• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

earliest claim

Status
Not open for further replies.

Uphill Battle

Well-Known Member
Apr 25, 2005
18,279
1,221
48
✟23,416.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
What is the earliest claim on record for the infallability of the RCC regarding doctrine?

I know that the RCC believes that the passage regarding the gates of hell is proof of freedom from any error.

I'm just wondering when is the first time that it is written down "we don't make no mistakes."

can anyone answer that?
 

Fireinfolding

Well-Known Member
Dec 17, 2006
27,285
4,084
The South
✟129,061.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
This might be a dumb question Uphill, but what would it look like if the gates of hell prevailed on something?^_^

I mean "the gates of death" are equated with a "THEM who HATE ME"

Using the gates of hell not prevailing upon the church (The church, any church, or all churches) What on earth would that look like? ^_^

By the way if you consider it a dumb question be kind and tell me Im off topic ok? lol

Peace

Fireinfolding
 
Upvote 0

Uphill Battle

Well-Known Member
Apr 25, 2005
18,279
1,221
48
✟23,416.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
This might be a dumb question Uphill, but what would it look like if the gates of hell prevailed on something?^_^

I mean "the gates of death" are equated with a "THEM who HATE ME"

Using the gates of hell not prevailing upon the church (The church, any church, or all churches) What on earth would that look like? ^_^

By the way if you consider it a dumb question be kind and tell me Im off topic ok? lol

Peace

Fireinfolding
personally, I think if the gates of hell prevailed against the univeral church, the universal church would cease to exist. We can see that this is not the case though. Christianity is strong an proud.

the gates have not prevailed.
 
Upvote 0

Fireinfolding

Well-Known Member
Dec 17, 2006
27,285
4,084
The South
✟129,061.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
personally, I think if the gates of hell prevailed against the univeral church, the universal church would cease to exist. We can see that this is not the case though. Christianity is strong an proud.

the gates have not prevailed.


Thats how I see it, though I would say Christianity is strong in Him and humble^_^
 
Upvote 0

E.C.

Well-Known Member
Jan 12, 2007
13,870
1,428
✟179,223.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
personally, I think if the gates of hell prevailed against the univeral church, the universal church would cease to exist. We can see that this is not the case though. Christianity is strong an proud.

the gates have not prevailed.
True.

Just look at the survival rate of Orthodox when under persecution.

Pick any: Muslim, Communists, Roman Catholics. The list goes on.
 
Upvote 0

Uphill Battle

Well-Known Member
Apr 25, 2005
18,279
1,221
48
✟23,416.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Papal infallibility was defined (written down) at the first vatican council at the end of the 19th century but the use of it, the charism can be found going far back as Acts.
I understand you believe that it was always so. I was more interested in when it was first stated directly.

19th century is rather late.
 
Upvote 0

Benedicta00

Well-Known Member
Jun 25, 2003
28,512
838
Visit site
✟55,563.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
I understand you believe that it was always so. I was more interested in when it was first stated directly.

19th century is rather late.
So?

It was believed, practiced and held since day one.

Again, i know you say you know and all that but you don't look like you really do know what it means to put it in writing, do you?

There's a reason like with any thing else the pope made the proclamation.

Schisms was getting out of hand, the l vatican council got together to set the record straight that only the pope is infallible and the bishops when they are IN UNION with him, they share in this charsim.

The key point to this proclamation was understanding that a bishop only has authority when he is in union with the pope.
 
Upvote 0

Uphill Battle

Well-Known Member
Apr 25, 2005
18,279
1,221
48
✟23,416.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
So?

It was believed, practiced and held since day one.
pardon me for saying it, but prove it.

Bene said:
Again, i know you say you know and all that but you don't look like you really do know what it means to put it in writing, do you?
sorry, this doesn't make any sense to me.

what did I say that I know?

All I DO know is, the 19th century seems a tad long to be leaving such a crucial truth undefined.

Bene said:
There's a reason like with any thing else the pope made the proclamation.

Schisms was getting out of hand, the l vatican council got together to set the record straight that only the pope is infallible and the bishops when they are IN UNION with him, they share in this charsim.

The key point to this proclamation was understanding that a bishop only has authority when he is in union with the pope.
Schisms were out of hand long before the 19th century. Why was it left so long?
 
Upvote 0

Trento

Senior Veteran
Apr 12, 2002
4,387
575
AZ. Between the Holy Cross river and the Saint Rit
Visit site
✟30,034.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
What is the earliest claim on record for the infallability of the RCC regarding doctrine?

I know that the RCC believes that the passage regarding the gates of hell is proof of freedom from any error.

I'm just wondering when is the first time that it is written down "we don't make no mistakes."

can anyone answer that?

Protestant Patristic scholar John Lawson’s work The Biblical Theology of St. Irenaeus had this to say about the Bishop of Lyons and his view of the Roman church and its primacy: AD 180
[W]hat church can compare with Rome? She is the life-work of the two greatest Apostles, known of all and knowing all, she is a supreme witness to the unified voice of the Church. If it is necessary for each and all to consent to the voice of the whole Church, how necessary is it for all to consent to Rome? To S. Irenaeus AD180 Rome was most certainly an authority none must question, as she cannot be imagined as ever in error. The word ‘infallible’ to some extent begs the question, for the use of it imports into the discussion the results of later definition. It is nevertheless a word which is difficult to do without. With this proviso we may say that Irenaeus regarded Rome as the very corner-stone and typification of a whole structure of ecclesiastical infallibility. The Church and Infallibility by B.C. Butler pgs. 136-137 (c. 1954


Irenaeus AD 180 --. “For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church Rome,, on account of its preeminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the apostolic tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere” (Against Heresies 3.3.2)

St. Cyprian 220 AD on the Church and the Papacy


"...they dare even to set sail...to the chair of Peter and the principal Church [at Rome], in which sacerdotal unity has its source...whose faith was praised by the preaching Apostle, and among whom it is not possible for perfidy [errors or perversion of faith] to have entrance." (Epistle 59:14)

The infallibility of the pope is not a doctrine that suddenly appeared in Church teaching; rather, it is a doctrine which was implicit in the early Church. It is only our understanding of infallibility which has developed and been more clearly understood over time. In fact, the doctrine of infallibility is implicit in these Petrine texts: John 21:15–17 ("Feed my sheep . . . "), Luke 22:32 ("I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail"), and Matthew 16:18 ("You are Peter
 
Upvote 0

Benedicta00

Well-Known Member
Jun 25, 2003
28,512
838
Visit site
✟55,563.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
pardon me for saying it, but prove it.

sorry, this doesn't make any sense to me.

what did I say that I know?

All I DO know is, the 19th century seems a tad long to be leaving such a crucial truth undefined.


Schisms were out of hand long before the 19th century. Why was it left so long?
I believe it was due to the onset of the "Old Catholics."

and excuse me but you asked a question, I gave you the answer. i thought you just wanted an answer. i didn't realize you wanted a debate instead.

There was a lot to Vatican l. I believe it was also connected in some way to the Eastern churches who did rejoin the Church and the excommunication that was lifted from the remaining Eastern churches that did not reunite. Or was the excommunication lifted at Vatican ll??

Actually you have me curious since I am going by memory. I think I'll look it up.

In any event, you have to stat getting it through to your head that infallible statements even if the infallible statement is to define infalliabilty, is to clear up issues that are being debated and contested.

You would have to look into what was happening during the time of Vatican l to see why the pope defined infallibly at that time.

The pope doesn't just up and decided one day he is going to proclaim something and make a dogma just for the heck of it, just becuase he wants to. He uses this gift (his keys) rarely and only when he needs to.
 
Upvote 0

disasm

Senior Member
Jun 19, 2007
689
58
41
Howard, PA
Visit site
✟23,589.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Irenaeus stated all churches should agree with Rome because they practiced what they taught. They were a role model when other churches, such as the Corinthians were having struggles with this, that and the other thing. These struggles with the other Churches are recognized by Paul in his epistles.

The problem with papal infallibility is it goes beyond role model status to dictator free to make changes as one sees fit. The biggest example of this is after the councils ratifying the Creed and stating that no word should be added or removed from it, Rome added the filioque (and the son) to it, thereby making a huge doctrinal mistake. At this point, the line can be drawn that Rome is no longer the great role model it used to be. Even Pope Leo III in times of controversy over the filioque had silver plates made purposefully omitting the filioque. It was his successors, who under the political influence of Charlemagne had the filioque officially inserted into the creed.
 
Upvote 0

Benedicta00

Well-Known Member
Jun 25, 2003
28,512
838
Visit site
✟55,563.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
Protestant Patristic scholar John Lawson’s work The Biblical Theology of St. Irenaeus had this to say about the Bishop of Lyons and his view of the Roman church and its primacy: AD 180
[W]hat church can compare with Rome? She is the life-work of the two greatest Apostles, known of all and knowing all, she is a supreme witness to the unified voice of the Church. If it is necessary for each and all to consent to the voice of the whole Church, how necessary is it for all to consent to Rome? To S. Irenaeus AD180 Rome was most certainly an authority none must question, as she cannot be imagined as ever in error. The word ‘infallible’ to some extent begs the question, for the use of it imports into the discussion the results of later definition. It is nevertheless a word which is difficult to do without. With this proviso we may say that Irenaeus regarded Rome as the very corner-stone and typification of a whole structure of ecclesiastical infallibility. The Church and Infallibility by B.C. Butler pgs. 136-137 (c. 1954


Irenaeus AD 180 --. “For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church Rome,, on account of its preeminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the apostolic tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere” (Against Heresies 3.3.2)

St. Cyprian 220 AD on the Church and the Papacy


"...they dare even to set sail...to the chair of Peter and the principal Church [at Rome], in which sacerdotal unity has its source...whose faith was praised by the preaching Apostle, and among whom it is not possible for perfidy [errors or perversion of faith] to have entrance." (Epistle 59:14)

The infallibility of the pope is not a doctrine that suddenly appeared in Church teaching; rather, it is a doctrine which was implicit in the early Church. It is only our understanding of infallibility which has developed and been more clearly understood over time. In fact, the doctrine of infallibility is implicit in these Petrine texts: John 21:15–17 ("Feed my sheep . . . "), Luke 22:32 ("I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail"), and Matthew 16:18 ("You are Peter
and there we have it. Proof that the early Church always recognized Rome as the final court.
 
Upvote 0

sunlover1

Beloved, Let us love one another
Nov 10, 2006
26,146
5,348
Under the Shadow of the Almighty
✟102,311.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
What is the earliest claim on record for the infallability of the RCC regarding doctrine?

I know that the RCC believes that the passage regarding the gates of hell is proof of freedom from any error.

I'm just wondering when is the first time that it is written down "we don't make no mistakes."

can anyone answer that?

I know that in the NT times, the disciples made mistakes.
Jesus even called Peter 'satan'.
:eek:

I know that in OT times, there were no infallible
men.
I cant find this doctrine in Scripture,
so it may be a man made tradition.
imo
sunlover
 
Upvote 0

disasm

Senior Member
Jun 19, 2007
689
58
41
Howard, PA
Visit site
✟23,589.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
And what proof do you have that the statements to Peter apply to only Rome alone? Peter went and commissioned many bishops. If these specific blessing are handed down to his successors, why wouldn't they be included in these blessings as well? It's key to note that Christ used the word Petros to mention Peter and Petra as the foundation of the church. If Christ meant the church would be built upon Peter, then why does he use a different word for the foundation of the church? The keys may have been given to Peter, but nothing dictates the keys were only held by one person. Every bishop Peter commissioned was given a copy of these keys, and even though Rome may be first, the Pope is only first among equals. The pope doesn't have the infallibility he thinks he does. That authority belongs to Christ, and through Christ all the bishops of the Orthodox Church.

On another note, I don't care what protestant scholars think, I care what the Early Church Fathers say, and I strongly dislike the emphasis of colored/big/bold text you use.
 
Upvote 0

Benedicta00

Well-Known Member
Jun 25, 2003
28,512
838
Visit site
✟55,563.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
UB,

If you're interested. This is Vatican l summed up.

IV. THE RESULTS

In comparison with the large scope of the preparations for the council, and with the great amount of material laid before it for discussion in the numerous drafts and proposals, the immediate result of its labours must be called small. But the council was only in its beginnings when the outbreak of war brought it to a sudden close. It is also true as is known, that reasons within the council prevented a larger result from its sessions. Thus it was that in the end only two not very large Constitutions could be promulgated. If, however, the contents of these two constitutions be examined their great importance is unmistakable. The contents meet in a striking manner the needs of the times.

A. The dogmatic Constitution on the Catholic Faith defends the fundamental principles of Christianity against the errors of modern Rationalism, Materialism, and atheism. In the first chapter it maintains the doctrine of the existence of a personal God, Who of His own free volition for the revelation of His perfection, has created all things out of nothing, Who foresees all things, even the future free actions of reasonable creatures, and Who through His Providence leads all things to the intended end. The second chapter treats the natural and supernatural knowledge of God. It then declares that God, the beginning and end of all things can also be known with certainty by the natural light of reason. It then treats the actuality and necessity of a supernatural revelation, of the two sources of Revelation, Scripture and tradition, of the inspiration and interpretation of the Holy Scripture. The third chapter treats the supernatural virtue of faith, its reasonableness supernaturalness, and necessity, the possibility and actuality of miracles as a confirmation of Divine Revelation; and lastly, the founding of the Catholic Church by Jesus Christ as the Guardian and Herald of revealed truth. The fourth chapter contains the doctrine, especially important today, on the connection between faith and reason. The mysteries of faith cannot, indeed, be fully grasped by natural reason, but revealed truth can never contradict the positive results of the investigation of reason. Contrariwise, however, every assertion is false that contradicts the truth of enlightened faith. Faith and true learning are not in hostile opposition; they rather support each other in many ways. Yet faith is not the same as a philosophical system of teaching that has been worked out and then turned over to the human mind to be further developed, but it has been entrusted as a Divine deposit to the Church for protection and infallible interpretation. When, therefore, the Church explains the meaning of a dogma this interpretation is to be maintained in all future time, and it can never be deviated from under pretence of a more profound investigation. At the close of the Constitution the opposing heresies are rejected in eighteen canons.

B. The other dogmatic Constitution is of equal, if not greater, importance; it is the first on the Church of Christ, or, as it is also called in reference to its contents, on the Pope of Rome. "The introduction to the Constitution says that the primacy of the Roman pontiff, on which the unity, strength, and stability of the entire Church rests, has always been, and is especially now, the object of violent attacks by the enemies of the Church. Therefore the doctrine of its origin, constant permanence, and nature must be clearly set forth and established, above all on account of the opposing errors. Thus the first chapter treats of the establishment of the Apostolic primacy in the popes of Rome. Each chapter closes with a canon against the opposing dogmatic opinion. The most important matter of the Constitution is the last two chapters. In the third chapter the meaning and nature of the primacy are set forth in clear words. The primacy of the Pope of Rome is no mere precedence of honour. On the contrary, the pope possesses the primacy of regularly constituted power over all other Churches, and the true, direct, episcopal power of jurisdiction, in respect to which the clergy and faithful of every rite and rank are bound to true obedience. The immediate power of jurisdiction of the individual bishops in their dioceses, therefore, is not impaired by the primacy, but only strengthened and defended. By virtue of his primacy the pope has the right to have direct and free relations with the clergy and laity of the entire Church. No one is permitted to interfere with this intercourse. It is false and to be rejected to say that the decrees issued by the pope for the guidance of the Church are not valid unless confirmed by the placet of the secular power. The pope is also the supreme judge of all the faithful, to whose decision all matters under examination by the Church can be appealed. On the other hand, no further appeal, not even to an ecumenical council, can be made from the supreme decision of the pope. Consequently the canon appended to the third chapter says: "When, therefore, anyone says that the Pope of Rome has only the office of supervision or of guidance, and not the complete and highest power of jurisdiction over the entire Church not merely in matters of faith and morals, but also in matters which concern the discipline and administration of the Church throughout the entire world, or that the pope has only the chief share, but not the entire fullness of this highest power, or that this his power is not actual and immediate either over all and individual Churches, or over all and individual clergy and faithful, let him be anathema."

The fourth chapter, lastly, contains the definition of papal infallibility. First, all the corresponding decrees of the Fourth Council of Constantinople, 680 (Sixth Ecumenical), of the Second Council of Lyons, 1274 (Fourteenth Ecumenical) and of the Council of Florence, 1439 (Seventeenth Ecumenical), are repeated and confirmed. It is pointed out, further, that at all times the popes, in the consciousness of their infallibility in matters of faith for the preservation of the purity of the Apostolic tradition, have acted as the court of last instance and have been called upon as such. Then follows the important tenet that the successors of St. Peter have been promised the Holy Ghost, not for the promulgation of new doctrines, but only for the preservation and interpretation of the Revelation delivered by the Apostles. The Constitution closes with the following words: "Faithfully adhering, therefore, to the tradition inherited from the beginning of the Christian Faith, we, with the approbation of the sacred council, for the glory of God our Saviour, for the exaltation of the Catholic religion, and the salvation of Christian peoples, teach and define, as a Divinely revealed dogma, that the Roman pontiff, when he speaks ex cathedra, that is, when he, in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, by virtue of his supreme Apostolic authority, decides that a doctrine concerning faith or morals is to be held by the entire Church he possesses, in consequence of the Divine aid promised him in St. Peter, that infallibility with which the Divine Saviour wished to have His Church furnished for the definition of doctrine concerning faith or morals; and that such definitions of the Roman pontiff are of themselves, and not in consequence of the Church's consent, irreformable."

What is given above is essentially the contents of the two Constitutions of the Vatican Council. Their import may be briefly expressed thus: in opposition to the Rationalism and Free-thinking of the present day the first Constitution gives authoritative and clear expression of the fundamental principles of natural and supernatural understanding of right and true faith, their possibility, necessity, their sources, and of their relations to each other. Thus it offers to all of honest intention a guide and a firm foothold, both in solving the great question of life and in all the investigations of learning. The second Constitution settles finally a question which had kept the minds of men disturbed from the time of the Great Schism, and the Council of Constance, and more especially from the appearance of the four Gallican articles of 1682, the question of the relation between the pope and the Church. According to the dogmatic decision of the Vatican Council, the papacy founded by Christ is the crown and centre of the entire constitution of the Catholic Church. The papacy includes in itself the entire fullness of the power of administration and teaching bestowed by Christ upon His Church. Thus ecclesiastical particularism and the theory of national Churches are forever overthrown. On the other hand, it is extravagant and unjust to say that by the definition of the primacy of jurisdiction and of the infallibility of the pope the ecumenical councils have lost their essential importance. The ecumenical councils have never been absolutely necessary. Even before the Vatican Council their decrees obtained general currency only through the approval of the pope. The increasing difficulty of their convocation as time went on is shown by the interval of three hundred years between the nineteenth and twentieth ecumenical councils. The definitions of the last council have, therefore, brought about the alleviation that was desirable and the necessary legal certainty. Apart from this, however, the hierarchy united with the pope in a general council is, now as formerly, the most complete representation of the Catholic Church.

Lastly, as regards the drafts and proposition which were left unsettled by the Vatican Council, a number of these were revived and brought to completion by Pius IX and his two successors. To mention a few: Pius IX made St. Joseph the patron saint of the Universal Church on 8 Dec., 1870, the same year as the council. Moral and religious problems, which it was intended to lay before the council for discussion, are treated in the encyclicals of Leo XIII on the origin of the civil power (1881), on freemasonry (1884), on human freedom (1888), on Christian marriage (1880), etc. Leo XIII also issued in 1900 new regulations regarding the index of forbidden books. From the beginning of his administration Pius X seems to have had in view in his legislative labours the completion of the great tasks left by the Vatican Council. The most striking proofs of this are: the reform of the Italian diocesan seminaries, the regulation of the philosophical and theological studies of candidates for the priesthood, the introduction of one catechism for the Roman church province, the laws concerning the form of ritual for betrothal and marriage, the revision of the prayers of the Breviary, and, above all, the codification of the whole of modern canon law. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15303a.htm
 
Upvote 0

Uphill Battle

Well-Known Member
Apr 25, 2005
18,279
1,221
48
✟23,416.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
I believe it was due to the onset of the "Old Catholics."

and excuse me but you asked a question, I gave you the answer. i thought you just wanted an answer. i didn't realize you wanted a debate instead.
I'm just questioning what I find suspicious.

Bene said:
There was a lot to Vatican l. I believe it was also connected in some way to the Eastern churches who did rejoin the Church and the excommunication that was lifted from the remaining Eastern churches that did not reunite. Or was the excommunication lifted at Vatican ll??

Actually you have me curious since I am going by memory. I think I'll look it up.

In any event, you have to stat getting it through to your head that infallible statements even if the infallible statement is to define infalliabilty, is to clear up issues that are being debated and contested.

You would have to look into what was happening during the time of Vatican l to see why the pope defined infallibly at that time.

The pope doesn't just up and decided one day he is going to proclaim something and make a dogma just for the heck of it, just becuase he wants to. He uses this gift (his keys) rarely and only when he needs to.
that seems rather silly. If he'd been given the keys to settle all matters, and truely WAS infallible, it should be used liberally and without reserve. It is after all, supposed to be perfect infallible truth.

and there we have it. Proof that the early Church always recognized Rome as the final court.
no. You have prooftexts that show some men believed Rome to be the foremost of the churches. That I have no problem with, at one point, that was surely true.
 
Upvote 0

Benedicta00

Well-Known Member
Jun 25, 2003
28,512
838
Visit site
✟55,563.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
I'm just questioning what I find suspicious.


that seems rather silly. If he'd been given the keys to settle all matters, and truely WAS infallible, it should be used liberally and without reserve. It is after all, supposed to be perfect infallible truth.


no. You have prooftexts that show some men believed Rome to be the foremost of the churches. That I have no problem with, at one point, that was surely true.
me said:
There was a lot to Vatican l. I believe it was also connected in some way to the Eastern churches who did rejoin the Church and the excommunication that was lifted from the remaining Eastern churches that did not reunite. Or was the excommunication lifted at Vatican ll??

Actually you have me curious since I am going by memory. I think I'll look it up.

In any event, you have to stat getting it through to your head that infallible statements even if the infallible statement is to define infalliabilty, is to clear up issues that are being debated and contested.

You would have to look into what was happening during the time of Vatican l to see why the pope defined infallibly at that time.

The pope doesn't just up and decided one day he is going to proclaim something and make a dogma just for the heck of it, just becuase he wants to. He uses this gift (his keys) rarely and only when he needs to.


Read both Vatican l and ll.


I did have 1 and 2 mixed up.

Vatican 2
, I. The Role of the Bishops in the Universal Church

4. By virtue of sacramental consecration and hierarchical communion with the head and members of the college, bishops are constituted as members of the episcopal body.(1) "The order of bishops is the successor to the college of the apostles in teaching and pastoral direction, or rather, in the episcopal order, the apostolic body continues without a break. Together with its head, the Roman pontiff, and never without this head it exists as the subject of supreme, plenary power over the universal Church. But this power cannot be exercised except with the agreement of the Roman pontiff."(2) This power however, "is exercised in a solemn manner in an ecumenical council."(3) Therefore, this sacred synod decrees that all bishops who are members of the episcopal college, have the right to be present at an ecumenical council.

"The exercise of this collegiate power in union with the pope is possible although the bishops are stationed all over the world, provided that the head of the college gives them a call to collegiate action, or, at least, gives the unified action of the dispersed bishops such approval, or such unconstrained acceptance, that it becomes truly collegiate action."(4)
http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_...ecree_19641121_unitatis-redintegratio_en.html
18. After taking all these factors into consideration, this Sacred Council solemnly repeats the declaration of previous Councils and Roman Pontiffs, that for the restoration or the maintenance of unity and communion it is necessary "to impose no burden beyond what is essential".(37) It is the Council's urgent desire that, in the various organizations and living activities of the Church, every effort should be made toward the gradual realization of this unity, especially by prayer, and by fraternal dialogue on points of doctrine and the more pressing pastoral problems of our time. Similarly, the Council commends to the shepherds and faithful of the Catholic Church to develop closer relations with those who are no longer living in the East but are far from home, so that friendly collaboration with them may increase, in the spirit of love, to the exclusion of all feeling of rivalry or strife. If this cause is wholeheartedly promoted, the Council hopes that the barrier dividing the Eastern Church and Western Church will be removed, and that at last there may be but the one dwelling, firmly established on Christ Jesus, the cornerstone, who will make both one.(38)

But in any event, you can read Vatican l and see for yourself why the pope called for the council.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.