Expert: Edward Bode - 2/9/2005

Question
-------------------------
Followup To
Question -
Dear Edward,

Here is a quote from the Catholic Encyclopedia

EXPLANATION OF PAPAL INFALLIBILITY

The Vatican Council has defined as "a divinely revealed dogma" that "the Roman Pontiff, when he speaks ex cathedra -- that is, when in the exercise of his office as pastor and teacher of all Christians he defines, by virtue of his supreme Apostolic authority, a doctrine of faith or morals to be held by the whole Church -- is, by reason of the Divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, possessed of that infallibility with which the Divine Redeemer wished His Church to be endowed in defining doctrines of faith and morals; and consequently that such definitions of the Roman Pontiff are irreformable of their own nature (ex sese) and not by reason of the Church's consent" (Densinger no. 1839 -- old no. 1680)

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


John Paul II has made some very strong statements against the idea of women priests, but it is still possible that a liberal successor would reverse this policy and allow women priests. In order to avoid this why doesn't John Paul make an infallible definition ie which is irreformable - can't be changed by successors?

Thank you

Charles
Answer -
Nice to hear from you, Charles, with your concern for the permanence of Catholic teaching.
I do not know why the Pope has not chosen to speak more formally about the ordination of women.  Possibly he thinks that what he has said and officially written should be sufficient.  
Not every doctrine of the Church is the subject of an infallible declaration.  Usually, definitions have come about when an issue has become so vociferous or dangerous that further silence would be gravely detrimental.
Also, probably the current condition of the Holy Father would affect his span of attention.
Such are my thoughts this morning.
Best wishes, Charles.



Dear Edward,

Thanks for your reply.

You said -

>I do not know why the Pope has not chosen to speak more formally about the >ordination of women.  Possibly he thinks that what he has said and >officially written should be sufficient.  

But surely the Holy Father is mistaken if he thinks this. Some liberal RC's openly say they are waiting for a more liberal pope. Ie John Paul is known as a conservative, but a liberal successor may take a different view on this matter, and may feel that the views of his predecessor are not binding. Hence the point about formal definition.  

>Also, probably the current condition of the Holy Father would affect his >span of attention.

Yes I guess I'm not really thinking why doesn't he do it now but why he hasn't done it before, I mean this has been a big issue during John Paul's pontificate.  

>Not every doctrine of the Church is the subject of an infallible >declaration.

Yes I wonder if this subject is somehow outside the category of infallible definition.


Thank you

Charles

Answer
I am not sure that the Pope is mistaken in not making a  formal definition about women's ordination.  I would think that he did what he wanted to do.  Whoever the successor might be, I would doubt that he would be a person to reverse the current Holy Father.  The Holy Spirit will still be in charge.  
How big the issue is beyond the liberals of North America, I am not sure.
What is subject to definition might not be known in advance.  Vatican I laid down the boundaries, as you know.  The exact limits in terms of precise doctrines might now be fuzzy at the edges.  As I recall, there were a few who hesitated on papal infallibility.  Pius XII made an extensive consultation before declaring the Assumption.
Again, Charles, thanks for your interest and concern.
Best wishes.