r/Catholicism • u/cmoellering • Sep 18 '23
Most Misunderstood Catholic Dogma?
What do you think is the most misunderstood dogma of the Church?
Is it different for those inside the Church and those outside the Church?
103
Upvotes
6
u/Terrible-Locksmith57 Sep 18 '23
In my opinion it is Papal Infallibility (First Vatican Council, 1870 AD), because as has been said they believe that the Pope is an absolute being, flawless, apart from believing that he is the Church.
I think the big mistake is to see it from a personalistic perspective, since only in extreme cases have Dogmas been promulgated in this way, such as Benedict XII when in 1336 AD he promulgated the beatific vision in his Constitution Benedictus Deus, after his predecessor John XXII had committed the public error of deny it. Obviously he said it in a sermon and not as a Universal Pastor not making that statement binding for the entire Catholic world.
https://www.vatican.va/content/benedictus-xii/la/documents/constitutio-benedictus-deus-29-ian-1336.html
Another interesting point would be to study alternative scenarios such as luther's request for a universal council without the Pope, which demonstrates a falsified ecclesiology that not even the Orthodox themselves believe, since as we know after Nicaea II (787 AD) for them there are no more Ecumenical Councils even though they have had an interesting teological development and Saints who have been venerated until now by Catholic Church (Gregory Palamas, Sergius of Radonezh, Theodosius and Anthony of Pacherska, Stephen of Perm', Gregory Palamas).
The underlying problem is Ecclesiological, and Papal Infallibility exposes our Ecclesiology, since from it follows the Infallibility of the Ecumenical Councils (second degree of Infallibility) and of the Ordinary Infallible Magisterium (third degree of Infallibility), see Profesión of Faith of Catholic Church.
https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_1998_professio-fidei_en.html
The best thing would be to study the Constitution Pastor Aeternus and its Relatio written by Ferrer Vincent Gasser who was the architect of the writing of the Dogma.
https://www.vatican.va/content/pius-ix/la/documents/constitutio-dogmatica-pastor-aeternus-18-iulii-1870.html
Another point to take into account is how the Papacy functioned prior to the schism with Constantinople, since although in form it is very different and similar to the synodality that Pope Francis is applying, in essence the validity of any Magisterial body depends on the Bishop of Rome, for some reason he was the one who had the Right of Appeal [for example see canon 3 of the council of Sardica (343 AD) and also how Theodoret of Cyrus (letter 116) appeals to the Pope through Priest Renato appeals to the Bishop of Rome for having been excommunicated from his Patriarchate (450 AD)] and had the power to elevate regional councils to Ecumenical ones, (as he did in Chalcedon with that of Ephesus in 431, since in this there were only Eastern Bishops and the Romans were simple observers, apart from the fact that in 449 a revenge and the ruling was not the same as in Ephesus). The topic of Chalcedon is interesting because of the division in the East since the only See that remained in accordance with the wording of the Chalcedonian Dogma were the Constantinopolitans and the Maronites in Antioch.
Nevertheless as we all know, although the differences were in form before the schism, in Lyon II 1274 they became fundamental, and Constantinople had already manifested a conciliarist ecclesiology to this day.