Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
(June 21, 2015 at 11:10 am)Randy Carson Wrote: 15. That people can be infallible.
I'd like to address this point next, I think. But first, can you tell me which people you are referring to?
The pope.
Okay, thanks...just wanted to be sure.
Let me begin with some background on what infallibility is and isn't and the basis for infallibility.
Terms first:
Impeccability
Impeccability means that one is incapable of sin. Catholics do not claim this characteristic for their Church or Pope. Popes have sinned because they are human.
Infallibility
Infallibility means that one is incapable of teaching error. Catholics do claim this for both the Church and the Pope.
Infallibility does not mean that one is always right or that everything he says is correct, but it does mean that no popes have ever formally taught error on matters of faith and morals because the Holy Spirit has prevented them from doing so. Infallibility does not come from man's ability; it is because of what God has done in protecting His Church from error.
Inerrancy
Regarding the inerrancy of Scripture, the Catholic Church teaches that the inspired books teach the truth. "Since therefore all that the inspired authors or sacred writers affirm should be regarded as affirmed by the Holy Spirit, we must acknowledge that the books of Scripture firmly, faithfully, and without error teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to see confided to the Sacred Scriptures."
I threw that last on in just because.
Now, I would like to quote the Catechism at this point because precision is REALLY important when discussing what infallibility is and is not. Why? Because misunderstanding the CATHOLIC definition of infallibility leads to many unnecessary disagreements.
889 In order to preserve the Church in the purity of the faith handed on by the apostles, Christ who is the Truth willed to confer on her a share in his own infallibility. By a "supernatural sense of faith" the People of God, under the guidance of the Church's living Magisterium, "unfailingly adheres to this faith."417
890 The mission of the Magisterium is linked to the definitive nature of the covenant established by God with his people in Christ. It is this Magisterium's task to preserve God's people from deviations and defections and to guarantee them the objective possibility of professing the true faith without error. Thus, the pastoral duty of the Magisterium is aimed at seeing to it that the People of God abides in the truth that liberates. To fulfill this service, Christ endowed the Church's shepherds with the charism of infallibility in matters of faith and morals. The exercise of this charism takes several forms:
891 "The Roman Pontiff, head of the college of bishops, enjoys this infallibility in virtue of his office, when, as supreme pastor and teacher of all the faithful - who confirms his brethren in the faith he proclaims by a definitive act a doctrine pertaining to faith or morals. . . . The infallibility promised to the Church is also present in the body of bishops when, together with Peter's successor, they exercise the supreme Magisterium," above all in an Ecumenical Council.418 When the Church through its supreme Magisterium proposes a doctrine "for belief as being divinely revealed,"419 and as the teaching of Christ, the definitions "must be adhered to with the obedience of faith."420 This infallibility extends as far as the deposit of divine Revelation itself.421
892 Divine assistance is also given to the successors of the apostles, teaching in communion with the successor of Peter, and, in a particular way, to the bishop of Rome, pastor of the whole Church, when, without arriving at an infallible definition and without pronouncing in a "definitive manner," they propose in the exercise of the ordinary Magisterium a teaching that leads to better understanding of Revelation in matters of faith and morals. To this ordinary teaching the faithful "are to adhere to it with religious assent"422 which, though distinct from the assent of faith, is nonetheless an extension of it.
So, infallibility does not mean that the pope cannot sin or that the pope has all the answers. What it DOES mean is that when the pope speaks on matters of faith and morals in his official capacity as head of the universal church, he is prevented by God from teaching error. Infallibility is like guardrails that keep the pope from going off the road.
This has only happened a few times in history, btw. Probably less than a dozen - depending on who is doing the counting.
Now, let's drill down a bit further into this. Hidden for the sake of those who don't care.
It is clear even from Scripture that Peter had a special commission and special powers from Christ to care for the flock of Christ, to bind and loose, and to confirm his brothers in faith -- indeed he had the very powers of the keys to the Kingdom. Obviously, these powers were essential to the Church as constituted by Christ. And Christ promised to be with the Church always to the end of time, and said that the powers of hell would not prevail against it.
Now, clearly Christ knew that Peter would not live until the end of time, so he must have intended that the power he gave to Peter would be carried on until His return. After all, Peter was to feed "my" (Christ's) sheep, and so was serving as the vicar of Christ in Christ's absence. When Peter died, a new vicar would take his place, and so on, until Christ returned to claim his own. The parable of the steward awaiting his Master's return is very much to the point.
Just as clearly, Peter's authority also enabled himself (and his successors) to set forth the manner in which their successors would be selected, either by choosing the successor personally before death, or by setting forth some other means -- eventually, election by the college of cardinals.
Moroever, if these special and essential powers were to pass out of existence, it would be proof that Christ was no longer with his Church and that the powers of Hell had indeed prevailed. Therefore, again, Christ must have intended successors to Peter.
For this reason, we are not at all surprised that subsequent popes claimed to have the Petrine power and that the early Christian community accepted it without question. This authority was exercised by the fourth Pope, Clement, while St. John the Evangelist was still alive. The earliest Christians were in a position to know Christ's will from other sources than Scripture (just as we today, under the guidance of the Church, are able to learn from Tradition).
Now we come to the specific question of infallibility, by which the successors of Peter continue to confirm the brethren. Since the successors of Peter have the same Petrine authority, which comes ultimately from Christ, to bind and loose, they have the authority to bind the faithful in matters pertaining to salvation -- that is, in faith or morals. [COLOR="Red"]Now, if a Pope could bind the faithful to error, it would be a clear triumph of the powers of Hell, because the entire Church would be bound to follow the error under Christ's own authority. Obviously, this cannot happen.[/COLOR]
[COLOR="Red"][COLOR="red"]Therefore, the logic of the situation demands that the Petrine power of confirming the brethren must be an infallible power. When the Pope intends by virtue of his supreme authority to teach on a matter of faith and morals to the entire Church, he MUST be protected by the Holy Spirit from error -- else the powers of hell would prevail.[/COLOR]
This is the logic behind infallibility. But, of course, it is not based solely on logic, since it is attested in Scripture and was held by the earliest Christians and the Fathers and, indeed, by the vast majority of Christians from the beginning.[/COLOR]
Further, it is not a new thing. It was precisely defined at Vatican I in order to clarify what was at that time a confusing issue, but this was by way of stating clearly what Christ's teaching was, not by way of adding anything new. Vatican I therefore carefully enumerated the conditions under which the Pope was in fact infallible -- the same conditions which logic demands, which Scripture suggests, and which tradition shows us in action down through the centuries.
When the Pope (1) intends to teach (2) by virtue of his supreme authority (3) on a matter of faith and morals (4) to the whole Church, he is preserved by the Holy Spirit from error. His teaching act is therefore called "infallible" and the teaching which he articulates is termed "irreformable".
All that having been said, I could provide you with a bunch of scriptures and writings from the Early Church Fathers which demonstrate that while the doctrine of papal infallibility was not formally declared until 1870 at the first Vatican Council, the basis for it was held by the Church going back to the books of the New Testament itself. Let me know if you are interested in this supporting material.
And I'm using spaceship as a metaphor for all, and I do mean ALL, the very human prophets, representatives, priests, and friars that have ever existed.
(June 21, 2015 at 4:06 pm)pocaracas Wrote: Randy, what does god need with a spaceship?
And I'm using spaceship as a metaphor for all, and I do mean ALL, the very human prophets, representatives, priests, and friars that have ever existed.
He doesn't. God has no needs.
But if you're asking why He has chosen to work via the priesthood instead of directly, I think this is because it is to our benefit to have someone of flesh and blood to talk to and to listen to.
The Bible frequently uses the analogy of the shepherd and the flock of sheep. He uses this imagery not only for Himself ("I am the Good Shepherd") but also for the leaders of His people ("Feed my sheep" - said to Peter).
It's a very apt analogy. The shepherd does indeed take care of his sheep - for the best interests of the butcher.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'
Ok, thanks. That narrows it down to matters of faith only.
problems I have with pope's infallibility:
~Popes disagree with each other
Quote:Pope Innocent III and Pope Gregory IX (1200) considered abortion to be homicide only when the fetus is "formed".
Pope Sixtus V (1588), declared contraception and abortion at any stage of pregnancy, whether the fetus was "animated or not animated, formed or unformed," to be homicide and a mortal sin.
Pope Gregory XIV (1591) revoked the previous Papal bull and reinstated the "quickening" test (the perception by a mother that the fetus moves/is animated) which he determined happened 116 days into pregnancy.
Pope Pius IX (1869) dropped the distinction between the "fetus animatus" and "fetus inanimatus" saying that the soul enters the embryo at conception.
even on matters of faith
~Called by god or people?
The pope is chosen by bishops. doesn't that mean he is chosen by people and not god?
~Infallibility can be turned on and off, apparently
what happens when a popeapps being the pope? still infallible?
~women can't be infallible, because who cares about women anyways?
a woman can't be a pope, or a bishop. Why? Women can't be infallible?
~Why doesn't divine guidance prevent popes from sinning?
If they can't be wrong about matters of morals and faith, why don't they follow their own doctrines?
Let's stop here. Other objections would venture to far away from the topic at hand.
(June 21, 2015 at 4:32 pm)Stimbo Wrote: It's a very apt analogy. The shepherd does indeed take care of his sheep - for the best interests of the butcher.
I thought is was for the wool...yes, sir, yes, sir...three bags full.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'
June 21, 2015 at 4:56 pm (This post was last modified: June 21, 2015 at 4:58 pm by Randy Carson.)
(June 21, 2015 at 4:42 pm)Neimenovic Wrote: Ok, thanks. That narrows it down to matters of faith only.
problems I have with pope's infallibility:
~Popes disagree with each other
Quote:Pope Innocent III and Pope Gregory IX (1200) considered abortion to be homicide only when the fetus is "formed".
Pope Sixtus V (1588), declared contraception and abortion at any stage of pregnancy, whether the fetus was "animated or not animated, formed or unformed," to be homicide and a mortal sin.
Pope Gregory XIV (1591) revoked the previous Papal bull and reinstated the "quickening" test (the perception by a mother that the fetus moves/is animated) which he determined happened 116 days into pregnancy.
Pope Pius IX (1869) dropped the distinction between the "fetus animatus" and "fetus inanimatus" saying that the soul enters the embryo at conception.
Well, sure. Popes can disagree with one another and they can be wrong in their ideas...AS PRIVATE THEOLOGIANS. Just not when they are teaching formally as head of the universal Church. As I said, there are only a few times this has ever been done. I can name only two off the top of my head:
The Immaculate Conception (1854)
The Assumption of Mary (1950)
Quote:even on matters of faith
~Called by god or people?
The pope is chosen by bishops. doesn't that mean he is chosen by people and not god?
Aren't those people being led by the Spirit to make a wise decision?
Quote:~Infallibility can be turned on and off, apparently
what happens when a popeapps being the pope? still infallible?
Pope Benedict has retired (a rare thing) and because he is no longer pope, he is no longer the head of the universal Church. Not infallible.
Quote:~women can't be infallible, because who cares about women anyways?
a woman can't be a pope, or a bishop. Why? Women can't be infallible?
ah...the ordination of women is a different question. Trying to sneak in a freebie, eh? Just kidding. Women cannot be ordained as priests because they are not male and therefore cannot stand in the place of Christ (in persona Christi) which a priest must do.
Quote:~Why doesn't divine guidance prevent popes from sinning?
If they can't be wrong about matters of morals and faith, why don't they follow their own doctrines?
Dunno. Not the way God wanted to do it, I guess. But I can know what I'm supposed to do or not do as a believer, and I still choose to sin at times. Why would the man in the Vatican be any different?
Quote:Let's stop here. Other objections would venture to far away from the topic at hand.
Cool. By the way, I should have asked when we finished discussing celibacy if you felt I had made a good-faith effort to answer your questions and whether you think my answers reduced the concerns you may have had about the subject previously?
(June 21, 2015 at 4:06 pm)pocaracas Wrote: Randy, what does god need with a spaceship?
And I'm using spaceship as a metaphor for all, and I do mean ALL, the very human prophets, representatives, priests, and friars that have ever existed.
He doesn't. God has no needs.
But if you're asking why He has chosen to work via the priesthood instead of directly, I think this is because it is to our benefit to have someone of flesh and blood to talk to and to listen to.
No, it's not.
But it's clearly for the benefit of those flesh and blood someones.
(June 21, 2015 at 4:27 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: The Bible frequently uses the analogy of the shepherd and the flock of sheep. He uses this imagery not only for Himself ("I am the Good Shepherd") but also for the leaders of His people ("Feed my sheep" - said to Peter).
It never ceases to amaze me how the flock is ok with that analogy!
That level of brainwashing is just amazing....
June 21, 2015 at 6:02 pm (This post was last modified: June 21, 2015 at 6:02 pm by Longhorn.)
(June 21, 2015 at 4:56 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: Well, sure. Popes can disagree with one another and they can be wrong in their ideas...AS PRIVATE THEOLOGIANS. Just not when they are teaching formally as head of the universal Church. As I said, there are only a few times this has ever been done. I can name only two off the top of my head:
The Immaculate Conception (1854)
The Assumption of Mary (1950)
well, what then? Did god change his mind? Or were the popes fallible?
Quote:Aren't those people being led by the Spirit to make a wise decision?
I don't know, are they? so how does this work? God makes sure they don't pick an asshole and then makes him infallible? this is more curiosity than objection
Quote:Pope Benedict has retired (a rare thing) and because he is no longer pope, he is no longer the head of the universal Church. Not infallible.
is....god ok with that? People quoting infallibility? sounds like it would be a job for life (I know it's not common to quit, but it does happen)
Quote:ah...the ordination of women is a different question. Trying to sneak in a freebie, eh? Just kidding. Women cannot be ordained as priests because they are not male and therefore cannot stand in the place of Christ (in persona Christi) which a priest must do.
no, I know it's a bit off topic, I'll try to keep it on track
a couple questions regarding the above:
~is Jesus god?
~Does god have a gender?
~why is a penis necessary to represent a perfect being?
~why does a perfect being have a penis!?!? nah, just kidding with this one
Quote:Dunno. Not the way God wanted to do it, I guess. But I can know what I'm supposed to do or not do as a believer, and I still choose to sin at times. Why would the man in the Vatican be any different?
I'm impressed. You admitted to not knowing. and well, fair enough
Quote:Cool. By the way, I should have asked when we finished discussing celibacy if you felt I had made a good-faith effort to answer your questions and whether you think my answers reduced the concerns you may have had about the subject previously?
yes, I'm actually glad because I feel like we're having a proper discussion. I don't think you can get me to like the catholic church's teachings, but to be fair you cleared up a couple things and I learned something too, so I'm inclined to call this discussion fruitful.
