Do non-Catholic church pastors claim to teach infallibly or fallibly?

[SyCarl]

Don’t you think it’s at least a little ironic that you bring in your unfounded opinion about what two men say, and then call my observation “baldly asserted” and “unsupported opinion”? The psychological term for that is projection.

Next, you absolutely did provide an interpretation of your own, asserting that one of these men opposed the Catholic position. In truth, Augustine does not for instance support the idea that all disciples of Christ were given Church disciplinary authority.

Here’s some additional assistance on what I wrote to you. I never said your eisegesis was “quoting what two doctors of the Church have said”, did I? It’s apparent that your eisegesis is in your interpretation of what they said to support your preconceived notions, instead of really trying to understand the truth of the issue.

Explain to me then Augustine was saying in the quote given or come up with one showing what he really meant.

With Chrysostom I don’t think it can get much clearer than "And He did not say to the ruler of the church, “Bind such a man,” but, “If thou bind,” committing the whole matter to the person himself, who is aggrieved, and the bonds abide indissoluble.

Rather than just stating I am wrong in how I view these quotes, show me evidence that shows otherwise.

 

[SyCarl]

You are right. Saint Augustine and Saint Chrysostom were both Catholic leaders in total agreement. Neither opposed the Catholic position. Neither support the idea that all disciples of Christ were given Church disciplinary authority.

The point is, that these men did not interpret this passage as dealing with church disciplinary authority. They relate the passage to what an aggrieved party is to do, not the church.

Again it is a rather feeble argument to say that these men didn’t mean what their words seem to say simply because they were Catholic and must have agreed with the Catholic Church. If they believed something else about Matthew 18:18 provide the evidence.

Also, what is the infallible interpretation of Matthew 18:18? I don’t believe the Catholic Church has made one.

 

[joe370]

SyCarl,

I can’t find the Augustine quote. Could you copy and paste the specific pericope from that site?

Regarding Chrysostom:

First he says, “But if he shall neglect to hear them also, tell it to the church,” that is,** to the rulers of it; **“but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be to thee as an heathen man and a publican.” For after this such a one is incurably diseased…

Then he goes on to say, And He did not say to the ruler of the church, “Bind such a man,” **but, “If thou bind,” committing the whole matter to the person himself, who is aggrieved, (or wronged) - and the bonds abide indissoluble.

Who is doing the binding here?**

 

[joe370]

The point is, that these men did not interpret this passage as dealing with church disciplinary authority. They relate the passage to what an aggrieved party is to do, not the church.

So you believe that these 2 men expected the aggrieved members of the church to settle the matter for themselves, even if they couldn’t reach some sort of resolution? In other words, they were not expected to take it to the church even if the aggrieved parties couldn’t resolve the matter???

I’m trying to follow you…

 

[1voice]

Sorry, but your interpretation is a logical fallacy.

“On this Rock”, refers to the most recent noun being Peter himself.

It wasnt my interpretation … I quoted Augustine.

---

"the Lord said, ‘On this rock will I build my Church,

because Peter had said , ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.’

On this rock (Petra) ,therefore, He said, which thou hast confessed,

I will build my Church. For the Rock (Petra) was Christ;

and on this foundation was Peter himself built."

… St Augustine

---

 

[1voice]

So it’s your belief, I think, that all churches regardless of denomination, are fallibly preaching and teaching regarding the infallible Word of God, giving way to fallible interpretations and teachings?

If that is the case then do you still believe that the bible is an infalliblly self-interpreted collection of books?

I was attempting to be humorous…
What I was doing there was to repeat, verbatim, what tomster had already said at the top of his quote …after which he said pretty much the same thing … but using about 50 words to accomplish the same task … I was being facetious and he indicated that he recognized his own long windedness.

 

[1voice]

We wonder if you’re all but completely oblivious to the meanings in Scriptures, or just generally confused by your false assumptions leading to your personal eisegesis.

Did you happen to notice that Luke 10 is describing a different scenario than Matthew 18, or does that escape you too?

Did you notice that there was a specific number mentioned… 72?

Which follows… did you notice that Luke 10 did NOT say “all disciples”?

Did you notice that in Luke 10, Jesus is NOT giving them Church authority?

Did you even happen to notice that Matthew 18 does NOT say “all disciples”?

Did you notice that in Matthew 18, Jesus is giving the very select group of disciples (NOT all disciples) Church authority?

Any of that even entering your mind? The wise person seeking God notices these things. Why do they seem to completely escape you,or be ignored by you?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MDK
Where Jesus gives authority, He is speaking only to a special group of disciples, His 12 Apostles.
Luke 10

1 After this the Lord appointed seventy-two others and sent them two by two ahead of him to every town and place where he was about to go.

17 The seventy-two returned with joy and said, “Lord, even the demons submit to us in your name.” 18 He replied, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven. 19** I have given you authority …**

---

casting out demons, healing people … is not Church authority?

 

[joe370]

So, you think it would be correct to assume that Matt Ch 18. applied only to the Apostles?

Was Jesus referring to you, me or the other potential future Christians in Matthew 18?

 

[joe370]

It was a joke…
What I was doing there was to repeat, verbatim, what tomster had already said at the top of his quote …after which he said pretty much the same thing … but using about 50 words to accomplish the same task … I was being facetious and he indicated that he recognized his own long windedness.

LOL…My bad…

 

[1voice]

Was Jesus referring to you, me or the other potential future Christians in Matthew 18?

Mark 3:35 (Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition)

35 For whosoever shall do the will of God, he is my brother, and my sister, and mother.

 

[joe370]

Mark 3:35 (Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition)

35 For whosoever shall do the will of God, he is my brother, and my sister, and mother.

So Jesus said the following to all of His brothers, sisters and mothers who do the will of God:

"I tell you the truth, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

So, you think it would be correct to assume that Matt Ch 18. applied only to the Apostles?

Read it and tell us who is the audience present when Christ gave instructions on His Church. It wasn’t the multitude. In fact, show me one time Christ gave instructions on His Church to the multitude.

 

[diorthosis]

No one said they were infallible, but it seems to be biased to select a portion of one and ignore all the others.

This thread is suppose to be about the claim to infallibility. So what’s your point?

Again, writings are either accurate or inaccurate, true or false, etc. Preachers and teachers may preach or teach accurately or inaccurately, but the word “infallible” pertains to the person (preacher or teacher) himself. The Scriptures are inerrant because the One who inspired them is Himself infallible. This cannot be said of any man, although your Magisterium (teaching authority) has asserted it.

 

[MDK]

Explain to me then Augustine was saying in the quote given or come up with one showing what he really meant.

With Chrysostom I don’t think it can get much clearer than "And He did not say to the ruler of the church, “Bind such a man,” but, “If thou bind,” committing the whole matter to the person himself, who is aggrieved, and the bonds abide indissoluble.

Rather than just stating I am wrong in how I view these quotes, show me evidence that shows otherwise.

Sorry, I gave you too much credit for having sufficient background and being willing to look deeper to figure something out, seeking to actually discern what someone wrote. You need the background to be able to understand what great Catholic minds like Augustine and Crysostom are talking about. When I read City of God, for instance, I had and have to think about what he’s saying, as it’s first from a different time with a different style and many insights are offered.

So, what is “clear” to you has been eisegetically obtained by you through lack of proper (Catholic) background coupled influence by your errant presuppositions, and not exegetically derived from the author’s intent. If you did things exegetically, you would be Catholic.

Now to the answer… First, the “ruler of the Church” Crysostom is referring to is the Pope.

Secondly, he’s saying that the Pope is not to bind the man (as in an act of excommunication) as something the Pope is actually introducing to the man, rather the excommunication is only decreed because the man has already excommunicated himself and the formal binding decree of excommunication (decreed by the Pope) is a formal recognition of what this man has done to himself.

Think about it for a while… perhaps a long time is needed because this truth is a new concept for you.

 

[MDK]

It wasnt my interpretation … I quoted Augustine.

---

"the Lord said, ‘On this rock will I build my Church,

because Peter had said , ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.’

On this rock (Petra) ,therefore, He said, which thou hast confessed,

I will build my Church. For the Rock (Petra) was Christ;

and on this foundation was Peter himself built."

… St Augustine

---

Your interpretation is that St. Augustine supports your position. This is the reason you presented it. Thinking St. Augustine’s words supported your position is your logical fallacy, due to your blind eisegetical methods based on fault presupposition and lack of proper background.

St. Augustine’s words you quoted support God’s Catholic Church and therefore my position… i.e. the truth. I showed you that, and you still don’t understand. But, only those seeking God would actually try to understand, which you have not done so. Why?

 

[MDK]

Quote:
Originally Posted by MDK
Where Jesus gives authority, He is speaking only to a special group of disciples, His 12 Apostles.
Luke 10

1 After this the Lord appointed seventy-two others and sent them two by two ahead of him to every town and place where he was about to go.

17 The seventy-two returned with joy and said, “Lord, even the demons submit to us in your name.” 18 He replied, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven. 19** I have given you authority …**

---

casting out demons, healing people … is not Church authority?

Sorry, I gave you too much credit for being able to understand the difference between authority such as to cast out demons, which any lay person can receive (described in Luke 10), and Church DISCIPLINARY authority given only to the Bishops of God’s Church (Matthew 18). I’ve clearly used the words subordinate and disciplinary in referring to Matthew 18 when I’ve taught you what God did. Were you not able to understand these concepts, or do you just continue to ignore the truths that don’t support your preconceived false notions?

 

[MDK]

Mark 3:35 (Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition)

35 For whosoever shall do the will of God, he is my brother, and my sister, and mother.

Matt 3:35 is a general statement intended for all. But the general statement in Mark 3:35 really has nothing to do with the specific subordinate disciplinary authority given to the Bishops in Matt 18. Only one who seeks to confuse the word of God would mix up the two.

Matt 3:35 is indeed meant for you and I. I seek to follow it first by not distorting the will of God, then seeking to follow His will. You on the other hand distort the meaning of Scriptures, and therefore don’t end up with God’s will in your heart and mind and so can’t possibly do His will. We must be open to God, and not simply substitute our own word for His. I hope you can begin to be open to God instead of yourself. It will do you a great deal of good, as it does for all people who seek God’s word over their own.

 

[MDK]

The point is, that these men did not interpret this passage as dealing with church disciplinary authority. They relate the passage to what an aggrieved party is to do, not the church…

That’s completely wrong, and I’ve shown you why in a separate post.

These men did absolutely interpret Matt 18 as Church disciplinary authority. Nothing in either quote shows otherwise.

Please read what they wrote, but you’ll need to have some rudimentary understanding of the Church which they belonged to first. Both were and still are Catholic men. Both believed the Pope is the Prime Minister to King Jesus as established by Jesus as a dynastic office. When all you have is false background as you do, then your preconceived falsehoods color incorrectly what you read. This has clearly shown in what you’ve presented here. The truth is what is needed, not Protestant falsehoods. Protestantism opposes what God has established for us, namely the truth about Him being taught without error.

 

[MDK]

Read it and tell us who is the audience present when Christ gave instructions on His Church. It wasn’t the multitude. In fact, show me one time Christ gave instructions on His Church to the multitude.

He can’t. But, that truth doesn’t seem to matter when one is bent on their own way instead of God’s way.

 

[MDK]

So Jesus said the following to all of His brothers, sisters and mothers who do the will of God:

"I tell you the truth, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.

I hope they actually think and seek to understand the truth, rather than simply confuse the two passages. Jesus is clearly saying different things to two different audiences.