An "infallible list" of Magisterial Documents and Papal Documents

[Cruxis117]

I was asked why the Magisterium does not have an “infallible list” of Magisterial and Papal documents. This is in response to the apologetic question of the “infallible list” of the Biblical Canon often proposed to Protestants.

Any help please?

 

[supertubos]

I was asked why the Magisterium does not have an “infallible list” of Magisterial and Papal documents. This is in response to the apologetic question of the “infallible list” of the Biblical Canon often proposed to Protestants.

Any help please?

The question is not so simple.
That is no need for that.

I understand your thoughts: “As there are so many documents, which are the essential ones?” Or, as you put it, “the infallible list”.

The Jews had the same problem. there were thousands of laws and they kept discussing the essential ones and the less fundamental ones. So, once, a doctor asked Jesus what the greatest commandment was and Jesus replied that was to Love God with all our heart and whole our soul and gave another equal to the first, Love your Neighbor even if he is your enemy.

I would guess this stands till now.

cheers

 

[DianaCC]

This is the beginning of an interesting philosophical question. Let’s say we cannot know that a given document is infallible until and unless we have an infallible declaration to that effect. Then there would have to be an infinite regress of infallible declarations each affirming the infallibility of the previous declaration. But an actual infinite cannot exist. Therefore we would have no certainty that a given document is infallible. Fascinating.

Anyway, we can with some certainty start the list with the 73 books of scripture, then the dogmatic canons and decrees of the ecumenical councils, the papal encyclicals, and the canonizations of saints. What else can be included?

 

[Cruxis117]

This is the beginning of an interesting philosophical question. Let’s say we cannot know that a given document is infallible until and unless we have an infallible declaration to that effect. Then there would have to be an infinite regress of infallible declarations each affirming the infallibility of the previous declaration. But an actual infinite cannot exist. Therefore we would have no certainty that a given document is infallible. Fascinating.

Anyway, we can with some certainty start the list with the 73 books of scripture, then the dogmatic canons and decrees of the ecumenical councils, the papal encyclicals, and the canonizations of saints. What else can be included?

What of the Catechism of the Catholic Church? Would that or any content within the book be considered infallible?

 

[1ke]

I was asked why the Magisterium does not have an “infallible list” of Magisterial and Papal documents

The faith doesn’t work that way.

This is in response to the apologetic question of the “infallible list” of the Biblical Canon often proposed to Protestants.

So, are you under the impression that the Church somehow requires such a list?

 

[Cruxis117]

The faith doesn’t work that way.

I agree. However, I was presented this question in response to my question to a Protestant about the Biblical Canon. I’ll assume it is a counter-argument.

So, are you under the impression that the Church somehow requires such a list?

Myself? No. At the time when I was presented with the question, I didn’t know how to respond. I’m under the impression that any of the documents that DianaCC mentioned above contain the authority of the Magisterium. But the idea of a specific list of all of the documents seem, now to me, to be silly now that I think about it. Remember, I was not the one asking this to a Catholic, I was the Catholic that was presented with this idea of this “list.”

 

[Windfish]

I was asked why the Magisterium does not have an “infallible list” of Magisterial and Papal documents. This is in response to the apologetic question of the “infallible list” of the Biblical Canon often proposed to Protestants.

Any help please?

Haha, that is actually rather clever in a cute sort of way. I am off to Mass, but I will back to hopefully answer the question.

 

[Big_Dummy]

Why would the catholic church even need an “infallible list”?

Would not an Athoritive list be all that is needed?

Would not the fact that a Papal Bull or document is published at the Vacatin site alone indicate said document has authority?

 

[Cruxis117]

Why would the catholic church even need an “infallible list”?

Would not an Athoritive list be all that is needed?

Would not the fact that a Papal Bull or document is published at the Vacatin site alone indicate said document has authority?

That actually makes sense. I never thought of it that way. Thank you

 

[Ana_v]

I was asked why the Magisterium does not have an “infallible list” of Magisterial and Papal documents.

I think, an okay answer to that, would be “because, even if possible, there is no need to have one – as it would be redundant.”

It would be like asking " why don’t we have an infallible list of all the dogmas?"

Dogmas, which in the context of Catholicism, are definitionally infallible, have no need to be added into an infallible list of infallible dogmas, as doing so would reveal no new information.

I also like DianaCC’s comment:

Let’s say we cannot know that a given document is infallible until and unless we have an infallible declaration to that effect. Then there would have to be an infinite regress of infallible declarations each affirming the infallibility of the previous declaration. But an actual infinite cannot exist. Therefore we would have no certainty that a given document is infallible. Fascinating.

If we had an infallible list of Magisterial and Papal documents, would the Protestants require that we have an infallible affirmation – of the infallible status of the list – outside of the infallible list?

 

[EricFilmer]

I was asked why the Magisterium does not have an “infallible list” of Magisterial and Papal documents. This is in response to the apologetic question of the “infallible list” of the Biblical Canon often proposed to Protestants.

Any help please?

In a manner-of-speaking, there is an “infallible list” of Magisterial and papal documents.
It’s called the search engine of the Vatican website.

Naturally, I meant that as a joke (software is not infallible), but nonetheless I think it makes a notable point. If I want to know if a particular text is an authentic Magisterial document, and I get a “no result” on the search engine, then I basically have my answer.

The whole concept of the Church having such an infallible list is a non-issue, and here’s why…

The Christians of the ancient world were bombarded with numerous texts claiming apostolic origin. Moreover, until around the end of the 1st Century there was no clear consensus among the Jews as to what books belonged in the Old Testament. The formulation of a biblical canon was needed to inform Christians which books were truly inspired. Because of the canon, Christians knew that they could disregard non-canonical books, such as the Book of Enoch, the Gospel of Thomas, etc.

**With all this in mind, what purpose would an “infallible list” of Magisterial and papal documents actually serve?

Are there a bunch of bogus Magisterial and papal documents being circulated out there creating confusion among Catholics?

When studying Church teachings, do certain people start citing, say, the encyclicals of Pope Bubba III?

Are there people going around citing the theological conclusions of, say, the Ecumenical Council of Cleveland? **

The answer to these questions, obviously, is, “No.” So the issue that the biblical canon serves is not an issue regarding Magisterial and papal documents. In the latter case, it is very easy to know what is and is not an authentic document without the need of an infallible list.

 

[DianaCC]

If we had an infallible list of Magisterial and Papal documents, would the Protestants require that we have an infallible affirmation – of the infallible status of the list – outside of the infallible list?

If there were an infallible affirmation of the infallible status of the list, but the affirmation were *not *on that list, then the list, inasmuch as it fails to include the affirmation, would be missing an item, and therefore would be a fallible list; and the affirmation, inasmuch as it incorrectly affirms infallibility of a fallible document, would thus be fallible. Therefore if the affirmation were infallible, then it would be fallible.