by Anura Guruge
on October 2, 2022
Wow! This one is convoluted and much depends on semantics, nuances & interpretations.
At a SUPERFICIAL level one can argue, somewhat persuasively, on both side, BUT it gets tricky when you really start drilling down.
ONE of my initial reactions was: “NO ONE but BUT NO ONE, on earth, has authority over the pope“. Can we all agree on that? As long as he is ensconced within the Vatican State he is unimpeachable, totally powerful, ABOVE THE LAW, untouchable & even infallible in certain scenarios (particularly when it comes to dogma, i.e., basically Church teaching). So, to say the pope doesn’t have the AUTHORITY is confusing. He might NOT, but who can legitimately challenge that? That is the question. Cardinals can spout their own opinions but they have NO POWER. Talk about being impotent. All talk, no trousers. Muller can asset anything in words, BUT he can’t do DIDDLY in terms of action.
So, my first contention is: ‘so, who can refute the pope, meaningfully & LEGALLY, on earth?‘ I don’t think there is anyone who can, BUT PLEASE correct me.
Then there are precedents. Many popes played a pivotal role in defining today’s teaching as to the Trinity! That is pretty basic & we only got to where we are today thanks to the hands-on involvement of a number of popes. Check out the whole ‘filioque‘ controversy. It was popes that made the determination.
Then there is the ‘Assumption of Mary‘. A couple of popes made that real.
Then there is Paul VI, birth control & Humanae vitae. That is pretty fundamental & far reaching Church teaching.
Then we also have papal infallibility. Wow. That absolves popes, in matters of dogma, on possible errors in doctrine! I am really not sure whether Muller got this one even vaguely right.
Tell me what you think. MY initial druthers is that Muller is not 100% correct on this.
