Disputed Questions on Papal Infallibility

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-61
Author(s):  
John P. Joy
Keyword(s):  
Papal Infallibility

Lamennais

1947 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 205-229 ◽  
Author(s):  
Waldemar Gurian
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Catholic Church ◽  
Early Church ◽  
The Third ◽  
Vatican Council ◽  
Papal Infallibility ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Church ◽  
The Catholic Church

The history of the Catholic Church includes men who, after brilliant services to the Church, died outside her fold. Best known among them is Tertullian, the apologetic writer of the Early Church; less known is Ochino, the third vicar-general of the Capuchins, whose flight to Calvin's Geneva almost destroyed his order. In the nineteenth century there were two famous representatives of this group. Johann von Doellinger refused, when more than seventy years old, to accept the decision of the Vatican Council about papal infallibility. He passed away in 1890 unreconciled, though he had been distinguished for years as the outstanding German Catholic theologian. Félicité de la Mennais was celebrated as the new Pascal and Bossuet of his time before he became the modern Tertullian by breaking with the Church because Pope Gregory XVI rejected his views on the relations between the Church and die world. As he lay deathly ill, his niece, “Madame de Kertanguy asked him: ‘Féli, do you want a priest? Surely, you want a priest?’ Lamennais answered: ‘No.’ The niece repeated: ‘I beg of you.’ But he said with a stronger voice: ‘No, no, no.

A.S. Khomyakov and “people’s thought” in the epic novel by Leo Tolstoy “War and Peace”

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (6) ◽  
pp. 91-97
Author(s):  
Yury V. Lebedev ◽  
Keyword(s):  
War And Peace ◽  
Russian Art ◽  
The People ◽  
Church Hierarchy ◽  
Single Organism ◽  
Papal Infallibility ◽  
Cult Of Personality ◽  
Christian Love ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Masses

The article reveals the deep connections of the “people’s thought” and Tolstoy’s philosophy of history in “War and Peace” with the theological and literary-critical works of A.S. Khomyakova. The author of the work analyzes the dispute between Tolstoy and the cult of an outstanding personality, with the Hegelian understanding of his role in the historical process. Tolstoy is alien to the Hegelian rise of “great personalities” over the masses, the Hegelian liberation of the “genius” from moral control and evaluation. Tolstoy believes that it is not an exceptional personality, but the life of the people that turns out to be the most sensitive organism, catching the will of Providence, intuitively sensing the hidden meaning of the historical movement. Anticipating Tolstoy, Khomyakov sharply criticizes the cult of personality in the church hierarchy, the Catholic dogma of papal infallibility, of the unconditional authority of an individual in matters of conscience and faith. Khomyakov reveals deep religious roots that feed the centuries-old Western enmity towards Russia. The article proves that Tolstoy is close to Khomyakov’s idea that Divine Providence overshadows with its grace only the believing people, united into a single organism by Christian love, that the epic basis of “War and Peace” is anticipated in Khomyakov’s literary-critical works “Glinka’s Opera ‘Life for Tsar’”, “On the Possibility of the Russian Art School”, “Ivanov’s Painting. Letter to the editor of ‘Russian Beseda’”. The article proves that “War and Peace” overcomes the conflict between the individual and society, the hero and the people, and reveals the epic horizons lost in the Western European novel.

Scripture

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
William J. Abraham
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Christian Theology ◽  
Christian Faith ◽  
Biblical Authority ◽  
Scriptural Interpretation ◽  
Divine Inspiration ◽  
Liberal Protestantism ◽  
Papal Infallibility ◽  
Historical Investigation ◽  
Radical Reconstruction

This chapter discusses the epochal shift in scriptural interpretation in the nineteenth century. Applying historical investigation to accounts of divine inspiration and revelation resulted in a call for a radical reconstruction of Christian theology, especially as developed in liberal Protestantism. There were a number of responses to such reconstruction of Christian faith. One option was to resist the logic of liberal Protestantism’s normative apologetic while retaining an existential appropriation of biblical heroes and narratives. A second option was to develop a whole new apologetic for the traditional position on inspiration and inerrancy. A third option was to shore up the appeal to biblical authority by a theory of development culminating in a doctrine of papal infallibility. Fourth, there was the populist option of focusing on personal piety and working from a deflationary soteriological vision of Scripture. All five options, if we include liberal Protestantism, continue to flourish.

Ecumenism, Mariology, and the Papacy

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark D. Chapman
Keyword(s):  
Vatican Ii ◽  
Early Church ◽  
Second Vatican Council ◽  
Mutual Respect ◽  
Anglican Church ◽  
Vatican Council ◽  
Papal Infallibility ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Written Traditions ◽  
The Church

This chapter begins with an assessment of Newman as one of the most important influences behind the Second Vatican Council, before moving on to discuss his contributions to ecumenism, or ‘reunion’ as it was usually called, in his own time. After showing how he remained opposed to what he regarded as the system of ‘papalism’ in his Anglican years, even as late as 1841, the chapter moves on to analyse his contribution to the debates of the 1860s that had been sparked by Edward Bouverie Pusey’s response to Henry Manning’s attacks on the Anglican Church of his baptism. Newman in turn responded to Pusey’s Eirenicon which led to a lengthy correspondence and two further volumes from Pusey. The subject-matter, which focused on the doctrines of Mary as well as papal infallibility, revealed important differences between the two former Tractarians. Where Pusey regarded the teachings of the Church as settled and fixed in the written traditions grounded in the early Church, Newman held that Christian life and practice were equally important and were open to change and development. Although the declaration of infallibility scuppered ecumenism for many decades, the debates between Pusey and Newman reveal an openness and sympathy for one another’s opinion that paved the way for a future after Vatican II in which mutual respect would flourish.

Infallibility

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryan J. Marr
Keyword(s):  
Historical Analysis ◽  
Roman Catholic ◽  
Oxford Movement ◽  
Papal Infallibility ◽  
The Church

This chapter provides a close historical analysis of the development in John Henry Newman’s understanding of infallibility from his days as a leader of the Oxford Movement up through the publication of his 1877 Preface to The Via Media. The essay begins with an overview of Newman’s perspective during the final years of his time as an Anglican, before moving into a discussion of how Newman’s viewpoint developed during the latter half of his life. The examination of Newman’s changing perspective during his Roman Catholic period focuses particularly on his theological struggles with the neo-ultramontanist faction in the Church, contending that Newman’s mature position was intended to counterbalance the maximalist interpretations of papal infallibility being advanced by such figures as Cardinal Manning and William George Ward.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document