Did Luther claim for himself that infallibility, which he would not allow to the Church of Christ?

[rcwitness]

This is also an interesting question , but I was looking forward to answers to alwayswill’s question.

I answered that ordination of women is declared impossible (or against the will of God). This is definitive and declared infallibly.

Do you think it’s possible women can be ordained as priests of the new Covenant?

 

[Wannano]

I answered that ordination of women is declared impossible (or against the will of God). This is definitive and declared infallibly.

Do you think it’s possible women can be ordained as priests of the new Covenant?

For me you did not answer his question directly. I hope you are not deflecting it.

Rc, you really got me here with your last question. Part of me says to answer with a “no.” But then I realize that maybe my answer needs to be “yes” because as a believer in the priesthood of all believers, I see no logical reason for male priests either. Jesus is our mediator between God and man. He abides within the heart and life of a true believer and His presence is very real moment by moment.

 

[rcwitness]

For me you did not answer his question directly. I hope you are not deflecting it.

which question do I need to answer more directly?

Rc, you really got me here with your last question. Part of me says to answer with a “no.” But then I realize that maybe my answer needs to be “yes” because as a believer in the priesthood of all believers, I see no logical reason for male priests either. Jesus is our mediator between God and man. He abides within the heart and life of a true believer and His presence is very real moment by moment.

The ministerial priesthood is different from the general priesthood of all believers. The former is an ordination to a specific calling with specific privileges. We are not discussing the details of those duties, but whether women can be ordained as leaders, pastors or whatever term you use for presbyters and bishops.

 

[Wannano]

which question do I need to answer more directly?

The ministerial priesthood is different from the general priesthood of all believers. The former is an ordination to a specific calling with specific privileges. We are not discussing the details of those duties, but whether women can be ordained as leaders, pastors or whatever term you use for presbyters and bishops.

The question is post 214.

My answer is not a direct yes or no… we do have married couples where they are ordained to a team ministry but with the woman being submissive to her husband’s leadership within the role. Works well for women, youth and children’s ministries.

 

[rcwitness]

The question is post 214.

My answer is not a direct yes or no… we do have married couples where they are ordained to a team ministry but with the woman being submissive to her husband’s leadership within the role. Works well for women, youth and children’s ministries.

Yes, we have women in those ministries also. I will answer you directly when you answer me directly.

 

[Wannano]

Yes, we have women in those ministries also. I will answer you directly when you answer me directly.

Hey, did not mean to avoid being direct. I thought I answered you. Are your women in those ministries ordained ministers?

In terms of having a woman by herself being the pastor, no. Being an ordained pastor alongside and under her husband’s leadership, yes.

 

[rcwitness]

Catholics seem to be unsure on what is and is not an infallible proclamation / writing from their Church.

am I correct?

Many Catholics don’t really care whether a Teaching is declared absolute or open to opinion. Take contraception. The condemnation of Birth control was given in humane vitae. This particular matter addressed in the document was later affirmed as correct. This has since, even been included into the Catechism. We can, therefore, be certain the Church has declared it through her infallibility.

But many Catholics think it’s not commanded by God. That doesn’t mean He hasnt.

 

[rcwitness]

Hey, did not mean to avoid being direct. I thought I answered you. Are your women in those ministries ordained ministers?

No, they are not ordained.

In terms of having a woman by herself being the pastor, no. Being an ordained pastor alongside and under her husband’s leadership, yes.

Ok. That’s closer. Now for the direct question: Is it possible God does accept and honor a single woman to be a pastor of a congregation???

 

[Peter_J]

This is also an interesting question , but I was looking forward to answers to alwayswill’s question.

Why separate the two questions?

 

[Wannano]

No, they are not ordained.

Ok. That’s closer. Now for the direct question: Is it possible God does accept and honor a single woman to be a pastor of a congregation???

Wow, I have not had such a hard time answering a question for a long time. When you ask it as you did in the above, I have to determine the mind of God, and I don’t know how to do that specifically. Our usual practice would be no, and my personal preference would be no.
However, I am being reminded that last winter I volunteered to go to Mexico and help with a house building mission for a unwed mothers refuge. While there, we also worked one day at a church that a Mexican woman had started by herself as a mission to children. This is in the back country, quite remote. There is no other church around for a fair distance. She has a real ministry to the children and one could not possibly deny that she is 100% genuine in her relationship to Christ and in her efforts there. Certainly no monetary reward or recognition. So she is the minister, janitor, and anything else. Does God accept and honor her as the pastor?
Seeing the radiance of the children’s faces as they sang for us, listening to her talk to them would make me very uncomfortable saying God does not accept and honor her in that role.

 

[Wannano]

Why separate the two questions?

You would have to connect them for me, you must see something I am missing.

 

[goout]

so
" that it is NOT absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff."

could be true if

“that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.”

was not an infallible declaration.

I’m not a theologian or a canon lawyer or a gravedigger for that matter. (but I did stay in a Holiday Inn last night )
So I am not going to try and sound real smart.
This post has a good start on your question about Unam Sanctum:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=7791254&postcount=2

This falls under the Ordinary Magisterium. To be infallible it must be either Ex Cathedra, which it is not or it must be an established dogma.

The dogma here is that all need to be united to the Church founded upon the Apostle Peter, because salvation comes through the Church. There is no problem there

The problem arises if we try to use this statement to say that those who are not in communion with Peter will not be saved. The statement has to be taken along with other statements about those who are not in communion with Peter.

It’s very dangerous to take one sentence from a 2000 year tradition and make it THE LAW, when in fact there are many statements on the same subject. All of them have to be taken together. There are other statements that explain how someone who is not in communion with Peter can be saved. And there are further statements that describe degrees of communion with Peter. All of them must be taken as a whole.

By itself, this statement is a black and white statement about the Church built upon the Apostle Peter, but it is missing everything else that has been said about that Church and those who are outside of the physical Church or who are in an imperfect communion with the Church.

In simple English. It does not tell the whole teaching of the Church to this day. This whole issue has to be taken biblically, dogmatically, historically, and phenomenonlogically. Catholicism has a biblical and philosophical tradtion. You have to take the whole of it. This statement is part of the whole.

 

[rcwitness]

Wow, I have not had such a hard time answering a question for a long time. When you ask it as you did in the above, I have to determine the mind of God, and I don’t know how to do that specifically. Our usual practice would be no, and my personal preference would be no.
However, I am being reminded that last winter I volunteered to go to Mexico and help with a house building mission for a unwed mothers refuge. While there, we also worked one day at a church that a Mexican woman had started by herself as a mission to children. This is in the back country, quite remote. There is no other church around for a fair distance. She has a real ministry to the children and one could not possibly deny that she is 100% genuine in her relationship to Christ and in her efforts there. Certainly no monetary reward or recognition. So she is the minister, janitor, and anything else. Does God accept and honor her as the pastor?
Seeing the radiance of the children’s faces as they sang for us, listening to her talk to them would make me very uncomfortable saying God does not accept and honor her in that role.

I appreciate your honesty. But we also are not without the Tradition found in Scripture. Qualifications for deacons and Bishops are men, with only one wife. Yet this doesnt explicitly restrict women.

That woman sounds ausome! Very cool. It does sound like a faith based orphanage, though, as opposed to a church with a celebration of the Sacraments, right?

 

[alwayswill]

I’m not a theologian or a canon lawyer or a gravedigger for that matter. (but I did stay in a Holiday Inn last night )
So I am not going to try and sound real smart.
This post has a good start on your question about Unam Sanctum:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=7791254&postcount=2

from the link
“This falls under the Ordinary Magisterium. To be infallible it must be either Ex Cathedra, which it is not or it must be an established dogma.”

From EWTN
ewtn.com/v/experts/showmessage.asp?number=336676&Pg=&Pgnu=&recnu=

“All ex cathedra statements are infallible, but not all infallible statements are issued ex cathedra.”

“Again, the issue is not whether or not a pope has spoken infallibly, most have on numerous occasions. The question was how many times the pope has done this of his own accord, that is, ex cathedra. I repeat, most theologians agree that the pope has only done this twice: the Assumption and the Immaculate Conception. Those are the only two times the pope has, with the intention of binding all Christians with a definitive teaching, issued specific teaching.”

 

[goout]

from the link
“This falls under the Ordinary Magisterium. To be infallible it must be either Ex Cathedra, which it is not or it must be an established dogma.”

From EWTN
ewtn.com/v/experts/showmessage.asp?number=336676&Pg=&Pgnu=&recnu=

“All ex cathedra statements are infallible, but not all infallible statements are issued ex cathedra.”

“Again, the issue is not whether or not a pope has spoken infallibly, most have on numerous occasions. The question was how many times the pope has done this of his own accord, that is, ex cathedra. I repeat, most theologians agree that the pope has only done this twice: the Assumption and the Immaculate Conception. Those are the only two times the pope has, with the intention of binding all Christians with a definitive teaching, issued specific teaching.”

ok…

 

[alwayswill]

I’m not a theologian or a canon lawyer or a gravedigger for that matter. (but I did stay in a Holiday Inn last night )
So I am not going to try and sound real smart.
This post has a good start on your question about Unam Sanctum:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=7791254&postcount=2

from the link
“This falls under the Ordinary Magisterium. To be infallible it must be either Ex Cathedra, which it is not or it must be an established dogma.”

Manning, Henry Cardinal. Vatican Decrees in their Bearing on Civil Allegiance. London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1875. pg 57, et. seq.: “But it is also true that these relations have been declared by the Church in acts and decrees of infallible authority. Such, for instance, is the bull of Boniface VIII., Unam Sanctam. As this has become the text and centre of the whole controversy at this moment, we will fully treat of it. This bull, then, was beyond all doubt an act ex cathedra.… Whatever definition, therefore, is to be found in this bull is to be received as of faith.”

From EWTN
ewtn.com/v/experts/showmessage.asp?number=362993&Pg=&Pgnu=&recnu=

"The new Catechism is not infallible, Unam Sanctam is. "

I stand by my point : Catholics do NOT what is and is not infallible

 

[Wannano]

I appreciate your honesty. But we also are not without the Tradition found in Scripture. Qualifications for deacons and Bishops are men, with only one wife. Yet this doesnt explicitly restrict women.

That woman sounds ausome! Very cool. It does sound like a faith based orphanage, though, as opposed to a church with a celebration of the Sacraments, right?

The faith based (affiliated with numerous denominations ) orphanage deals mostly in rescuing young girls who are pregnant and or abused usually by their own fathers or uncles. It is unbelievable. Unfortunately most of these homes have a crucifix hanging in the home. I am not mentioning that to take a swipe at Catholicism but it is discouraging that the Catholic priests in that city will give no assistance. The police are no better, they drop off girls during the night at the refuge and then refuse to go after the perpetrators. I would almost not believe it if I had not been there. In all fairness the problem is huge and out of control.

The Church I mentioned is not related to the orphanage but located out from the city. It is not a church with the celebration of the Sacrements. It is very openly evangelical and effective in communicating that God loves each of them . Many of them hardly know what love is. Being there was an awful experience and yet very rewarding.

 

[goout]

from the link
“This falls under the Ordinary Magisterium. To be infallible it must be either Ex Cathedra, which it is not or it must be an established dogma.”

Manning, Henry Cardinal. Vatican Decrees in their Bearing on Civil Allegiance. London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1875. pg 57, et. seq.: “But it is also true that these relations have been declared by the Church in acts and decrees of infallible authority. Such, for instance, is the bull of Boniface VIII., Unam Sanctam. As this has become the text and centre of the whole controversy at this moment, we will fully treat of it. This bull, then, was beyond all doubt an act ex cathedra.… Whatever definition, therefore, is to be found in this bull is to be received as of faith.”

From EWTN
ewtn.com/v/experts/showmessage.asp?number=362993&Pg=&Pgnu=&recnu=

"The new Catechism is not infallible, Unam Sanctam is. "

I stand by my point : Catholics do NOT what is and is not infallible

:banghead:
You don’t realize that you are pulling your quote** from the objection** !!!
This is frustrating. Pardon my impatience, but don’t you think you should know the material you are debating?
Here is Dr Caroll’s answer to the question (objection) you are quoting.

Answer by Dr. William Carroll on 4/5/2001:
I’m sorry we disagree about this, but I stand by my previous statements. You have no authority to convict me of heresy. And I do believe that the Catholic Catechism is infallible. In considering Unam sanctam, we do have to consider the audience to which it was directed, and the extent of knowledge of the world at the time it was issued. This is only common sense. - Dr. Carroll

COPYRIGHT 2016

So round we go, and Fulton Sheen’s maximum is proved true, that aren’t probably 8 people who object to the Catholic Church **and **actually know what they are objecting to.

 

[alwayswill]

:banghead:
You don’t realize that you are pulling your quote** from the objection** !!!
This is frustrating. Pardon my impatience, but don’t you think you should know the material you are debating?
Here is Dr Caroll’s answer to the question (objection) you are quoting.

So round we go, and Fulton Sheen’s maximum is proved true, that aren’t probably 8 people who object to the Catholic Church **and **actually know what they are objecting to.

yes i do know.

My point stands; knowledgeable and faithful Catholics do not know what is and is not an infallible teaching/ declaration…

"In the end, I think we are bound to admit the following two things about Unam Sanctam:

**First, the statement we are discussing fits all the criteria for an infallible statement and should be regarded as such **(unlike my college history professor, who laughed at the notion that Unam Sanctam was infallible but held Gaudium et Spes in very high regard).

Second, we ought to admit that this document does indeed make a universal statement about salvation in general that pertains to all mankind. Perhaps Pope Boniface did not mean to make such a statement, but the simple fact is that he did, and we have to take it as it is and not try to get around the actual wording, for the actual wording is what is guaranteed by the Holy Spirit."
unamsanctamcatholicam.blogspot.com/search?q=infallible

It is not just 8 people:
faithful students or teachers of Catholicism ( that have the courage to address the question) reach different conclusions about the infallibility of Unam Sanctam:

 

[rcwitness]

"The new Catechism is not infallible, Unam Sanctam is. "

I stand by my point : Catholics do NOT what is and is not infallible

The Catechism is “free from errors in faith and morals” and a “sure norm”. But some things deal with practices that may change, like priestly celebacy (I believe).

And it doesn’t matter if some Catholics don’t have a good relationship with their pastor and search the Teachings and Scripture. I am sure there are plenty of Protestants who do not know the Scriptures well at all.