Cannot err in doctrine

  • Thread starter Thread starter Hisalone
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
If the Church that assembled the Bible can be wrong, we can say that the Bible might not be the correct collection of works. IF that is the case, we cannot accept the Bible as 100% correct. Books may have been left out. Incorrect ones may have been put in.

It is that simple.
 
ralphinal said:
If the Church that assembled the Bible can be wrong, we can say that the Bible might not be the correct collection of works. IF that is the case, we cannot accept the Bible as 100% correct. Books may have been left out. Incorrect ones may have been put in.

It is that simple.
Click to expand...
Can you answer the question How did Catholics get the belief that it cannot err in doctrine? Are you unable to answer it?
 
Hisalone said:
Can you answer the question How did Catholics get the belief that it cannot err in doctrine? Are you unable to answer it?
Click to expand...
Jesus promised that he would send the Holy Spirit to guide the Church to all Truth.

But, what you need to do is step back and use some logic. What good is a faith if it does not teach Truth? If a church can be wrong, it is worthless as a means to teach. WORTHLESS. Logic says that an all-knowing God would know that. Further, an all knowing God would know that, if left alone, humans will mess things up. An all-powerful God would be able to prevent that from happening.

Does that make sense?

Back to my question: if the Church can be wrong, how do you know that the Bible it put together is correct?
 
Bob_Crowley said:
As a former Protestant, I’m not starry eyed about the Catholic Church always being right about doctrine. I think it’s wrong about the contraceptive pill for a start. Christ didn’t say Peter, even as the Rock, would never err. In the very next breath, Peter made his first mistake, with Christ rebuking him as Satan, and later ran away with the other disciples, and even denied Christ three times. That’s hardly a sign of infallible judgement or a promise of infallible doctrine, starting with the very first “Pope”.
However Christ stated that which Peter (and by later extension) the Papacy “bound” or “loosed” on earth would be similarly honoured in heaven. The simple fact that the two words mean diametric opposites implies the church can change a doctrine and heaven will honour the change. A change of opinion means a re-think of a previous doctrine, hence Christ’s statement all by itself implies the church is going to change it’s mind on various issues. There’s more involved here than the simple issue of excommunication.
Click to expand...
Bob Crowely,

1st of all you are not a Catholic for the fact that if you go against any, I repeat any Catholic Teaching, you are not a Catholic!

Contraceptives is a form to stop life from coming into God’s World.

Shame on you

Ufam Tobie
Click to expand...
 
Hisalone said:
Again you are saying the CAtholic Church cannot err in doctrine because that position makes sense to you-------human reasoning!!!
Click to expand...
I say no such thing. I clearly show how catholic teaching comes directly from the teaching of Jesus and the behavior and precedents illustrated in the New Testament.

The bible NOWHERE illustrates a community in which people gather together to read the scriptures for themselves and making up their own minds isolated from the personal leadership of the aspostles and their appointed successors.

That’s totally made up and unscriptural. It seems right to you because you are too close to the trees to see the forest. You’ve never known any other way, so any other way is inconceivable. Scripture actually implies the OPPOSITE of what you believe. The Ethiopian eunich is drawn towards the faith by reading the Scriptures, but God sends a clear message by sending an apostolic representative to him to teach the faith with authority, not MERELY writing on a page. That story exists for a reason, like everything in scripture.

The “bible alone” model of the church was invented 1,500 years later in an era when a depressing amount of corruption and abuse was occurring in the hierarchy of the Church. Its hard to blame Luther, Clavin and the gang for despairing that God could work through such a corrupt institution, but despair is exactly what they did when they cooked up their previously unheard of idea of authority resting ONLY in the printed word. It’s too bad they missed the moral of the story when St. Paul rebuked St. Peter. Maybe history would be different if they had trusted that Christ could handles the Judases still among his apostles.
 
QUOTE=Hisalone;5954192]where do Catholics get this concept?
Click to expand...
Hisalone,

The question is why can you not grab this Concept that the Catholic Church can not err in Doctrine?

Is The Reason why you can not grab this concept, mean that you believe your protestant church can err in Doctrine. However that does not mean that the Catholic Church can err in Doctrine, Why? Because it is guided by the Holy Spirit. AMEN… Read the bible verse below.

(ACT 15: 22-29) Then it pleased the apostles and ancients, with the whole church, to choose men of their own company, and to send to Antioch, with Paul and Barnabas, namely, Judas, who was surnamed Barsabas, and Silas, chief men among the brethren. 23 Writing by their hands: The apostles and ancients, brethren, to the brethren of the Gentiles that are at Antioch, and in Syria and Cilicia, greeting. 24 Forasmuch as we have heard, that some going out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls; to whom we gave no commandment: 25 It hath seemed good to us, being assembled together, to choose out men, and to send them unto you, with our well beloved Barnabas and Paul: 26 Men that have given their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27 We have sent therefore Judas and Silas, who themselves also will, by word of mouth, tell you the same things. 28 For it hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us, to lay no further burden upon you than these necessary things: 29 That you abstain from things sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication; from which things keeping yourselves, you shall do well. Fare ye well.

Hisalone,The Holy Spirit will not allow the Catholic Church to error in Doctrine as you have read it for youself above.

Hisalone you have been told this many times that the Catholic Church can not error and it is the Holy Spirit telling you this through the Catholic Church, but you still want to cause chaos, just like the men above "Forasmuch as we have heard, that some going out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls;"aka

You have been told the Truth by the Catholic Church which is Guided by the Holy Spirit it is up to you to choose good or do you still want to continue to troubling yourself, for you will not be able to trouble any devout Catholic Here.

Ufam Tobie
 
Another Scripture example that serves catholicism is the story of the Bereans in Scripture. Protestants like to try to twist this story into supporting “sola scriptura” but the opposite is true. The Bereans do not learn the faith by reading it!

They learn the faith through the preaching of the APOSTLES. THEN they go back and read the scriptures (which is at that time just the OT), and see and marvel at how all that the apostles say is true (prophecies, Messiah as suffering servant AND glorious king, etc…) Then, as now, the Scriptures backstop and confirm the authority of the apostles, not replace them! Catholic teaching is still the same today: all catholic teachings are consistent with the Scriptures (when correctly understood).

Can you find me a NT Scripture story of a group who learns the faith from Scripture and uses the writings to reject the authority or teaching of one of the apostles? I rather doubt it! So where does your model of trustworthy authority residing ONLY is Scripture COME from? Human reasoning? 😉
 
ufamtobie said:
Bob Crowely,

1st of all you are not a Catholic for the fact that if you go against any, I repeat any Catholic Teaching, you are not a Catholic!

Contraceptives is a form to stop life from coming into God’s World.

Shame on you

Ufam Tobie
Click to expand...
Well, the way I see it certain catastrophes are not far off. I’ll be interested to see the response of anti-contraceptive hardliners when they start finding their own resources becoming rather limited.
 
manualman said:
On the contrary, my first post here laid it out quite succinctly. The catholic line of reasoning shows that our church continues to operate with apostolic leadership in an unbroken line just like the leadership in Scripture portrays and Christ instituted.

Your position is that there was a radical departure when authority transferred from the apostles (including those later appointed to apostolic office like St. Paul and Judas Iscariot’s replacement) to a book (the Bible). But that same book says nothing about exacty when this radical change occurred. It is a rather gaping hole in protestant thinking.
Click to expand...
manualman said:
It is really easy to get yourself into trouble with hypotheticals. A more likely answer to your quandry is that the Holy Spirit simply restrains the church from changing a true doctrine into error. Occam’s razor, you know…

The OP raises an awfully good question, but it is a far greater question for HIM than for us. Catholic logic works like this:
  1. Jesus claimed to be God the Son and proved it rather dramatically.
  2. Because of #1 above, we can trust what Jesus promised us.
  3. Jesus invested authority in his apostles to teach in His name and breathed the Holy Spirit on them in a manner that gave them special graces to be reliable teachers of the faith.
  4. The apostles immediately established the precedents of ordaining new apostles upon the death of one (see Judas Iscariot replacement) and establishing new apostolic offices when mission and geography call for it (St. Paul)
  5. The apostles clearly act with authority (repealing the OT prohibition on eating pork, for example).
  6. The successors of the apostles discern and compile the Sacred Scripture from the hundreds of documents that could have potentially been considered inspired and declare them sacred, inerrant and inviolable (when understood correctly, of course).
For catholics, #6 above only works because 1-5 before them hold water. I have no idea how protestants justify their total trust in Scripture when it is only the authority Jesus gave to the catholic church that makes Scripture knowable as inspired in the first place! Sure the Bible claims that it is inspired. Big deal, so does the Quran and Book of Mormon. Only the Bible backs up its claims with a lineage that goes back to Jesus himself. Same goes for catholicism as a whole.

For the record, I should add that there is a #7 that few protestants seem to know about. It is catholic dogma that the era of general revelation is over. No pope can come on the scene tomorrow and do a Muhammed or Joseph Smith thing and claim divine inspiriation for his ideas that are incompatible with general revelation already proclaimed. We still make advances in understanding of the revelation that has been given to us and have to make moral judgements on new issues based on established principles (like in vitro and stem cell research, for example). But it simply cannot happen for, say, an 8th sacrament to be proclaimed.
Click to expand...
 
1)Jesus is God we can agree te scriptures from John1 to Thomas calling Him my Lord and my God to Jesus telling SAtan not to tempt the Lord thy God. I agree
2) We can trust the word of God and we can trust the Word of God.
3) The apostles were reliable teachers.
4) The apostles did draw lots to determine Judas’ replacement and Paul was an apostle. Dont know were the other apostles recognized this…
5) The apostles did bind and loose in setting up requiremenst for Gentile believers.
6) Christians after the apostles collected their writting along with the writtings of scribes of apostles and codified them as scripture.
  1. General revelation is over. I dsagree but we will cite your claim.
NONE, NONE of what you just said leads to the Catholic Church cannot err in doctrine.
 
manualman said:
Another Scripture example that serves catholicism is the story of the Bereans in Scripture. Protestants like to try to twist this story into supporting “sola scriptura” but the opposite is true. The Bereans do not learn the faith by reading it!

They learn the faith through the preaching of the APOSTLES. THEN they go back and read the scriptures (which is at that time just the OT), and see and marvel at how all that the apostles say is true (prophecies, Messiah as suffering servant AND glorious king, etc…) Then, as now, the Scriptures backstop and confirm the authority of the apostles, not replace them! Catholic teaching is still the same today: all catholic teachings are consistent with the Scriptures (when correctly understood).

Can you find me a NT Scripture story of a group who learns the faith from Scripture and uses the writings to reject the authority or teaching of one of the apostles? I rather doubt it! So where does your model of trustworthy authority residing ONLY is Scripture COME from? Human reasoning? 😉
Click to expand...
Preaching the gospel is called the word of God in NT scripture. Bereans heard the word of God but verified that word by cross checking it with the scripture they had.

Again how does this lead to the Doctrine that the Catholic Church cannot err?
 
40.png
ufamtobie:
Hisalone,

The question is why can you not grab this Concept that the Catholic Church can not err in Doctrine?

Is The Reason why you can not grab this concept, mean that you believe your protestant church can err in Doctrine. However that does not mean that the Catholic Church can err in Doctrine, Why? Because it is guided by the Holy Spirit. AMEN… Read the bible verse below.

QUOTE]

I am asking a simple question. Where did this doctrine come from?
The the CC just come up with we cannot err so believe what we say?
 
40.png
ufamtobie:
Hisalone,The Holy Spirit will not allow the Catholic Church to error in Doctrine as you have read it for youself above.

Hisalone you have been told this many times that the Catholic Church can not error and it is the Holy Spirit telling you this through the Catholic Church, but you still want to cause chaos, just like the men above "Forasmuch as we have heard, that some going out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls;"aka

You have been told the Truth by the Catholic Church which is Guided by the Holy Spirit it is up to you to choose good or do you still want to continue to troubling yourself, for you will not be able to trouble any devout Catholic Here.

Ufam Tobie

The Holy Gost guides the people of God to do His work, as you have shown above. But once again you fail to show that the Catholic Church cannot err.
 
ralphinal said:
Jesus promised that he would send the Holy Spirit to guide the Church to all Truth.

But, what you need to do is step back and use some logic. What good is a faith if it does not teach Truth? If a church can be wrong, it is worthless as a means to teach. WORTHLESS. Logic says that an all-knowing God would know that. Further, an all knowing God would know that, if left alone, humans will mess things up. An all-powerful God would be able to prevent that from happening.

Does that make sense?

Back to my question: if the Church can be wrong, how do you know that the Bible it put together is correct?
Click to expand...
Christ has sent the Holy Ghost to lead His people to all truth.
Is leading people to truth the same as saying these same people cannot err?
You say I need to step back and use logic, what you really mean is I need to accept your logic. For me your logic is nothing more than hman reasoning. How can one make a doctrine out of human reasoning?
 
ralphinal said:
If the Church that assembled the Bible can be wrong, we can say that the Bible might not be the correct collection of works. IF that is the case, we cannot accept the Bible as 100% correct. Books may have been left out. Incorrect ones may have been put in.

It is that simple.
Click to expand...
Catholic doctrine declare the bible to be the inspired inerrant word of God. I agree. If this is so God breathed the bible into existence.
Where we disagree is your claim that the CC cannot err in doctrine.
Were did you get such a claim?
 
Hisalone said:
Christ has sent the Holy Ghost to lead His people to all truth.
Is leading people to truth the same as saying these same people cannot err?
Click to expand...
Truth is unchangeable. Since Jesus Christ himself is the Truth. The Holy Spirit guides the Church to teach correct doctrine on faith and morals.

Christian believers are given the Holy Spirit through our baptism. However, when it comes to teaching office and interpretation of Scripture, the Church Alone can interpret it.

Protestantism parades itself in Biblical Authority and when you look at the general picture of Protestantism, you see contradictory teachings using Bible Alone as their source. One Protestant might say that Baptism saves, while others deny it. Another Protestant might adhere to Eternal Security while another does not.

There is a constant inconsistency in Protestantism, especially when it deals with moral and faith issues. Therefore, their doctrine is subject to error. The Catholic Church have a consistent teachings on moral and faith, and they remained the same.

The doctrine of the Trinity is solely based on the Church’s interpretation of Scripture and it’s orthodox beliefs concerning the Divine Mystery of God, the Father, God, the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. Three Persons but ONE God.

You also need to look at the historical Christianity after the death of the last Apostles. You see everytime there is a dispute, the bishop gather together and resolve heresy. Councils such as the Council of Nicea 325 AD, which condemned Arianism (Arius used Scripture to support his claim), the Council of Ephesus in 431 AD which condemned Nestorianism.

These Councils were modelled from the first Christian Council in the Book of Acts, Council of Jerusalem.
 
Hisalone said:
Catholic doctrine declare the bible to be the inspired inerrant word of God. I agree. If this is so God breathed the bible into existence. Where we disagree is your claim that the CC cannot err in doctrine. Were did you get such a claim?
Click to expand...
The claim comes from Our Apostolic Traditions handed down to us from the successors of the Apostles.

“And thus preaching through countries and cities, they appointed the first-fruits [of their labours], having first proved them by the Spirit, to be bishops and deacons of those who should afterwards believe. Nor was this any new thing, since indeed many ages before it was written concerning bishops and deacons. For thus saith the Scripture a certain place, ‘I will appoint their bishops s in righteousness, and their deacons in faith.’… Our apostles also knew, through our Lord Jesus Christ, and there would be strife on account of the office of the episcopate. For this reason, therefore, inasmuch as they had obtained a perfect fore-knowledge of this, they appointed those [ministers] already mentioned, and afterwards gave instructions, that when these should fall asleep, other approved men should succeed them in their ministry…For our sin will not be small, if we eject from the episcopate those who have blamelessly and holily fulfilled its duties.” Pope Clement, Epistle to Corinthians, 42, 44 (A.D. 98).

“For what is the bishop but one who beyond all others possesses all power and authority, so far as it is possible for a man to possess it, who according to his ability has been made an imitator of the Christ off God? And what is the presbytery but a sacred assembly, the counselors and assessors of the bishop? And what are the deacons but imitators of the angelic powers, fulfilling a pure and blameless ministry unto him, as…Anencletus and Clement to Peter?” Ignatius, To the Trallians, 7 (A.D. 110).

“Hegesippus in the five books of Memoirs which have come down to us has left a most complete record of his own views. In them he states that on a journey to Rome he met a great many bishops, and that he received the same doctrine from all. It is fitting to hear what he says after making some remarks about the epistle of Clement to the Corinthians. His words are as follows: ‘And the church of Corinth continued in the true faith until Primus was bishop in Corinth. I conversed with them on my way to Rome, and abode with the Corinthians many days, during which we were mutually refreshed in the true doctrine. And when I had come to Rome I remained a there until Anicetus, whose deacon was Eleutherus. And Anicetus was succeeded by Soter, and he by Eleutherus. In every succession, and in every city that is held which is preached by the law and the prophets and the Lord.’” Hegesippus, Memoirs, fragment in Eusebius Ecclesiatical History, 4:22 (A.D. 180).

“True knowledge is [that which consists in] the doctrine of the apostles, and the ancient constitution of the Church throughout all the world, and the distinctive manifestation of the body of Christ according to the successions of the bishops, by which they have handed down that Church which exists in every place, and has come even unto us, being guarded and preserved without any forging of Scriptures, by a very complete system of doctrine, and neither receiving addition nor [suffering] curtailment [in the truths which she believes]; and [it consists in] reading [the word of God] without falsification, and a lawful and diligent exposition in harmony with the Scriptures, both without danger and without blasphemy; and [above all, it consists in] the pre-eminent gift of love, which is more precious than knowledge, more glorious than prophecy, and which excels all the other gifts [of God].” Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 4:33:8 (A.D. 180).

“But if there be any (heresies) which are bold enough to plant themselves in the midst Of the apostolic age, that they may thereby seem to have been handed down by the apostles, because they existed in the time of the apostles, we can say: Let them produce the original records of their churches; let them unfold the roll of their bishops, running down in due succession from the beginning in such a manner that [that first bishop of theirs] bishop shall be able to show for his ordainer and predecessor some one of the apostles or of apostolic men,–a man, moreover, who continued steadfast with the apostles. …To this test, therefore will they be submitted for proof by those churches, who, although they derive not their founder from apostles or apostolic men (as being of much later date, for they are in fact being founded daily), yet, since they agree in the same faith, they are accounted as not less apostolic because they are akin in doctrine…Then let all the heresies, when challenged to these two tests by our apostolic church, offer their proof of how they deem themselves to be apostolic. But in truth they neither are so, nor are they able to prove themselves to be what they are not. Nor are they admitted to peaceful relations and communion by such churches as are in any way connected with apostles, inasmuch as they are in no sense themselves apostolic because of their diversity as to the mysteries of the faith.” Tertullian, Prescription against the Heretics, 33 (A.D. 200).

“And that you may still be more confident, that repenting thus truly there remains for you a sure hope of salvation, listen to a tale? Which is not a tale but a narrative, handed down and committed to the custody of memory, about the Apostle John. For when, on the tyrant’s death, he returned to Ephesus from the isle of Patmos, he went away, being invited, to the contiguous territories of the nations, here to appoint bishops, there to set in order whole Churches, there to ordain such as were marked out by the Spirit.” Clement of Alexandria, Who is the rich man that shall be save?, 42 (A.D. 210).
 
(continue)

II. Authority is Transferred by the Sacrament of Ordination

“Since therefore I have, in the persons before mentioned, beheld the whole multitude of you in faith and love, I exhort you to study to do all things with a divine harmony, while your bishop presides in the place of God, and your presbyters in the place of the assembly of the apostles, along with your deacons, who are most dear to me, and are entrusted with the ministry of Jesus Christ, who was with the Father before the beginning of time, and in the end was revealed…Let nothing exist among you that may divide you ; but be ye united with your bishop, and those that preside over you, as a type and evidence of your immortality.” Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Magnesians, 6 (c. A.D. 110).

“For, since ye are subject to the bishop as to Jesus Christ, ye appear to me to live not after the manner of men, but according to Jesus Christ, who died for us, in order, by believing in His death, ye may escape from death. It is therefore necessary that, as ye indeed do, so without the bishop ye should do nothing, but should also be subject to the presbytery, as to the apostle of Jesus Christ, who is our hope, in whom, if we live, we shall [at last] be found. It is fitting also that the deacons, as being [the ministers] of the mysteries of Jesus Christ, should in every respect be pleasing to all. For they are not ministers of meat and drink, but servants of the Church of God. They are bound, therefore, to avoid all grounds of accusation [against them], as they would do fire.” Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Trallians, 2 (c. A.D. 110).

“And do ye also reverence your bishop as Christ Himself, according as the blessed apostles have enjoined you. He that is within the altar is pure, wherefore also he is obedient to the bishop and presbyters: but he that is without is one that does anything apart from the bishop, the presbyters, and the deacons. Such a person is defiled in his conscience, and is worse than an infidel. For what is the bishop but one who beyond all others possesses all power and authority, so far as it is possible for a man to possess it, who according to his ability has been made an imitator of the Christ Of God? And what is the presbytery but a sacred assembly, the counselors and assessors of the bishop? And what are the deacons but imitators of the angelic powers, fulfilling a pure and blameless ministry unto him, as the holy Stephen did to the blessed James, Timothy and Linus to Paul, Anencletus and Clement to Peter? He, therefore, that will not yield obedience to such, must needs be one utterly without God, an impious man who despises Christ, and depreciates His appointments.” Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Trallians, 7 (c. A.D. 110).

“I must not omit an account of the conduct also of the heretics–how frivolous it is, how worldly, how merely human, without seriousness, without authority, without discipline, as suits their creed…At one time they put novices in office; at another time, men who are bound to some secular employment; at another, persons who have apostatized from us, to bind them by vainglory, since they cannot by the truth. Nowhere is promotion easier than in the camp of rebels, where the mere fact of being there is a foremost service. And so it comes to pass that today one man is their bishop, to-morrow another; to-day he is a deacon who to-morrow is a reader; to-day he is a presbyter who tomorrow is a layman. For even on laymen do they impose the functions of priesthood.” Tertullian, On Prescription Against Heretics, 41 (c. A.D. 200).

“Since, according to my opinion, the grades here in the Church, of bishops, presbyters, deacons, are imitations of the angelic glory, and of that economy which, the Scriptures say, awaits those who, following the footsteps of the apostles, have lived in perfection of righteousness according to the Gospel. For these taken up in the clouds, the apostle writes, will first minister [as deacons], then be classed in the presbyterate, by promotion in glory (for glory differs from glory) till they grow into ‘a perfect man.’” Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, 13 (A.D. 202).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top