For years, one has read quotes in Tradisdtan (Rad Trad's great neologism) that assert that even the disciplinary acts of The Holy See are infallible. The quotes are out there for those whose interest is so inclined but simply on the face of it, such quotes seem weird.
From Brother Pascal of The Holy Sacrament, quotes in Vol 1 of Bishop Freppel, pp 497-498
Bishop Fessler, the secretary of the First Vatican Council, explained, with Pius IX’s full approval, that the Pope “ is only endowed with the gift of infallibility in the exercise of his office of Supreme ‘Doctor,’ when teaching the truth revealed by God that is necessary for salvation, and not in disciplinary affairs, nor when he acts as a judge in ecclesiastical trials, nor in the other functions to which his office of Head of the Church might extend. Likewise, in dogmatic decrees, dogmatic bulls, etc., everything that is found in them should not be indiscriminately considered as an object of infallibility. ”
I have now read the quote in context. It seems to me we have no other option but to accept a "minimalist" view of infallibility. Otherwise we end up with the absurd notion of a "fallible infallible magisterium", as Christopher Ferrara called it.
But what does this mean then? Isn't any person who sticks to the Deposit of Faith originally given also "infallible"?
ReplyDeleteDear Father. Thank you.
ReplyDeleteFor years, one has read quotes in Tradisdtan (Rad Trad's great neologism) that assert that even the disciplinary acts of The Holy See are infallible. The quotes are out there for those whose interest is so inclined but simply on the face of it, such quotes seem weird.
Dear Father. Your readers may find this of use:
ReplyDeleteFrom Brother Pascal of The Holy Sacrament, quotes in Vol 1 of Bishop Freppel, pp 497-498
Bishop Fessler, the secretary of the First Vatican Council, explained, with Pius IX’s full approval, that the Pope “ is only endowed with the gift of infallibility in the exercise of his office of Supreme ‘Doctor,’ when teaching the truth revealed by God that is necessary for salvation, and not in disciplinary affairs, nor when he acts as a judge in ecclesiastical trials, nor in the other functions to which his office of Head of the Church might extend. Likewise, in dogmatic decrees, dogmatic bulls, etc., everything that is found in them should not be indiscriminately considered as an object of infallibility. ”
I have now read the quote in context. It seems to me we have no other option but to accept a "minimalist" view of infallibility. Otherwise we end up with the absurd notion of a "fallible infallible magisterium", as Christopher Ferrara called it.
ReplyDelete