How does the case of Vigilius not disprove Vatican I?

[paul1149]

Can someone provide the list of infallible statements please?

Someone would have to show me how Boniface's Unam Sanctum was not intended to be a definitive papal pronouncement.

 

[Markie Boy]

Someone would have to show me how Boniface's Unam Sanctum was not intended to be a definitive papal pronouncement.

I have asked on this one before too - it's a serious problem for infallibility, as it's clear as crystal what he's saying, which is contradicted by current teaching - AND it excluded the Eastern Orthodox of the time, whom I have a ton of respect for.

 

[Markie Boy]

However, this theological ground becomes contradictory in cases where the Early Church clearly judged the dogmatic statements of Popes and judged Popes for heresy. It seems to be the case that the Early Church didn't hold to the doctrinal ground that the Pope can't be judged being the "sole" "Successor of Peter."

Exactly - history does not support Papal Infallibility (and neither did the 60 or so bishops that walked out on the Vatican I vote to avoid the mess).

 

[Rhamiel]

Someone would have to show me how Boniface's Unam Sanctum was not intended to be a definitive papal pronouncement.

This would be one of the clearest examples of papal infallibility before 1850

The Pope was clearly defining doctrine

 

[paul1149]

This would be one of the clearest examples of papal infallibility before 1850

The Pope was clearly defining doctrine

Yep. That's the way I see it. I will withhold my opinion of his exegesis and doctrine, out of respect for this venue.

 

[Markie Boy]

This would be one of the clearest examples of papal infallibility before 1850

The Pope was clearly defining doctrine

Yes - that's what makes it so problematic. He clearly would be eliminating the Orthodox at this time in history with his statement, which I would say is clearly wrong.

 

[Rhamiel]

Yes - that's what makes it so problematic. He clearly would be eliminating the Orthodox at this time in history with his statement, which I would say is clearly wrong.

Why is it “clearly wrong”?

I think “No Salvation Outside The Church” has been used as condemnation of schismatics for centuries, has been supported by several Church Councils, including the Council of Florence

 

[Markie Boy]

Why is it “clearly wrong”?

I think “No Salvation Outside The Church” has been used as condemnation of schismatics for centuries, has been supported by several Church Councils, including the Council of Florence

Unam Sanctam - The bull ends, "Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff."

The Eastern Orthodox were not subject to the Roman Pontiff. They have valid priesthood, sacraments, Apostolic Succession, etc. - there is no way they were all doomed as the Bull states.

I agree that Bull is an official Papal teaching - but it's also not true - which proves infallibility of the pope on his own is false.

 

[Rhamiel]

Unam Sanctam - The bull ends, "Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff."

The Eastern Orthodox were not subject to the Roman Pontiff. They have valid priesthood, sacraments, Apostolic Succession, etc. - there is no way they were all doomed as the Bull states.

I agree that Bull is an official Papal teaching - but it's also not true - which proves infallibility of the pope on his own is false.

Christ gave Peter the three fold command of “feed My sheep”
Not “feed my sheep in the diocese of Rome” or “feed My sheep in the West”
No, it was “feed My sheep”

So while the Eastern Schismatics have retained Apostolic succession, unless they repent and become united with the Church they will not have eternal life

This is a hard teaching, but there is One Faith, One Baptism, One Church
That is the path our Lord set up for the salvation of mankind

 

[Markie Boy]

Wow - I'll steer clear of that judgement.

If we are to simply follow the teaching of Jesus and the Apostles that is preserved - not expanded on and added to - I'm not so sure the Rome is ahead of the East.

 

[Rhamiel]

Wow - I'll steer clear of that judgement.

If we are to simply follow the teaching of Jesus and the Apostles that is preserved - not expanded on and added to - I'm not so sure the Rome is ahead of the East.

Both East and West have developed theology over the years, while the east has moves slower in some regards it is not free of innovation

At the same time, I do see most recent innovations in the West as serious mistakes and we could learn a lot from the East
Prayers that the Schism is soon healed

 

[TheLostCoin]

Both East and West have developed theology over the years, while the east has moves slower in some regards it is not free of innovation

At the same time, I do see most recent innovations in the West as serious mistakes and we could learn a lot from the East
Prayers that the Schism is soon healed

If you truly believe the Holy Spirit is guiding your Church, you need nothing from the Eastern Orthodox.

What, would you have the Eastern Orthodox compromise their principles, by denigrating to the level of the Ukrainian Catholics, who have abolished all fasting, and have openly endorsed / promoted the Charismatic movement? As well as Medjugorje?

 

[TheLostCoin]

Christ gave Peter the three fold command of “feed My sheep”
Not “feed my sheep in the diocese of Rome” or “feed My sheep in the West”
No, it was “feed My sheep”

So while the Eastern Schismatics have retained Apostolic succession, unless they repent and become united with the Church they will not have eternal life

This is a hard teaching, but there is One Faith, One Baptism, One Church

Wow, you are seriously going to sink to the levels of Sola Scriptura “disprove a negative” argumentation?

Where in the Bible does it say we should pray to the Saints? Where in the Bible does it say priests should be celibate?

The truth is, you ignore the fact that in Matthew 18:18, all the Apostles are given the power of binding and loosing. Even Saint John Chrysostom brings this up when he says that Saint John the Apostle also has the keys. Peter was a shepherd, but you have yet to prove to me in a positive manner of Scripture (saying what is there, not what isn’t there) that Peter was made a King over all the Apostles, and that all the Apostles weren’t all Shepherds of the Christ’s sheep.

 

[Rhamiel]

If you truly believe the Holy Spirit is guiding your Church, you need nothing from the Eastern Orthodox.

There are some Catholic practices, such as a respect for tradition and a deep sense of solemnity in celebrating the Litugy, which are now more common in the Eastern Orthodox Church then they are in the Catholic Church.

So it is not learning something new, but rather a reminder of practices that have been forgotten

We can look through history at high points and low points for both the Catholic and Orthodox churches

 

[Rhamiel]

Wow, you are seriously going to sink to the levels of Sola Scriptura “disprove a negative” argumentation?

Where in the Bible does it say we should pray to the Saints? Where in the Bible does it say priests should be celibate?

The truth is, you ignore the fact that in Matthew 18:18, all the Apostles are given the power of binding and loosing. Even Saint John Chrysostom brings this up when he says that Saint John the Apostle also has the keys. Peter was a shepherd, but you have yet to prove to me in a positive manner of Scripture (saying what is there, not what isn’t there) that Peter was made a King over all the Apostles, and that all the Apostles weren’t all Shepherds of the Christ’s sheep.

Using the Holy Bible to enlighten the mind and soul is not the same as Sola Scripture

I never said Peter was a “King over the other Apostles” and asking me to cut and paste a verse that directly defines Petrine Supremacy is playing into Sola Scripture far more then any argument I have posted, instead I ask you to read scripture with the mind of the Church, slowly and prayerfully, you will see the special role given to St. Peter
“Rome has spoken, the matter is finished” was not a quote from some decedent Borgia Pope, but rather St Augustine, so many say we need to go back to the first millennium, St Augustine died in AD 430

 

[Markie Boy]

There are some Catholic practices, such as a respect for tradition and a deep sense of solemnity in celebrating the Litugy, which are now more common in the Eastern Orthodox Church then they are in the Catholic Church.

So it is not learning something new, but rather a reminder of practices that have been forgotten

We can look through history at high points and low points for both the Catholic and Orthodox churches

Yes - I think there is no denying that Orthodoxy has preserved the original faith better than Rome. I was shocked after entering the RCC at the Charismatic nonsense that is not just allowed, but promoted.

And a liturgy over run by lay folks and women.

And clergy so out of touch they can't clean their own house or preach well (partly due to mandatory celibacy and the disconnection it introduces into people if it is mandated for all).

 

[TheLostCoin]

Using the Holy Bible to enlighten the mind and soul is not the same as Sola Scripture

I never said Peter was a “King over the other Apostles” and asking me to cut and paste a verse that directly defines Petrine Supremacy is playing into Sola Scripture far more then any argument I have posted, instead I ask you to read scripture with the mind of the Church, slowly and prayerfully, you will see the special role given to St. Peter
“Rome has spoken, the matter is finished” was not a quote from some decedent Borgia Pope, but rather St Augustine, so many say we need to go back to the first millennium, St Augustine died in AD 430

Saint Augustine never said that. The origin of this false quote comes from Sermon 131:10, where he says “Already two councils have sent to the Apostolic See concerning this matter, and reactions have come from hence. The case is concluded; would that error soon cease...”

The African Church and Roman Church have condemned Pelagius, the case is closed.

Pope Zosimus actually later restores Pelagius, and then Saint Augustine and the African Church held a synod condemning Pelagius.

A quote you ought to quote is Saint Augustine’s opinion that you can appeal a judgment of Rome to a General Council.

From Epistle 43:

“Supposing those bishops who judged at Rome were not good judges, there remained a plenary Council of the Universal Church where the cause could be sifted with the judges themselves, so that if they were convicted of judging wrongly their sentence could be annulled.”

 

[TheLostCoin]

Saint Augustine never said that. The origin of this false quote comes from Sermon 131:10, where he says “Already two councils have sent to the Apostolic See concerning this matter, and reactions have come from hence. The case is concluded; would that error soon cease...”

The African Church and Roman Church have condemned Pelagius, the case is closed.

Pope Zosimus actually later restores Pelagius, and then Saint Augustine and the African Church held a synod condemning him.

A quote you ought to quote is Saint Augustine’s opinion that you can appeal a judgment of Rome to a General Council.

From Epistle 43:

“Supposing those bishops who judged at Rome were not good judges, there remained a plenary Council of the Universal Church where the cause could be sifted with the judges themselves, so that if they were convicted of judging wrongly their sentence could be annulled.”

My point on the Bible was that if you make an assertion about an interpretation of the Bible, the burden of proof is on you to provide positive evidence for it - not me. Considering you don’t believe in Sola Scriptura, this includes the Church Fathers.

And I ask you to read the Bible carefully about what the “Key” is, and Peter’s role among the Apostles. Read Matthew 18:18, Revelation 3:7, 1 Corinthians 1:10-17, and Revelation 21:14. Read them in their proper context.

 

[Rhamiel]

Yes - I think there is no denying that Orthodoxy has preserved the original faith better than Rome.

Lol I deny that, many of the Eastern Orthodox say that Westerners can not truly understand the ways of their Church from the outside, I think in a similar way we do not see all the subtle dysfunctions and innovations from the East, unfortunately I am not nearly educated enough to enumerate on them.

I was shocked after entering the RCC at the Charismatic nonsense that is not just allowed, but promoted.

And a liturgy over run by lay folks and women.

Yes the innovations of the last 50 years have been unfortunate, we do not have to look East, when looking back less then a century clears these issues up

And clergy so out of touch they can't clean their own house or preach well (partly due to mandatory celibacy and the disconnection it introduces into people if it is mandated for all).

Are you also disdainful of the mandatory celibacy of the Bishops in the Eastern churches?
You are correct that there are serious problems, I think you are mistaken about the cause

 

[Markie Boy]

You are right - the last 50 years in Catholicism have been embarrassing. I'm not familiar with it before then, but my parents describe it as not much joy and community - mostly strict, mean, and guilt.

I'm not a fan of celibate bishops in the Orthodox, but I think that is one of their innovations as it does not jive with 1 Timothy ch. 3 either. And we know in the first 1,000 years there were married popes, so both East and West had married bishops. God does not seem to mandate celibacy for any of his clergy, man does.