Clarifying Catholicism

"This episode has demonstrated that the Church is not only obligated to restate or reapply its fundamental principles to changing situations but that failing to do so would ironically yield discontinuity. This is why the theologian Henri Bouillard writes, “a theology which is not up to date is a false theology.”

"That said, several Church Fathers considered the Hebrew prophets of the Old Testament and pagan philosophers like Socrates to be within the confines of the Church, since Christ was partially revealed to them as universal wisdom, or logos. However, once a Jew or pagan had heard the Gospel, their conversion was required for their salvation. Christianity’s legalization accelerated this idea."

"Theologian Richard John Neuhaus observes, 'The irony is in the agreement between Lefebvre and the liberal party of discontinuity.' Additionally, the consequences of either side being correct are similar. If even one conciliar principle is demonstrably discontinuous, it could throw into question several other conciliar statements, as well as the Church’s claim to infallibility altogether."

"The second big debate surrounding infallibly taught doctrine is about moral issues that Jesus didn’t directly teach about and instead rely more on ethical systems derived from reason alone. Take contraception, for example. Where does Jesus say that contraception cannot be used by couples? Remember how I mentioned natural law earlier in this episode? Well, given how sparse or arguably even non-existent Christ’s teachings are about contraception, a vast majority of arguments against their use comes from the idea that sex is intrinsically ordered towards procreation."

Obviously, a pope speaking on an airplane is very different than every bishop in the world agreeing about something. And bishops all agreeing that Jesus is the Son of God is very different than the bishops all agreeing that Jesus’s favorite food was, indeed bacon. So, when the Church teaches, the weight of the teaching is going to depend on the infallibility of the subject, the nature of the object, and the context. Let’s dive in.

"Time after time, throughout the earliest ecumenical councils, Rome’s position won out, even though Rome was hardly a political powerhouse after the rise of Constantinople. Between Monophysitism, Nestorianism, Monothelitism, iconoclasm, and others, the Roman positions ultimately defeated heresies at every turn. Some, myself included, argue that this is because Rome, having been replaced by Constantinople as the capital of the empire, was free from being tainted by the pervasive political influence that eastern bishops had to deal with. But, heading into the second millennium, that would change, as the papacy accumulated immense political power and wealth."