Church Authority on Faith and Morals

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tolkien1096
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Tolkien1096

Guest
I had a question on faith and morals and the authority of the bible and catholic church. When and where does it come from that the church or bible is authoritative only in matters of faith and morals. Is this an early teaching? or Is it from Trent?
 
Last edited:
Tolkien1096 said:
I had a question on faith and morals and the authority of the bible and catholic church. When and where does it come from that the church or bible is authoritative only in matters of faith and morals. Is this an early teaching? or Is it from Trent?
Click to expand...
Christ gave this authority to His Church (Matthew 16:18), and the Bible is God’s Word, given to the Church who is its custodian and interpreter. The Church has the final word on all matters of faith and morals. We are to form our consciences in accord with what the Church teaches. Bottom line.
 
Tolkien1096 said:
I had a question on faith and morals and the authority of the bible and catholic church. When and where does it come from that the church or bible is authoritative only in matters of faith and morals. Is this an early teaching? or Is it from Trent?
Click to expand...
I’m not sure I understand the question. Do you mean Who placed those restrictions (faith and morals only)? I suppose Thomas Jefferson, etc would argue that.

Or did you mean only the Church and Bible are authoritative. That is the more commonly asked question.

Obviously, the Bible, Trent, and V2 all consider the Church and Bible to be authoritative in areas beyond just Faith and morals.
 
Last edited:
The bible is completely inerrant. “Infallible” is not something that can apply to an inanimate object. We can say the sacred writers wrote infallibly. Inspiriation is incompatible with error (bear in mind, the Bible is a library of 73 books of all different genres that teach truth in very different ways from each other).

The Church is infallible in matters of faith because those truths cannot be known with certainty otherwise. By definition, truths of faith are not those that can be known by reason, but only by the revelation of God. Since revelation ended with the death of the last Apostle, the Church must hand on those revealed truths for all time since God desires all to be saved by knowing them. If the Church did not do so infallibly, those truths could be corrupted and lost, and therefore denied to generations.

Since morals are inextricably tied to salvation, and since man is fallen and his rational soul wounded, he often has difficulty reasoning out sound morality. Because of this woundedness, God reiterates in revelation points of morality otherwise knowable by reason. So likewise does He ensure the Church infallibly hands on sound morals until the end of time.

Other truths can be known by natural reason and have less bearing on salvation, and so there is no need for the charism of infallibility.
 
Last edited:
I understand that, but I am asking why is the authority limited to only faith and morals. So why not history and science? and when did its authority become limited or has it always been only authoritative on faith and morals.
 
Yes as in who limited its authority to only faith and morals. Was this Trent or has this been the teaching from early times of the church. Jefferson should have no say to catholic authority i presume.

So Trent and Vatican 2 both said the church is authoritative beyond faith and morals? what section? were does the saying that the church only is infallible on faith and morals come from?
 
But why is the authority limited only to matters of salvation I guess is what I am asking. Why not history/science etc
 
Tolkien1096 said:
I understand that, but I am asking why is the authority limited to only faith and morals. So why not history and science? and when did its authority become limited or has it always been only authoritative on faith and morals.
Click to expand...
Because faith and morals are the proper province of the Catholic Church, whereas history and science are, strictly speaking, secular matters. The Church’s authority never “became limited” — it is what it always has been. Nothing has changed.

It’s not clear why you are asking these questions. I was taken to task recently in another thread as to “what do you intend to do with this information?” — sometimes knowledge for its own sake is the objective, and that is a good thing. Do you have some kind of issue with the Catholic Church and her claims of divine origin and authority? Or are you considering a conversion?
 
Tolkien1096 said:
Yes as in who limited its authority to only faith and morals. Was this Trent or has this been the teaching from early times of the church. Jefferson should have no say to catholic authority i presume.

So Trent and Vatican 2 both said the church is authoritative beyond faith and morals? what section? were does the saying that the church only is infallible on faith and morals come from?
Click to expand...
The V2 document on Education, for instance, asserts the Church authority to operate schools, not just for faith and morals but all subjects. It also asserts the right of such schools to receive assistance.
 
Salvation is the objective of the mission its founder, Jesus Christ, gave it. That’s why He came into the world, to save those who were lost. At the end, that’s what matters.
 
Authoritative is not the same as infallible.

I wouldn’t say “the Church” is infallible on Faith and Morals, but rather one specific entity, the Magisterium, and then only under certain conditions.

There can be some aspects of faith and morals the Magisterium does not yet know the answer.
 
Last edited:
commenter said:
Yes as in who limited its authority to only faith and morals. Was this Trent or has this been the teaching from early times of the church. Jefferson should have no say to catholic authority i presume.

So Trent and Vatican 2 both said the church is authoritative beyond faith and morals? what section? were does the saying that the church only is infallible on faith and morals come from?
Click to expand...
Yes, because they are the Church’s schools, and the Church has authority over what is taught there and how it is taught. Any other entity that operates schools has the same kind of authority. It does not mean that the Church has the authority to define what is true and false in mathematics, chemistry, physics, management, accounting, what have you. These are secular subjects.

Catholic and Christian principles do inform some secular subjects, such as law, business ethics, medical ethics, and so on, but only to the extent that questions of faith and morals are involved in the first place.
Click to expand...
 
Our goal is eternal life with God. Suppose you are a great historian and scientist, but are unfaithful and immoral.

What’s the point?
 
Tolkien1096 said:
When and where does it come from that the church or bible is authoritative only in matters of faith and morals.
Click to expand...
The Bible itself has this passage:
All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work. -2 Tim 3:16-17
Click to expand...
So the Bible isn’t about the intricacies of our physical world or how our universe is expanding.
 
Tolkien1096 said:
So why not history and science?
Click to expand...
History and Science are in a process of constant revelation.

What was scientifically true in 1912, if you have diabetes it is a death sentence was not scientifically true in 1919 when a way to manufacture insulin was discovered.

Growing up, every student was taught that Christopher Columbus discovered America while trying to prove the earth was round.

Facts change as we learn more. Faith and Morals are absolute truth.
 
Last edited:
HomeschoolDad said:
Catholic and Christian principles do inform some secular subjects, such as law, business ethics, medical ethics, and so on, but only to the extent that questions of faith and morals are involved in the first place.
Click to expand...
True.

But the modern tendency is to restrict the definition of “Faith and Morals” so that the Church authority is almost non existing. The blatant example is “Catholic” politicians who claim to be devout, but of course abortion refers to medical care.

The Church can’t wait till the results of Nietzsche’s philosophy become manifest in faith and morals, in the 1930s Germany. The Church has authoritatively to affirm Reason and oppose anti-reason, right at the outset, much earlier. The Church’s neglect of Philosophy had put us into the situation of today.
 
Last edited:
commenter said:
Catholic and Christian principles do inform some secular subjects, such as law, business ethics, medical ethics, and so on, but only to the extent that questions of faith and morals are involved in the first place.
Click to expand...
I think we are saying the same thing, basically. Of course various secular disciplines need to be informed by Catholic faith and morality.

Mathematics and engineering, for instance, are pretty neutral. An atheist, an agnostic, a Muslim, a Jew, or a Christian will learn the same things, in the same ways, and faith or morals do not even enter into it.

Some aspects of business most certainly do have an ethical coloration. The mechanics of manufacturing widgets are morally neutral, but the ownership of the widget factory, obtaining the raw materials to make the widgets, the rights of the employees who are hired to make the widgets, a just price for the widgets, and whether widgets are safe to use — all this, and more, requires the application of ethical and moral principles. Is it better for the widget factory to be owned by one rich man, or should many people each own a small piece of the factory? Are indigenous or dispossessed peoples exploited in the extraction of the raw materials? Does the raw material extraction conform to good stewardship of the environment? Are the widget makers paid a fair wage? Is it moral to charge whatever the market will bear for the widgets, or is there a “just price”? How do you determine it? Is it moral to allow children to buy widgets, or could they get hurt with them? You could teach a whole semester of Catholic business ethics just on that one widget factory.

Likewise with history and literature. Were they “the Dark Ages” or was it “the Age of Faith”? A bit of both? Why? Was the Protestant Reformation good or bad? The American Revolution? The French Revolution? How were they different? What were Voltaire’s ideas? Does it endanger our faith to read them? Can we accept them? How do we refute them? Marx? Lenin? Ethicist Peter Singer? Stephen Hawking’s ideas on the existence of God? Can any good be derived from Saul Alinsky? It goes on and on. A student educated in Catholic doctrinal and moral principles could spend ten lifetimes studying these ideas and concepts.

A person could do a lot worse than to take out four years of their life, get the money somehow, and go to Thomas Aquinas College ( https://thomasaquinas.edu/ ). I didn’t. Part of me wishes I had. They deal with that kind of stuff there.
Click to expand...
 
I consider conversion but I have roadblocks. To this issue i just wanted to know if the churches stance that it is the authority only on matters of faith and morals was from Trent, or from an earlier time. Has secularism forced it to retreat? or has it always only been about faith and morals.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top