The Pope Francis Thread

[Del]

+JMJ+

[…]

… [C]an it be a legitimate magisterium, since the magisterium truly cannot be erroneous?

[…]

I'm curious, do you expect a schism like Francis apparently does?

If people keep proposing theological incoherencies like "legitimate magisterium", then I think the question answers itself.

If one claims access to some higher authority so as to sift True from Pretender magisterium, then newsflash: one doesn't need a Magisterium. IOW, the Magisterium would only exist in order to parrot one's own opinion.

My opinion is that the new guy is disrespecting the ancient magisterium of Jesus, Scripture, and centuries of Sacred Tradition.

Fortunately, everyone agrees with me except for a few useful idiots at America and National Catholic Reporter.

[Hovannes]

It's been pretty well established that a "magisterium" that cannot survive scrutiny in the light of 2,000 years of church Tradition isn't exactly infallible.
See what John Paul II and Benedict XVI had to say about it.

[Wosbald]

+JMJ+

It's been pretty well established that a "magisterium" that cannot survive scrutiny in the light of 2,000 years of church Tradition isn't exactly infallible.
See what John Paul II and Benedict XVI had to say about it.

That seems like moving-the-goalposts.

Cuz you weren't talking about infallible magisterium, but rather about "legitimate magisterium".

Even non-infallible magisterium is still Magisterium. It's not some illegitimate pretender magisterium.

[Hovannes]

+JMJ+

It's been pretty well established that a "magisterium" that cannot survive scrutiny in the light of 2,000 years of church Tradition isn't exactly infallible.
See what John Paul II and Benedict XVI had to say about it.

That seems like moving-the-goalposts.

Cuz you weren't talking about infallible magisterium, but rather about "legitimate magisterium".

Even non-infallible magisterium is still Magisterium. It's not some illegitimate pretender magisterium.

OK, "legitimate magisterium" it is then if that floats yer boat.
FWIW, Dr. Brant Pitre wrote eloquently on when Papal infallibility may not be infallible. It might help you sort this stuff out.

[Wosbald]

+JMJ+

That seems like moving-the-goalposts.

Cuz you weren't talking about infallible magisterium, but rather about "legitimate magisterium".

Even non-infallible magisterium is still Magisterium. It's not some illegitimate pretender magisterium.

OK, "legitimate magisterium" it is then if that floats yer boat.
FWIW, Dr. Brant Pitre wrote eloquently on when Papal infallibility may not be infallible. It might help you sort this stuff out.

I think yer missing the point.

Didja ever wonder why it's called "non-infallible magisterium" and not simply "fallible magisterium"?

That's cuz, paradoxical as it may sound, "non-infallible" does not equal "fallible". There's no such animal as "fallible magisterium". Which means that the degree of error which can exist in non-infallible magisterium is extremely circumscribed.

Non-infallible magisterium is still taught in persona Christi. It is still taught with the help of the Spirit.

Which means that non-infallible magisterium isn't going anywhere. It will never be dustbinned. It will never be flatly upended, repudiated, undone, negated, condemned, disappeared, etc. It will never be contradicted.

So, if yer waiting for someone to wave a magic wand to rid you of that troublesome pope and all his works, yer gonna be waiting a long time. Yer children's children's children will be waiting a long time.

[Hovannes]

+JMJ+

That seems like moving-the-goalposts.

Cuz you weren't talking about infallible magisterium, but rather about "legitimate magisterium".

Even non-infallible magisterium is still Magisterium. It's not some illegitimate pretender magisterium.

OK, "legitimate magisterium" it is then if that floats yer boat.
FWIW, Dr. Brant Pitre wrote eloquently on when Papal infallibility may not be infallible. It might help you sort this stuff out.

I think yer missing the point.

Didja ever wonder why it's called "non-infallible magisterium" and not simply "fallible magisterium"?

That's cuz, paradoxical as it may sound, "non-infallible" does not equal "fallible". There's no such animal as "fallible magisterium". Which means that the degree of error which can exist in non-infallible magisterium is extremely circumscribed.

Non-infallible magisterium is still taught in persona Christi. It is still taught with the help of the Spirit.

Which means that non-infallible magisterium isn't going anywhere. It will never be dustbinned. It will never be flatly upended, repudiated, undone, negated, condemned, disappeared, etc. It will never be contradicted.

So, if yer waiting for someone to wave a magic wand to rid you of that troublesome pope and all his works, yer gonna be waiting a long time. Yer children's children's children will be waiting a long time.

Unless a later pope dustbins poor Francis' mess as Francis did to Benedict XVI and JPII. Francis uncorked the genie's bottle if that's what you're saying, but if there's no deposit of faith like the Papal Nuncio says, what difference would it make anyway?

[Jocose]

https://x.com/sovereignbrah/status/1730 ... 91804?s=20

This is unreal, man.

Pope Francis just said the Catholic Church’s “great sin” is being “too masculine.”

Further, he said he wants to “demasculinize the Church” because there are too many male theologians, and not enough female theologians.

Pope Francis is in direct violation of the Word of God.

The Bible has an extremely clear stance against women exercising spiritual authority in the church. (2 Timothy 2:11-15)

Dude’s a globalist subverter, through-and-through.

Look at his track record:

- He pushed for the global legalization of gay marriage

- He pushes globalist climate change narratives

- He supported COVID lockdowns

- He punished clergymen who stood against the COVID vaccines

- Pushed for open borders and the mass migration destroying the West

- He vocally supported the UN Agenda 2030’s Sustainable Development Goals

- Allowed for worship of pagan deities in the Vatican (complete violation of God’s 1st commandment)

How much more subversive could he get?

The man might as well be on the WEF’s payroll, at this point.

[Wosbald]

+JMJ+

OK, "legitimate magisterium" it is then if that floats yer boat.
FWIW, Dr. Brant Pitre wrote eloquently on when Papal infallibility may not be infallible. It might help you sort this stuff out.

I think yer missing the point.

Didja ever wonder why it's called "non-infallible magisterium" and not simply "fallible magisterium"?

That's cuz, paradoxical as it may sound, "non-infallible" does not equal "fallible". There's no such animal as "fallible magisterium". Which means that the degree of error which can exist in non-infallible magisterium is extremely circumscribed.

Non-infallible magisterium is still taught in persona Christi. It is still taught with the help of the Spirit.

Which means that non-infallible magisterium isn't going anywhere. It will never be dustbinned. It will never be flatly upended, repudiated, undone, negated, condemned, disappeared, etc. It will never be contradicted.

So, if yer waiting for someone to wave a magic wand to rid you of that troublesome pope and all his works, yer gonna be waiting a long time. Yer children's children's children will be waiting a long time.

Unless a later pope dustbins poor Francis' mess as Francis did to Benedict XVI and JPII. Francis uncorked the genie's bottle if that's what you're saying, but if there's no deposit of faith like the Papal Nuncio says, what difference would it make anyway?

Rescinding a policy is not the same as dustbinning in any major sense.

JP2's and B16's magisteriums — both their infallible and non-infallible elements — still stand in their entirety. Their policies rooted in magisterium are still admissible, still fall within the boundaries of orthodoxy. But the same must be said of Francis' policies.

As such, a future Pope JP3 would be supremely free to rescind Francis' policies and reinstate those of his namesake. But by that same token, the next-future pope [Frank2?] could just-as-freely rescind JP3's and reinstate Francis'. And again, both would also be supremely free to strike out in some unforeseen direction.

The worm turns.

[Del]

magisteriums

[Wosbald]

+JMJ+

magisteriums

<pic redacted cuz of Wos' wonky account>

Yes, there is a certain sense in which one speaks of THE Magisterium, singular and unbroken.

There is also another common, more colloquial sense in which one speaks of the collected body of teachings promulgated by each pontificate as that pope's magisterium. JP2's magisterium, Piux XII's magisterium, etc.

One might think that the "Faith of the Both/And" would find this handy, workingman's distinction rather uncontroversial and a snap to master.