@FeserEdward..Dignitas Infinita..call[ed] much attention..that a pope can teach error when not speaking ex cathedra...
Something the debate over Dignitas Infinita has so far oddly neglected to call much attention to is that it seems that it has now been conclusively demonstrated that a pope can teach error when not speaking ex cathedra. For the new DDF document (issued with the pope’s approval) says:
The death penalty… violates the inalienable dignity of every person, regardless of the circumstances… The firm rejection of the death penalty shows to what extent it is possible to recognize the inalienable dignity of every human being and to accept that he or she has a place in this universe. If I do not deny that dignity to the worst of criminals, I will not deny it to anyone.
By contrast, in Evangelium Vitae, even Pope John Paul II taught only:
Punishment… ought not go to the extreme of executing the offender except in cases of absolute necessity: in other words, when it would not be possible otherwise to defend society. Today however, as a result of steady improvements in the organization of the penal system, such cases are very rare, if not practically non-existent.
And the original version of the Catechism promulgated by John Paul II stated:
The traditional teaching of the Church has acknowledged as well-founded the right and duty of the legitimate public authority to punish malefactors by means of penalties commensurate with the gravity of the crime, not excluding, in cases of extreme gravity, the death penalty.
In short, John Paul II (like scripture, and like every previous pope who spoke on the matter) held that some circumstances can justify capital punishment, whereas Pope Francis teaches that no circumstances can ever justify capital punishment.
You can say that Pope Francis is right, but then you are committed to saying that John Paul II and every previous pope who spoke on the matter erred. Or you can say that all previous popes were right and that Francis has erred. Either way, you are logically committed to holding that some pope or other erred.
This does not contradict the doctrine of papal infallibility, because the new DDF document is not an ex cathedra definition, as Cardinal Fernandez has confirmed. What it does refute is the view of those who argue that all papal teaching on faith and morals is infallible, and the view of those who hold that, even if not all such teaching is infallible, no pope has actually taught error.
Again, this latest development shows that some pope certainly taught error, whether you think that is Francis or his predecessors. Feel free to stomp your feet, shout “dissenter” and “bloodthirsty,” and otherwise blame the messenger all you like. The contradiction is not going away, and neither are the problems that follow from it. Pope Francis has guaranteed his place in the history books.
Comments
The latter may be defined ex cathedra by a pope when need to define an important question of faith or morals.
But Pope John Paul II followed the ordinary magisterium of his legitimate predecessors in demonstrating possibilities only about replacing capital punishment in the present circumstances, not an abolition of capital punishment.
This is quite different from the attitude of Pope Francis, who has an illegitimate pontificate and who is abolishing the faith, has completely excluded this continuity of the popes of the past with the ordinary magisterium of always.
"The traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude, presupposing full ascertainment of the identity and responsibility of the offender, recourse to the death penalty, when this is the only practicable way to defend the lives of human beings effectively against the aggressor".
https://ucatholic.com/catechism/2267/