If all Popes are deemed to be infallible in rulings on the doctrine of Christ, has it never happened that a ruling has contradicted or been inconsistent with some earlier one, perhaps from distant times , and, if it has, how was this problem resolved?

Hi Fred.

This is a good question, but expect more smoke than light when everyone checks in.

The basics of this are as follows:

1.Infallibility is a pretty technical theological definition, and does not admit of an easy explanation. Lots of people reject it on this basis. Of course, they don't reject, say, chemistry, for the same reason.

2.Infallibility is restricted to at most, those occasions where a Pope is definitively ruling on a controversial theological matter dealing with faith or morals and is doing so specficially in his capacity as head shepherd and he is not under duress or being coerced and he specifically rules out the option for Catholics to believe differently.

3.For those who are opposed to the doctrine, Popes Liberius and Honorius are their favorite examples. Since these are the best chances to prove the doctrine false, you might want to study these closely. They have to do with what it means to be informed (since infallibility is not a magic spell which gives the Pope the right answer but merely a negative protection from error when he is operating from freedom and knowledge) and what it means to be free (since infallibilty is not a magic spell which will render someone incapable to speak untruth even under torture, but is simply a negative protection from error when the Pope is operting with freedom and knowledge). Lots of info about this is available. A good, cheap paperback which gives the Catholic position is Pope Fiction by Patrick Madrid.

4.It is important, when analyzing what Catholics think about this, to determine what is a doctrinal development, and what constitutes a doctrinal change or contradiction. Most Catholics don't understand this. Catholics who did good work on this were Gregory of Nyssia and John Cardinal Newman. Writings of both are available on Amazon.

5.I think it is useful to note that Catholics make a very striking claim: That their Church has claim to a unique guidance. What would one expect to see if this is true? Catholics note that consistency on moral teachings (you can see how badly this stick-in-the-mud consistency inflames anti-Catholics here) is one very strong suit of the Church. Consistency is one thing which one might expect if the claim were true.

Happy investigating.

Fred, don't ask.

Here is a helpful list.

http://catholicchurch.homestead.com/infallibledocuments.html

But note the disclaimer at the top:

"Note that the infallible documents are not necessarily limited to those in this list, but this list is considered infallible by several sources."

"Several sources?"


For a basic rundown:

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07790a.htm


For essays and discussions which exemplify the views on this dogma, see these Catholic sites:

C:\religion\infachos.htm

(Defends against some of the common non-Roman criticisms.)


http://www.catholic.net/RCC/Issues/Papal-Infallibility/papal-infallibility.html

(Defends against some of the common Roman church adherents' criticisms.)


http://www.ewtn.com/library/Theology/SIPVAT2.HTM

(A faithful Roman churchman's view of the current crisis.)


http://www.mcn.org/1/aloysius/ISSUFILE/PAPLINFL.HTML

(Outlines the American 'revolt' and its background.


http://www.sspx.ca/Angelus/1978_October/Ask_Me.htm

(Outlines the 'right wing' position, which thinks Vatican II was a big mistake.)


Some Roman church members' criticisms in America are very strong:

http://www.angelfire.com/ky/dodone/Kung.html


http://www.post-gazette.com/books/reviews/20000813review550.asp
(clerical celibacy, exclusion of women from the priesthood, the Immaculate Conception, papal infallibility, contraception, homosexuality, Christian-Jewish relations and abortion - reviewed by a Roman church historian)

From outside the Roman church:

http://www.liberalcatholic.org/faq.html
('Old Catholics' -- those who rejected the dogma of papal infallibility when it was announced in 1870, and their descendants, the 'Liberal Catholic Church')


http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/infallible.html

(A skeptical look at papal infallibility.)


The Roman church commands its members to obey its bishops. That way -- if they simply obey -- they don't need to worry about whether a particular belief is infallible or not.

The bishops are instructed by the pope in encyclicals and other documents, and these may or may not be infallible. No one seems to know. If the pope knows, he's not saying.

So to be safe, obey everything.

It also allows the Roman church -- er, considerable latitude.

I am a non-practing catholic, but that comes from My parents, and they always tried to do what was right in THEIR TIME.

In Ireland, as it's happening now, Ireland was ruled with fear of the Priest's (to long to place here)

But now, they (priest's) were at the root of many evil's in Ireland, and to make a long story short,... the Pope would NOT remove them from the priesthood,,,
he may know the book, (how many Pope's were/are/ under 70) but he is VERY FAR removed from family life in the year 2003.

Here's hoping,,
Jack

A very interesting perspective, Jack, wish you would elaborate.

Quote:

"That their Church has claim to a unique guidance. What would one expect to see if this is true? Catholics note that consistency on moral teachings (you can see how badly this stick-in-the-mud consistency inflames anti-Catholics here) is one very strong suit of the Church. Consistency is one thing which one might expect if the claim were true."

Endquote:

Yes, this is interesting, especially when compared to other world religions, such as Islam and Judaism. I wonder how many changes there have been to the Koran since it was written and how strong the feeling is that they are 'special'. Note also that Jews consider themselves as God's 'chosen people'.
All in all, every religion thinks that they are right and the others are wrong. There's nothing particularly unique in the Catholic church believing that they are unique.
If I had to rank religions in terms of 'consistency', Catholicism would come behind Islam and Judaism.

"To believe in God or in a guiding force because someone tells you to, is the height of stupidity. We are given senses to receive our information within. With our own eyes we see, and with our own skin we feel. With our intelligence, it is intended that we understand. But each person must puzzle it out for himself or herself."
Sophie Burnham.