-
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.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Papal Infallibility: What is it?
- Thread starter Hoonbaba
- Start date
- Status
ZooMom
Thanks for the memories...
- Feb 5, 2002
- 21,387
- 1,010
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
It is the inability of the Successor of Peter to teach error in the matter of faith and morals. It is not a guarantee that every word out of his mouth error-free. There is a much longer explanation if you would like it, but that is what it basically boils down to.
Upvote
0
Is that to say that Popes literally cannot make any mistakes at all in terms of teaching the truth?
Wasn't there a pope in the middle ages who ordered the crusades? That didn't sound all to godly at all.
-Jason
Upvote
0
ZooMom
Thanks for the memories...
- Feb 5, 2002
- 21,387
- 1,010
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
The Crusades were the effort to reclaim the Holy Land from the Infidels. And in the mindset of that era, it was their Christian duty to take back God's Holy places from the 'heathens'. To them, then, going to war to 'rescue' the Holy Land was imminently moral and completely justifiable. Besides, the Crusades had a way of outgrowing their original purpose. The sacking of Constantinople was particularly horrendous, as the Greeks were not heathen at all, but Orthodox Christian. But though the Church may have been nominally present in the armies, they were led by secular princes who's greed often overcame their Christian piety.
Anywho...
Preaching a Crusade in the Middle Ages has nothing to do with Papal Infallibility. As I said, that specific protection of the Holy Spirit *only* pertains to the pronouncement of Doctrine or Dogma in the matters of faith and/or morals. These statements cannot be repudiated, altered, or dismissed. Once pronounced, they are forever a part of Church Teaching.
Anywho...
Preaching a Crusade in the Middle Ages has nothing to do with Papal Infallibility. As I said, that specific protection of the Holy Spirit *only* pertains to the pronouncement of Doctrine or Dogma in the matters of faith and/or morals. These statements cannot be repudiated, altered, or dismissed. Once pronounced, they are forever a part of Church Teaching.
Upvote
0
Ah! I get it now =)
But how can we expect that to happen? Is this biblical? I guess this is where faith comes in
God bless!
-Jason
Upvote
0
ZooMom
Thanks for the memories...
- Feb 5, 2002
- 21,387
- 1,010
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
Follow this link...
http://www.catholic.com/library/Papal_Infallibility.asp
This is a great explanation of Papal Infallibility. In fact, the whole site is good 'for them as want answers'.
Let me know what you think!
http://www.catholic.com/library/Papal_Infallibility.asp
This is a great explanation of Papal Infallibility. In fact, the whole site is good 'for them as want answers'.
Let me know what you think!
Upvote
0
Hey, this is my first post here, and since I am a former Catholic, this thread piqued my curiosity.
If you want to look at papal infallibility, you first have to realize the doctrine is very political. It became official at Vatican I, although it had sort of been an implied belief from the 1500s or so on. Pope Pius IX pushed it through to the horror of the more liberal cardinals in 1870.
It was a political move to centralize power to the Pope, who was slowly losing it to a movement to decentralise the Church, specifically in France and Italy. Conservative Italian cardinals were a big factor in pushing it through. It was basically ignored by them (France and Italy), but others took it more seriously.
On a side note, papal infallibility as an official Church dogma had been proposed once before in the 1320s. A Franciscan monk named Peter Olivi proposed it to Pope John XXII, who found it so offensive he declared it the work of the Devil in 1324.
If you want to look at papal infallibility, you first have to realize the doctrine is very political. It became official at Vatican I, although it had sort of been an implied belief from the 1500s or so on. Pope Pius IX pushed it through to the horror of the more liberal cardinals in 1870.
It was a political move to centralize power to the Pope, who was slowly losing it to a movement to decentralise the Church, specifically in France and Italy. Conservative Italian cardinals were a big factor in pushing it through. It was basically ignored by them (France and Italy), but others took it more seriously.
On a side note, papal infallibility as an official Church dogma had been proposed once before in the 1320s. A Franciscan monk named Peter Olivi proposed it to Pope John XXII, who found it so offensive he declared it the work of the Devil in 1324.
Upvote
0
ZooMom
Thanks for the memories...
- Feb 5, 2002
- 21,387
- 1,010
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
I'm sorry, TheNatural, but your information is incomplete. The Church has believed that the Teaching of the Church is free from error since the time of Christ. The Scriptures tell us that the Church is the 'pillar and foundation' of truth.
1 Timothy 3:15 if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God's household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.
The early Church also believed that Peter was the leader of the Church and established by Christ as such. "Feed my sheep, tend my lambs...", "You are Peter (rock), and upon this rock I will build my Church."
The Church Fathers believed that Peter, as the leader of the Apostles and the Church, and his successors were under the Protection of the Holy Spirit not to lead the Church into error. "The gates of hell shall not overcome it..."
Cyprian of Carthage (258 AD) addresses clearly the Primacy of Peter and Papal Infallibility.
In his Epistle LIV para. 14, he speaks of the Chair of Peter...
"After such things as these, moreover, they still dare--a false bishop having been appointed for them by, heretics--to set sail and to bear letters from schismatic and profane persons to the throne of Peter, and to the chief church whence priestly unity takes its source; and not to consider that these were the Romans whose faith was praised in the preaching of the apostle, to whom faithlessness could have no access."
The last part of that last sentence is also translated as, "...from whence no error can come". 258 AD is a whole lot earlier than the 1500's. And I would like to see your source for the Pope who rejected the notion of Papal Infallibility.
1 Timothy 3:15 if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God's household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.
The early Church also believed that Peter was the leader of the Church and established by Christ as such. "Feed my sheep, tend my lambs...", "You are Peter (rock), and upon this rock I will build my Church."
The Church Fathers believed that Peter, as the leader of the Apostles and the Church, and his successors were under the Protection of the Holy Spirit not to lead the Church into error. "The gates of hell shall not overcome it..."
Cyprian of Carthage (258 AD) addresses clearly the Primacy of Peter and Papal Infallibility.
In his Epistle LIV para. 14, he speaks of the Chair of Peter...
"After such things as these, moreover, they still dare--a false bishop having been appointed for them by, heretics--to set sail and to bear letters from schismatic and profane persons to the throne of Peter, and to the chief church whence priestly unity takes its source; and not to consider that these were the Romans whose faith was praised in the preaching of the apostle, to whom faithlessness could have no access."
The last part of that last sentence is also translated as, "...from whence no error can come". 258 AD is a whole lot earlier than the 1500's. And I would like to see your source for the Pope who rejected the notion of Papal Infallibility.
Upvote
0
VOW
Moderator
- Feb 7, 2002
- 6,912
- 15
- 73
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
Another point to consider with Papal Infallibility is that it has been exercised very few times. It's not like JP2 wakes up every morning, stretches and yawns, and says, "Well, let's see what kind of turmoil I can create today!" Any statement made ex cathedra is thoroughly researched, studied, debated, and certainly prayed over by the Pope and his advisors.
A study of the Church history is fascinating. There were some perfectly rotten Popes, even one who practically preached heresy, and was voted in by the Council of Cardinals, thinking they were going to (hee-hee!) get some major changes made to the Church. The Holy Spirit had other ideas, though, and once this man came to power, he reversed his thinking and became a staunch defender of the Faith.
Rotten Popes have indeed been found in history, but through the miraculous intervention by the Holy Spirit, they were able to do no real damage to the Deposit of Faith. Their personal reputation did nothing for Catholicism (as non-Catholics delight in pointing out), but they did serve one extremely useful function: they served as "place holders" in the Apostolic Succession.
All families have whacked out relatives. When we have holiday gatherings, all of us enjoy talking about Uncle So-and-so's shenanigans, or Aunt Whatzername's most recent marriage. The important thing is that the family continues in spite of them!
Peace be with you,
~VOW
A study of the Church history is fascinating. There were some perfectly rotten Popes, even one who practically preached heresy, and was voted in by the Council of Cardinals, thinking they were going to (hee-hee!) get some major changes made to the Church. The Holy Spirit had other ideas, though, and once this man came to power, he reversed his thinking and became a staunch defender of the Faith.
Rotten Popes have indeed been found in history, but through the miraculous intervention by the Holy Spirit, they were able to do no real damage to the Deposit of Faith. Their personal reputation did nothing for Catholicism (as non-Catholics delight in pointing out), but they did serve one extremely useful function: they served as "place holders" in the Apostolic Succession.
All families have whacked out relatives. When we have holiday gatherings, all of us enjoy talking about Uncle So-and-so's shenanigans, or Aunt Whatzername's most recent marriage. The important thing is that the family continues in spite of them!
Peace be with you,
~VOW
Upvote
0
Wow thanks for sharing!
Somehow I thought that's exactly what the Pope did. LOL! So basically the Holy Spirit uses the Pope to determine truth. =)
-Jason
Upvote
0
ZooMom
Thanks for the memories...
- Feb 5, 2002
- 21,387
- 1,010
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
Ummm...more like the HS prevents the Pope from proclaiming untruth as Divine Truth. Public Revelation ended with the death of John, so Papal Infallibility will only *define* a Truth that has already been Revealed.
Is this helping at all?
Is this helping at all?
Upvote
0
Originally posted by ZooMom
Ummm...more like the HS prevents the Pope from proclaiming untruth as Divine Truth. Public Revelation ended with the death of John, so Papal Infallibility will only *define* a Truth that has already been Revealed.
Is this helping at all?
Yes is it!!
-Jason
Upvote
0
Here's what Vatican I said in its definition of Papal Infallibility:
9. Therefore, faithfully adhering to the tradition received from the beginning of the Christian faith, to the glory of God our savior, for the exaltation of the Catholic religion and for the salvation of the Christian people, with the approval of the Sacred Council, we teach and define as a divinely revealed dogma that when the Roman Pontiff speaks EX CATHEDRA, that is, when, in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church, he possesses, by the divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, that infallibility which the divine Redeemer willed his Church to enjoy in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals. Therefore, such definitions of the Roman Pontiff are of themselves, and not by the consent of the Church, irreformable.
So then, should anyone, which God forbid, have the temerity to reject this definition of ours: let him be anathema.
http://www.ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/V1.HTM#6
9. Therefore, faithfully adhering to the tradition received from the beginning of the Christian faith, to the glory of God our savior, for the exaltation of the Catholic religion and for the salvation of the Christian people, with the approval of the Sacred Council, we teach and define as a divinely revealed dogma that when the Roman Pontiff speaks EX CATHEDRA, that is, when, in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church, he possesses, by the divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, that infallibility which the divine Redeemer willed his Church to enjoy in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals. Therefore, such definitions of the Roman Pontiff are of themselves, and not by the consent of the Church, irreformable.
So then, should anyone, which God forbid, have the temerity to reject this definition of ours: let him be anathema.
http://www.ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/V1.HTM#6
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
