Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
    I'll go with the dictionary definition of "infallible": incapable of failure or error.
    This definition is too broad. Nobody thinks the Pope is infallible at the race track.
  7. Standard memberBosse de Nage
    Zellulärer Automat
    Spiel des Lebens
    Joined
    27 Jan '05
    Moves
    83887
    23 Sep '05 09:321 edit
    Originally posted by bbarr
    This definition is too broad. Nobody thinks the Pope is infallible at the race track.
    OK--here's the Wikipedia definition:
    "In Catholic theology, papal infallibility is the dogma that the Pope, when he solemnly defines a matter of faith and morals ex cathedra (that is, officially and as pastor of the universal Church), is correct, and thus does not have the possibility of error."

    Does the Pope's decision to have Giordano Bruno roasted alive constitute "a matter of faith and morals ex cathedra"?
  8. Donationbbarr
    Chief Justice
    Center of Contention
    Joined
    14 Jun '02
    Moves
    17381
    23 Sep '05 09:37
    Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
    OK--here's the Wikipedia definition:
    "In Catholic theology, papal infallibility is the dogma that the Pope, when he solemnly defines a matter of faith and morals ex cathedra (that is, officially and as pastor of the universal Church), is correct, and thus does not have the possibility of error."
    What sort of possibility is being utilized in this definition? Nomological, logical, or what? I'm surprised the Catholics haven't opted for Papal incorrigibility rather than infallibility.
  9. Standard memberBosse de Nage
    Zellulärer Automat
    Spiel des Lebens
    Joined
    27 Jan '05
    Moves
    83887
    23 Sep '05 09:401 edit
    Originally posted by bbarr
    What sort of possibility is being utilized in this definition? Nomological, logical, or what? I'm surprised the Catholics haven't opted for Papal incorrigibility rather than infallibility.
    That's what I'm asking really. I'm seeking to understand Papal infallibility. Hopefully the man from Nottingham will help us to see through the smoke.

    "The Vatican itself has given no list of papal statements considered to be infallible. A 1998 commentary by Cardinal Ratzinger and Cardinal Bertone, the leaders of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, listed a number of instances of infallible pronouncements by popes and by ecumenical councils, but explicitly stated that this was not meant to be a complete list."
  10. London
    Joined
    02 Mar '04
    Moves
    36083
    23 Sep '05 09:47
    Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
    I'll go with the dictionary definition of "infallible": incapable of failure or error.
    This is a common misconception about 'Papal Infallibility' (which is used in a technical sense by the Church).

    [Infallibility is] in general, exemption or immunity from liability to error or failure; in particular in theological usage, the supernatural prerogative by which the Church of Christ is, by a special Divine assistance, preserved from liability to error in her definitive dogmatic teaching regarding matters of faith and morals.

    Papal Infallibility is the infallibility of the Pope when talking on matters of faith and doctrine under specific conditions:

    - what is claimed for the pope is infallibility merely, not impeccability or inspiration (see above under I). ...
    - infallibility is not attributed to every doctrinal act of the pope, but only to his ex cathedra teaching; and the conditions required for ex cathedra teaching are mentioned in the Vatican decree:

    * The pontiff must teach in his public and official capacity as pastor and doctor of all Christians, not merely in his private capacity as a theologian, preacher or allocutionist, nor in his capacity as a temporal prince or as a mere ordinary of the Diocese of Rome. ...
    * Then it is only when, in this capacity, he teaches some doctrine of faith or morals that he is infallible (see below, IV).
    * Further it must be sufficiently evident that he intends to teach with all the fullness and finality of his supreme Apostolic authority, in other words that he wishes to determine some point of doctrine in an absolutely final and irrevocable way, or to define it in the technical sense ...
    * Finally for an ex cathedra decision it must be clear that the pope intends to bind the whole Church.


    What you're talking about is impeccability.

    ---
    † http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07790a.htm
    ‡ ibid.
  11. Standard memberBosse de Nage
    Zellulärer Automat
    Spiel des Lebens
    Joined
    27 Jan '05
    Moves
    83887
    23 Sep '05 09:49
    Originally posted by lucifershammer

    What you're talking about is impeccability.
    [/b]
    Which, presumably, the Pope is not.

    Thanks for clearing that up.

    Burning Giordano Bruno was simply an act of political expediency, then?
  12. Donationbbarr
    Chief Justice
    Center of Contention
    Joined
    14 Jun '02
    Moves
    17381
    23 Sep '05 09:52
    Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
    Which, presumably, the Pope is not.

    Thanks for clearing that up.

    Burning Giordano Bruno was simply an act of political expediency, then?
    Hey, nobody claimed that Popes are perfect.
  13. London
    Joined
    02 Mar '04
    Moves
    36083
    23 Sep '05 09:52
    Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
    OK--here's the Wikipedia definition:
    "In Catholic theology, papal infallibility is the dogma that the Pope, when he solemnly defines a matter of faith and morals ex cathedra (that is, officially and as pastor of the universal Church), is correct, and thus does not have the possibility of error."

    Does the Pope's decision to have Giordano Bruno roasted alive constitute "a matter of faith and morals ex cathedra"?
    Does the Pope's decision to have Giordano Bruno roasted alive constitute "a matter of faith and morals ex cathedra"?

    No.
  14. Standard memberBosse de Nage
    Zellulärer Automat
    Spiel des Lebens
    Joined
    27 Jan '05
    Moves
    83887
    23 Sep '05 09:57
    Originally posted by bbarr
    Hey, nobody claimed that Popes are perfect.
    It seems paradoxical that the same person can be capable of "infallibility" as well as murder, but perhaps life is inherently paradoxical (I wonder was that last bit nonsense).
  15. London
    Joined
    02 Mar '04
    Moves
    36083
    23 Sep '05 09:59
    Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
    Which, presumably, the Pope is not.

    Thanks for clearing that up.

    Burning Giordano Bruno was simply an act of political expediency, then?
    Burning Giordano Bruno was simply an act of political expediency, then?

    More or less. The physical persecution of all heretics was primarily driven by political factors. In the history of Church till the 15th century or so, the rise of heresies was almost always accompanied by armed rebellion against the State and civil war (e.g. with Nestorianism in the 5th-6th cent. AD and with Albigensianism in the 12th-13th cent. AD).
Back to Top