Papal Infallibility

One Of The Elect · Sep 26, 2017

Dogma introduced by Pope Pius IX. Which is the belief in apostolic authority established from St. Peter by Christ. Which teaches: the only way a Pope could be fallible is if he strays from the foundation which is the Word, right? St. Peter died for the Word. So, my question is why aren't more Catholic Christians outraged with what the Vatican II sect is doing to the faith? Is it not a fallible doctrine to teach unity amongst religions who reject Christ as Lord and Saviour? John14:6 Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but by me. If you had known me, you would have known my Father also; henceforth you know him and have seen Him." I speak to people of different denominations, they really are confused and have hatred for Roman Catholic teachings. Perhaps the demonization of Catholic Christians comes from the Adulteries of the Vatican and its unfaithful Popes, no? So, should we tread lightly with this infallibility doctrine? I mean- after all man is fallible right? I was told in this forum that it is impossible for man to be sinless.
Based on this impossible to be sinless doctrine, do we have a right to hold the Popes accountable when need be? When they are in error ,should we call them out or blindly follow? Should we pray and remain silent when people are being lead astray? Or do both, speak out and pray? Curious observer.

samir · Sep 26, 2017

One Of The Elect said:
Dogma introduced by Pope Pius IX. Which is the belief in apostolic authority established from St. Peter by Christ. Which teaches: the only way a Pope could be fallible is if he strays from the foundation which is the Word, right?

Papal infallibility was defined (not introduced) by Pius IX. Dogmas are often not defined until there is a need to do so to clarify an issue. Infallibility means a pope can't be wrong when he is exercising his office of supreme pastor to teach all the faithful regarding faith or morals. It's similar to the authors of scripture. Peter's teaching in 1Peter and 2Peter is considered infallible (can't be wrong) even though Peter was fallible (could be wrong) at other times.

St. Peter died for the Word. So, my question is why aren't more Catholic Christians outraged with what the Vatican II sect is doing to the faith?

Vatican II did not change any Catholic teachings. They emphasized positive aspects of Catholic teaching which some people twisted to convince others the Church reversed it's position.

Is it not a fallible doctrine to teach unity amongst religions who reject Christ as Lord and Saviour? John14:6 Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but by me. If you had known me, you would have known my Father also; henceforth you know him and have seen Him."

Your question is ambiguous. It's important to be precise when discussing these important issues. Vatican II taught that salvation only comes through Jesus.

I speak to people of different denominations, they really are confused and have hatred for Roman Catholic teachings.

Their hatred is misplaced and in modern times is often due to ignorance (lack of knowledge) and prejudice (due to being raised in an anti-catholic environment).

Perhaps the demonization of Catholic Christians comes from the Adulteries of the Vatican and its unfaithful Popes, no? So, should we tread lightly with this infallibility doctrine? I mean- after all man is fallible right? I was told in this forum that it is impossible for man to be sinless.

It is NOT Catholic teaching that pope's are impeccable (sinless). A pope can sin and do horrible deeds (even murder someone) but that does not take away from his infallibility. For example, Peter denying Jesus (a very serious sin) does not mean that his writings (1Peter and 2Peter) are not true.

Based on this impossible to be sinless doctrine, do we have a right to hold the Popes accountable when need be? When they are in error ,should we call them out or blindly follow?

Jesus said, "The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat; therefore, do whatever they teach you and follow it (Matt 23:3, NRSV)." Likewise, Catholics are to follow whatever the pope teaches from his office as supreme pastor.

Then Jesus said, "but do not do as they do, for they do not practice what they teach. (Matt 23:3)." Likewise, if a Pope sins, Catholics should not commit that sin. They need only follow his teaching, not mimic his actions if they are sinful.

Lest anyone think Christians don't need to submit to anyone, scripture also commands Christians to "Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls and will give an account (Hebrews 13:17, NRSV)."

Should we pray and remain silent when people are being lead astray? Or do both, speak out and pray? Curious observer.

Be careful before you judge. Scripture says, "Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers and sisters, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness. (James 3:1, NRSV)"

SolomonVII · Sep 26, 2017

My experience with Catholic dogma is that grabbing at them is like grabbing at water. The harder you squeeze, the less there is left in your hand

It is fair to say that papal infallibility is not what its main critics define it as. But even the more than its apologists try to define it, the more than it remains an enigma wrapped in a mystery.

It is kind of fun using it in a political partisan way. If a particular pope says something that we like, then it is all like "Rome has spoken end of discussion".
But if it is something that we are at odds with, then it is all about a question of where he was sitting. If he is not on the Chair of Peter, it just doesn't count.

The basic summary is that when a pope teaches like the Church has always taught, then that is infalliblity. If he is adding or subtracting from the basic message that has been taught from the beginning, then his teaching is as fallible as any other sinner.
It is basically a conservative dogma in that way. It is saying that Catholicism is what it is and always has been, and no pope or anybody else can change that.

In the end, Christianity has never been rocket science. The basic teachings are clear enough, men marrying women, and babies being a blessing, and Christ is the first born raised from the dead, and God is good and merciful and the ultimate judge of our eternal souls.
When a pope teaches us what we already know, that is infallible. We can take it to the bank. Otherwise it is not.

bbbbbbb · Sep 27, 2017

SolomonVII said:
My experience with Catholic dogma is that grabbing at them is like grabbing at water. The harder you squeeze, the less there is left in your hand

It is fair to say that papal infallibility is not what its main critics define it as. But even the more than its apologists try to define it, the more than it remains an enigma wrapped in a mystery.

It is kind of fun using it in a political partisan way. If a particular pope says something that we like, then it is all like "Rome has spoken end of discussion".
But if it is something that we are at odds with, then it is all about a question of where he was sitting. If he is not on the Chair of Peter, it just doesn't count.

The basic summary is that when a pope teaches like the Church has always taught, then that is infalliblity. If he is adding or subtracting from the basic message that has been taught from the beginning, then his teaching is as fallible as any other sinner.
It is basically a conservative dogma in that way. It is saying that Catholicism is what it is and always has been, and no pope or anybody else can change that.

In the end, Christianity has never been rocket science. The basic teachings are clear enough, men marrying women, and babies being a blessing, and Christ is the first born raised from the dead, and God is good and merciful and the ultimate judge of our eternal souls.
When a pope teaches us what we already know, that is infallible. We can take it to the bank. Otherwise it is not.

Yes, my experience with Catholic dogma, like yours, is like grabbing at water. It can be extremely frustrating until one determines, as you have pointed out, to ignore all that is taught that conflicts with the essentials of the Christian faith and to cling tenaciously to those essentials.

W2L · Sep 27, 2017

bbbbbbb said:
Yes, my experience with Catholic dogma, like yours, is like grabbing at water. It can be extremely frustrating until one determines, as you have pointed out, to ignore all that is taught that conflicts with the essentials of the Christian faith and to cling tenaciously to those essentials.

I have done the same with all denominations.

bbbbbbb · Sep 27, 2017

W2L said:
I have done the same with all denominations.

That, IMO, is a very wise decision.

kepha31 · Sep 27, 2017

Isa. 35:8, 54:13-17 – this prophecy refers to the Church as the Holy Way where sons will be taught by God and they will not err. The Church has been given the gift of infallibility when teaching about faith and morals, where her sons are taught directly by God and will not err. This gift of infallibility means that the Church is prevented from teaching error by the power of the Holy Spirit (it does not mean that Church leaders do not sin!)

Acts 9:2; 22:4; 24:14,22 – the early Church is identified as the “Way” prophesied in Isaiah 35:8 where fools will not err therein.

Matt. 10:20; Luke 12:12 – Jesus tells His apostles it is not they who speak, but the Spirit of their Father speaking through them. If the Spirit is the one speaking and leading the Church, the Church cannot err on matters of faith and morals.

Matt. 16:18 – Jesus promises the gates of Hades would never prevail against the Church. This requires that the Church teach infallibly. If the Church did not have the gift of infallibility, the gates of Hades and error would prevail. Also, since the Catholic Church was the only Church that existed up until the Reformation, those who follow the Protestant reformers call Christ a liar by saying that Hades did prevail.

Matt. 16:19 – for Jesus to give Peter and the apostles, mere human beings, the authority to bind in heaven what they bound on earth requires infallibility. This is a gift of the Holy Spirit and has nothing to do with the holiness of the person receiving the gift. Heaven cannot bind an error.

Matt. 18:17-18 – the Church (not Scripture) is the final authority on questions of the faith. This demands infallibility when teaching the faith. She must be prevented from teaching error in order to lead her members to the fullness of salvation.

Matt. 28:20 – Jesus promises that He will be with the Church always. Jesus’ presence in the Church assures infallible teaching on faith and morals. With Jesus present, we can never be deceived.

Luke 10:16 – whoever hears you, hears me. Whoever rejects you, rejects me. Jesus is very clear that the bishops of the Church speak with Christ’s infallible authority.

Luke 22:32 – Jesus prays for Peter, that his faith may not fail. Jesus’ prayer for Peter’s faith is perfectly efficacious, and this allows Peter to teach the faith without error (which means infallibly).

John 11:51-52 – some non-Catholics argue that sinners cannot have the power to teach infallibly. But in this verse, God allows Caiaphas to prophesy infallibly, even though he was evil and plotted Jesus’ death. God allows sinners to teach infallibly, just as He allows sinners to become saints. As a loving Father, He exalts His children, and is bound by His own justice to give His children a mechanism to know truth from error.

1 & 2 Peter – for example, Peter denied Christ, he was rebuked by his greatest bishop (Paul), and yet he wrote two infallible encyclicals. Further, if Peter could teach infallibly by writing, why could he not also teach infallibly by preaching? And why couldn’t his successors so teach as well?

Gen. to Deut.; Psalms; Paul – Moses and maybe Paul were murderers and David was an adulterer and murderer, but they also wrote infallibly. God uses us sinful human beings because when they respond to His grace and change their lives, we give God greater glory and His presence is made more manifest in our sinful world.

John 14:16 – Jesus promises that the Holy Spirit would be with the Church forever. The Spirit prevents the teaching of error on faith and morals. It is guaranteed because the guarantee comes from God Himself who cannot lie.

John 14:26 – Jesus promises that the Holy Spirit would teach the Church (the apostles and successors) all things regarding the faith. This means that the Church can teach us the right moral positions on such things as in vitro fertilization, (test tube babies) cloning, surrogate mothers and other issues that are not addressed in the Bible. After all, these issues of morality are necessary for our salvation, and God would not leave such important issues to be decided by us sinners without His divine assistance.

John 16:12 – Jesus had many things to say but the apostles couldn’t bear them at that point. This demonstrates that the Church’s infallible doctrine develops over time. All public Revelation was completed with the death of the last apostle, but the doctrine of God’s Revelation develops as our minds and hearts are able to welcome and understand it. God teaches His children only as much as they can bear, for their own good.

John 16:13 – Jesus promises that the Spirit will “guide” the Church into all truth. Our knowledge of the truth develops as the Spirit guides the Church, and this happens over time.
THE CHURCH IS INFALLIBLE AND SUPERNATURAL

Phil 1:21 · Sep 27, 2017

kepha31 said:
Matt. 18:17-18 – the Church (not Scripture) is the final authority on questions of the faith.

Seriously, that statement should utterly horrify any Christ follower, to think a group of men is superior to the inspired word of God.

Joshua 24:15b "But as for me and my household, we will serve the Lord."

bbbbbbb · Sep 27, 2017

JayW said:
Seriously, that statement should utterly horrify any Christ follower, to think a group of men is superior to the inspired word of God.

Joshua 24:15b "But as for me and my household, we will serve the Lord."

It certainly perplexed me, knowing that sinful men would arrogate to themselves divine attributes.

Phil 1:21 · Sep 27, 2017

bbbbbbb said:
It certainly perplexed me, knowing that sinful men would arrogate to themselves divine attributes.

When folks place men in a superior position to God, it becomes an Exodus 20:3 issue.

bbbbbbb · Sep 27, 2017

JayW said:
When folks place men in a superior position to God, it becomes an Exodus 20:3 issue.

And that is not at all an insignificant issue.

concretecamper · Sep 27, 2017

samir said:
Papal infallibility was defined (not introduced) by Pius IX. Dogmas are often not defined until there is a need to do so to clarify an issue. Infallibility means a pope can't be wrong when he is exercising his office of supreme pastor to teach all the faithful regarding faith or morals. It's similar to the authors of scripture. Peter's teaching in 1Peter and 2Peter is considered infallible (can't be wrong) even though Peter was fallible (could be wrong) at other times.

Vatican II did not change any Catholic teachings. They emphasized positive aspects of Catholic teaching which some people twisted to convince others the Church reversed it's position.

Your question is ambiguous. It's important to be precise when discussing these important issues. Vatican II taught that salvation only comes through Jesus.

Their hatred is misplaced and in modern times is often due to ignorance (lack of knowledge) and prejudice (due to being raised in an anti-catholic environment).

It is NOT Catholic teaching that pope's are impeccable (sinless). A pope can sin and do horrible deeds (even murder someone) but that does not take away from his infallibility. For example, Peter denying Jesus (a very serious sin) does not mean that his writings (1Peter and 2Peter) are not true.

Jesus said, "The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat; therefore, do whatever they teach you and follow it (Matt 23:3, NRSV)." Likewise, Catholics are to follow whatever the pope teaches from his office as supreme pastor.

Then Jesus said, "but do not do as they do, for they do not practice what they teach. (Matt 23:3)." Likewise, if a Pope sins, Catholics should not commit that sin. They need only follow his teaching, not mimic his actions if they are sinful.

Lest anyone think Christians don't need to submit to anyone, scripture also commands Christians to "Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls and will give an account (Hebrews 13:17, NRSV)."

Be careful before you judge. Scripture says, "Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers and sisters, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness. (James 3:1, NRSV)"

Excellent!

Jeepneytravel · Sep 30, 2017

Check out this link, does this sound like "infallibility?
The Criminal History of the Papacy - 1

samir · Sep 30, 2017

Jeepneytravel said:
Check out this link, does this sound like "infallibility?
The Criminal History of the Papacy - 1

Infallibility only applies to teaching, not behavior, so it does NOT mean popes are sinless. Therefore, any crimes committed by popes are completely irrelevant as far as infallibility is concerned.

PeaceB · Sep 30, 2017

Jeepneytravel said:
Check out this link, does this sound like "infallibility?
The Criminal History of the Papacy - 1

But seriously, how many different threads are you going to keep posting the same link in?

Jeepneytravel · Sep 30, 2017

samir said:
Infallibility only applies to teaching, not behavior, so it does NOT mean popes are sinless. Therefore, any crimes committed by popes are completely irrelevant as far as infallibility is concerned.[/QUOTE

In other words they want the sheep to do as they say, not do as they do! lol....seems a bit hypocritical wouldn't you think?

Jeepneytravel · Sep 30, 2017

PeaceB said:
But seriously, how many different threads are you going to keep posting the same link in?

Here is another one for you...
The Antichrist Is Hidden In Plain Sight

samir · Sep 30, 2017

Jeepneytravel said:
In other words they want the sheep to do as they say, not do as they do! lol....seems a bit hypocritical wouldn't you think?

It's not hypocritical at all. It's exactly what Jesus said in Matthew 23:3, "The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat; therefore, do whatever they teach you and follow it; but do not do as they do, for they do not practice what they teach. (Matt 23:3)."

It's also the case with the apostle Peter. He exercised the gift of infallibility when writing 1Peter and 2Peter in the New Testament yet he denied Jesus 3 times. Christians follow his infallible teaching but do not deny Jesus as Peter did.

Jeepneytravel · Sep 30, 2017

samir said:
It's not hypocritical at all. It's exactly what Jesus said in Matthew 23:3, "The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat; therefore, do whatever they teach you and follow it; but do not do as they do, for they do not practice what they teach. (Matt 23:3)."

It's also the case with the apostle Peter. He exercised the gift of infallibility when writing 1Peter and 2Peter in the New Testament yet he denied Jesus 3 times. Christians follow his infallible teaching but do not deny Jesus as Peter did.

Big difference, Matthew 23.3 is written about the scribes and pharises, and not the pagan based Roman religious organization...
Peter immediately repented for denying Jesus 3 times, and was a Godly follower of Jesus thereafter....and no he was not associated with the pagan based Roman church which started 3 centuries after Peter's death.

iwbswiaihl2 · Sep 30, 2017

concretecamper said:
Excellent!

You of course are using scripture that was saying that all scripture came when holy men of God were moved by God to write what He told them. All scripture is inspired, but that ended with the last verse of Revelations.

Papal Infallibility

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Regular Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member of His Church

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Newbie

Similar threads