Vincent Vega Posted August 12, 2007 Share Posted August 12, 2007 Alright. The pope is infallible. Say, Pope Javier (making up names and cases for my own sake sake, and because I think Pope Javier would sound cool...and I'm not mocking infallibility, I'm just using this in place of less controversial matter) says that elephants are only born white. He is infallible, so this has to be correct, yes? Pope Javier dies, and his successor is Pope Chuck. Pope Chuck declares that Pope Javier is incorrect, and elephants are only born pink. Who's right? If they are both infallible, but one says that the other is not correct, will the space-time continuum rip? Kidding about the space-time continuum, of course, but seriously, what would happen if this were a real scenario? Pax Christi, Mitch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenchild17 Posted August 12, 2007 Share Posted August 12, 2007 The color of elephants or the color of anything else for that matter is not a part of faith or morals so neither would be infallible in this case. If you substitute the color of elephants for a matter of faith or morals, like the Assumption of Mary or the primacy of the Bishop of Rome or some other such thing, then if the first Pope spoke in any way binding and was not contrary to any (previous) teaching, the latter pope would have contradicted Catholic teaching. And he couldn't legitimately speak infallibly in doing so because this is protected from occurring by the doctrine of infallibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Vega Posted August 12, 2007 Author Share Posted August 12, 2007 I thought I said that it wasn't actually about the color of elephants, but I suppose I didn't...oh well. Thanks for the clarification. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenchild17 Posted August 12, 2007 Share Posted August 12, 2007 wasn't sure if you were using that to refer to the hypothetical teaching or the hypothetical name of Pope "Javier" . Just making sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anomaly Posted August 12, 2007 Share Posted August 12, 2007 Popes are infallible until they are proven wrong, then it wasn't an infallible statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercy me Posted August 12, 2007 Share Posted August 12, 2007 It is a big deal when a pope speaks "ex cathedra" whis is the term that is used when he speaks infallibly. I don't remember when the last time a pope spoke ex cathedra. Anyone remember? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin86 Posted August 12, 2007 Share Posted August 12, 2007 It was in the 1950s--when the Assumption was officially declared doctrine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercy me Posted August 12, 2007 Share Posted August 12, 2007 Taht was the last one I remembered. Wasn't the Immaculate Conception declared as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin86 Posted August 12, 2007 Share Posted August 12, 2007 In 18-something, yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenchild17 Posted August 12, 2007 Share Posted August 12, 2007 (edited) [quote name='Mercy me' post='1357197' date='Aug 12 2007, 12:56 AM']It is a big deal when a pope speaks "ex cathedra" whis is the term that is used when he speaks infallibly. I don't remember when the last time a pope spoke ex cathedra. Anyone remember?[/quote] Just for clarification, I consider a number of things more than just the highest level of ex cathedra statements to be under the protection of infallibility so I would extend the "hypothetical" much further out than just those two "top-level" dogmatic statements. Edited August 12, 2007 by goldenchild17 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercy me Posted August 12, 2007 Share Posted August 12, 2007 (edited) I have found that some people outside of the church think that everything the pope says is infalible which is not true. Certainly there are many other documents that carry a lot of weight but they are not infalible. Goldenchild how did you avoid getting roundhouse kicked in the face by Chuck Norris? Edited August 12, 2007 by Mercy me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenchild17 Posted August 12, 2007 Share Posted August 12, 2007 [quote name='Mercy me' post='1357283' date='Aug 12 2007, 10:04 AM']I have found that some people outside of the church think that everything the pope says is infalible which is not true. Certainly there are many other documents that carry a lot of weight but they are not infalible.[/quote] oh I agree completely. But from my understanding there is still much more that is considered infallible that many people don't consider. One example that a lot of people probably don't think of is the canonization of saints. When a saint is canonized I believe such an act is considered infallible. [quote name='Mercy me' post='1357283' date='Aug 12 2007, 10:04 AM']Goldenchild how did you avoid getting roundhouse kicked in the face by Chuck Norris?[/quote] Because I've got Jack Bauer and Dog the Bounty Hunter for bodyguards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenchild17 Posted August 12, 2007 Share Posted August 12, 2007 Nice tights [img]http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b139/jonnyle/Chuck_Norris.jpg[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercy me Posted August 12, 2007 Share Posted August 12, 2007 [quote name='goldenchild17' post='1357351' date='Aug 12 2007, 01:55 PM']oh I agree completely. But from my understanding there is still much more that is considered infallible that many people don't consider. One example that a lot of people probably don't think of is the canonization of saints. When a saint is canonized I believe such an act is considered infallible. Because I've got Jack Bauer and Dog the Bounty Hunter for bodyguards [/quote] Jack Bauer and Dog the Bounty Hunter both? Oh, you're good. I was thinking about canonizations and actually took out of my post a mention of them because the church got rid of a bunch of saints a few years back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenchild17 Posted August 12, 2007 Share Posted August 12, 2007 I heard about this. I didn't know (before that) that the Vatican no longer considered this an infallible act. It was then that I actually started to look that up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now