Papal Infallibility (Pope Innerancy). Can the Pope ever be in the wrong?

[AvilaSurfer]

This question is mainly to Catholics but anyone can answer with Scripture.

Do you believe in "papal infallibility"? That is to say, can the Pope ever sin or be in sin? Can he ever be wrong in His official teaching, views, actions, or beliefs? Since you believe Peter was the first Pope of the Church, do you know of a case in Scripture where this earthly leader of the universal church was in the wrong and had to be rebuked/corrected by someone else on earth?

Scriptures to read:
Galatians 2:11-21

LOL - Yeah, the apostles were wrong a few times, Peter especially.

 

[fhansen]

This question is mainly to Catholics but anyone can answer with Scripture.

Do you believe in "papal infallibility"? That is to say, can the Pope ever sin or be in sin? Can he ever be wrong in His official teaching, views, actions, or beliefs? Since you believe Peter was the first Pope of the Church, do you know of a case in Scripture where this earthly leader of the universal church was in the wrong and had to be rebuked/corrected by someone else on earth?

Scriptures to read:
Galatians 2:11-21

If it hasn't been said, infallibility has nothing to do with impeccability, freedom from sin. Infallibility is said to be given to the office of the papacy and the teaching authority of the church, and used only for official declarations of some type and only on matters of faith and morals. Personal or private opinions given by the pope, whether on theological issues or otherwise, are exempt. Infallibility is said to be a gift, to the church and the world, despite anyone's human limitations and sin.

The understanding is that God must provide a place where the "buck stops", so to speak, in order to guide His church. Incidentally, people often speak as if their own interpretations or opinions are correct, i.e. infallible for all practical purposes, while nonetheless verbally rejecting the concept of infallibility.

 

[Monk Brendan]

This question is mainly to Catholics but anyone can answer with Scripture.

Do you believe in "papal infallibility"? That is to say, can the Pope ever sin or be in sin? Can he ever be wrong in His official teaching, views, actions, or beliefs? Since you believe Peter was the first Pope of the Church, do you know of a case in Scripture where this earthly leader of the universal church was in the wrong and had to be rebuked/corrected by someone else on earth?

Scriptures to read:
Galatians 2:11-21

Nobody ever said the Pope would never sin. That's why he has a confessor.

As others have pointed out, only under certain very carefully described and limited conditions, the Pope cannot teach error officially.

If you really want to know what's involved, read PASTOR AETERNUS, which gives them.

 

[doctorwho29]

Well he is a human being and there has only been one Perfect Human

 

[Cis.jd]

LOL, Is that like receiving 'dog'ma without researching Scripture first?

These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. (Act 17:11)

No. It's making sure research comes before scripture.. because you know, how else was the scriptures canonized?

 

[PaulCyp1]

Infallibility has nothing whatsoever to do with sin. All human beings sin, and the Pope is a human being. A few popes over the ages have led pretty immoral personal lives. Papal infallibility is the result of the promises Jesus Christ made to the first Pope - "Whatsoever you bind upon Earth is bound in Heaven", and "The Holy Spirit will guide you into all truth", and "He who hears you hears Me". These promises guarantee that The Pope cannot be wrong when officially stating a matter of doctrine or morality. It is this divine guarantee that assures that members of the Church Jesus Christ founded will always have access to full and complete truth. Which is why it remains one in belief, one in teaching, one in worship, one in biblical understanding after 2,000 years. The Pope can make errors on financial matters, what team will win the World Series, the weather, and any number of other subjects, just like the rest of us. The doctrinal chaos of Protestantism demonstrates what happens when people abandon Jesus Christ's Church, which He said was to remain one, and its divine promises, and attempt to find truth any other way. Thousands of conflicting manmade denominations, each claiming to be taking truth from "the Bible alone", yet the teaching of each denomination contradicting the teaching of the others, all within a few hundred years.

 

[Jonathan Mathews]

was Jesus actually speaking Greek ?

God chose to write it in Greek, and I will hold fast to what is written aforementioned for our learning.

 

[crossnote]

No. It's making sure research comes before scripture.. because you know, how else was the scriptures canonized?

Long before Rome...i.e. the Jews. As a matter of fact, that's where we got our Scriptures from. ...

Romans 3:1-2 (KJV) What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.

 

[Cis.jd]

Long before Rome...i.e. the Jews. As a matter of fact, that's where we got our Scriptures from. ...

Romans 3:1-2 (KJV) What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.

Even Matt-Rev? How do you know any of the jews wrote any of those books?

 

[fhansen]

Long before Rome...i.e. the Jews. As a matter of fact, that's where we got our Scriptures from. ...

Romans 3:1-2 (KJV) What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.

The Jews did not canonize the New Testament.

 

[crossnote]

Even Matt-Rev? How do you know any of the jews wrote any of those books?

I gave you the passage (Rom 3:1-2) which stated to whom the oracles of God were given. Are you saying the New Testament books are not Scripture?

 

[friend of]

Whenever this issue of Papal infallibility arises I kinda just shake my head and remember the sale of indulgences that was permitted by infalliable decree. Basically, sinning was allowed so long as you paid money for it. Give to Cesar and all that...

 

[Not David]

That neither the Oriental nor the Eastern Orthodox believe that means that that wasn't part of Christianity.

 

[crossnote]

The Jews did not canonize the New Testament.

Sure they did, that's why Jesus repeatedly could appeal to Scripture by saying "It is written".
Actually it often was their own Traditions that Jesus had to expose with Scripture, thus placing Scripture above man's traditions.

 

[Concord1968]

Sure they did, that's why Jesus repeatedly could appeal to Scripture by saying "It is written".
Actually it often was their own Traditions that Jesus had to expose with Scripture, thus placing Scripture above man's traditions.

I believe Jesus was referring to the OLD Testament when he was saying "It is written". The New Testament hadn't been written yet during Christ's teaching ministry.

 

[fhansen]

I believe Jesus was referring to the OLD Testament when he was saying "It is written". The New Testament hadn't been written yet during Christ's teaching ministry.

Right, and NT canonization didn't take place on any universal or widespread level until a few centuries later.

 

[worshipjunkie]

Even on teaching, if the Pope taught something like say the Trinity is wrong...he could not teach that infallibly because it goes against the Deposit of Faith. There is actually a method for official correction of a Pope by the other Bishops.

And if he did this, would it (theoretically) prove papal infallibility wrong? Let's say the Pope says "I, by the authority given to me by Almighty God and the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, etc, etc., hereby declare, decree and define that the Trinity is now the Quadrinity, Father, Son, Daughter, and Holy Spirit."
Assuming it could be proved he was of right mental state (that he wasn't suffering from dementia, for example), would that thereby prove the claims of papal infallibility false?
Or is it more that it wouldn't be considered infallible because it's not in union with the deposit of faith? If that's the case, isn't it awfully circular reasoning? And who decides what is the deposit of faith according to Catholic teaching? The church. So does the church decide when the infallible Pope is in fact infallible?

 

[Acts2:38]

The Rock in this particular verse was Peter, whose name literally means "Rock".

Elsewhere in Scripture Christ is also called the Rock. So Christ essentially named Simon bar Jonah after Himself, and it is to Peter whom Christ refers in this verse. Not Himself.

Greetings, just a slight Correction:

"Upon this rock" is not Peter himself, but Peter's confession. See Acts 2 and 1 Peter 2:4-5 as examples.

...Upon this rock (confession see Acts 2) / I will build MY church....

He did not say he was building a church in Peter's name, charisma, etc. Jesus said Peter was to go out, confess Christ, and upon that confession, build Christs church.

Other than that, thanks for your input on this discussion as I am interested in reading just what people have to say about this topic.

With love

 

[Gregory Thompson]

This question is mainly to Catholics but anyone can answer with Scripture.

Do you believe in "papal infallibility"? That is to say, can the Pope ever sin or be in sin? Can he ever be wrong in His official teaching, views, actions, or beliefs? Since you believe Peter was the first Pope of the Church, do you know of a case in Scripture where this earthly leader of the universal church was in the wrong and had to be rebuked/corrected by someone else on earth?

Scriptures to read:
Galatians 2:11-21

I disagree with papal infallibility for the same reason I disagree with bible infallibility. When the bible is the authority, each individual becomes as pope.

 

[redleghunter]

On this subject I will just have to take the advice of Pope Francis:

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Like take, for instance, women's ordination. Saint Pope John Paul II declared using arguably infallible language, that the Pope lacks the authority to change that. What he did was clarify what was already in the deposit of faith.

So let's say tomorrow the Pope decided to try to infallibly declare against what has been held for 2,000 years. He could not.

It is interesting that Pope John Paul II went to the U.S. and preached religious tolerance and freedom of worship among Christians - Catholic and Protestant. When we went to the South American countries were Catholicism was dominant he preached that all other faiths needed to be suppressed to maintain the purity of the Catholic faith. As a result many Protestant churches were burned and Protestant Christians killed.

So, was he being infallible in the U.S., or in South America?