Although John Paul II had requested that all his personal notes be burned upon his death, his longtime personal secretary, Archbishop Stanislaw Dziwisz, announced,
“Nothing has been burned,” Dziwisz said. “Nothing is fit for burning, everything should be preserved and kept for history, for the future generations – every single sentence.”
More here from an AP story via MyWay.
A thought…
I’m not an expert on Catholocism, though I did start my education in a Catholic school. (I spent a year and a half there before my folks finally moved me to public school. And people ask why I converted to Paganism.) But last I checked, I thought most Catholics, especially high ranking Catholics like Archbishops, believed in the infalibility of the Pope and that his word and decisions were second only to members of the Trinity.
So when a Pope, especially a really popular Pope like John Paul II, gives an order you’d think they’d obey it- what with him being infalible and all. You’d think that be especially important since this order comes in something akin to a last will and testament. So does the infalibility thing and “second to God” thing go away after he dies or what?
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not mocking Catholics or their religious beliefs. And even though I don’t agree with everything John Paul II did, I can honestly say that he seemed to be a pretty decent human being and a good Pope. It just seems weird to me that they’re doing this.
Re:A thought…
The Pope is only infalible in matters of faith.
Re:A thought…
The doctrine of “papal infallibility” is a huge source of misunderstanding of Catholics and Catholicism for non-Catholics.
The pope is infallible only in matters of faith and dogma, and then only under very precise and limited conditions. Papal infallibility has actually been exercised only four times since the doctrine was formally enunciated. Even on the hot-button moral and religious issues of the current day (you know what they are; let’s not go there), there have been no “infallible” papal statements.
The pope’s wishes on the disposal of his personal papers after his death doesn’t even come close to meeting the narrow demands of the doctrine of papal infallibility. Unless the current pope issues a direct order on the matter (in which case church discipline, not papal infallibility, takes over), the late pope’s secretary is fully justified in balancing the demands of history against John Paul’s personal wishes, and exercising his own judgment in concluding that the demands of history take precedence.
I’m grateful the notes were saved
Thanks to Lis for such a clear explanation of papal infallibility. If memory serves me correctly, even the doctrine of papal infallibility wasn’t formally introduced until the late 19th Century.
I’m very glad to hear that John Paul’s notes will eventually be used for study.
Re:A thought…
Okay, I’ll buy that. Thanks for the clarification!
Re:I’m grateful the notes were saved
I thoroughly enjoyed church history as an undergraduate and especially enjoyed all the parts discussing Roman Catholicism. Since most of my friends are either part of LCMS or Latin Rite Roman Catholicism, I have always needed a better appreciation of where they come from.
Anyhow, you are correct Daniel as Ineffabilis Deus was promulgated in 1854. New Advent has an English translation of it available for review. Of course, this was promulgated by Pius IX and as a historian I recognize that he was quite interesting for many of the things that occurred during his tenure.
Re:I’m grateful the notes were saved
Yes, “interesting” is definitely one word that could be used to describe Pius IX. Others come to mind, but that’s another place we shouldn’t go.