I
icamhif
Guest
How exactly does an ecumenical council (like Vatican 2) decide on disputed dogma? Is it by majority vote of all the bishops in the council?
- Status
B
bben15
Guest
Yes, after heated debate, the bishops put it to a vote. If it passes, it is declared infallible.
I
icamhif
Guest
Thanks, Ben.
Another question (or set of questions) I have in mind:
Does a council have to be in the “ecumenical” category in order to be infallible? If so, then why isn’t the Council of Carthage and/or Hippo in that category? Was the canon of Scripture infallibly determined in these councils? If not, then is the Council of Trent the earliest infallible declaration of the canon?
Another question (or set of questions) I have in mind:
Does a council have to be in the “ecumenical” category in order to be infallible? If so, then why isn’t the Council of Carthage and/or Hippo in that category? Was the canon of Scripture infallibly determined in these councils? If not, then is the Council of Trent the earliest infallible declaration of the canon?
po18guy
Well-known member
Small but large point: as with the Council of Jerusalem, we cannot exclude the Holy Spirit from the decision-making process.
I
icamhif
Guest
Thanks, Ben.
Another question (or set of questions) I have in mind:
Does a council have to be in the “ecumenical” category in order to be infallible? If so, then why isn’t the Council of Carthage and/or Hippo in that category? Was the canon of Scripture infallibly determined in these councils? If not, then is the Council of Trent the earliest infallible declaration of the canon?
Another question (or set of questions) I have in mind:
Does a council have to be in the “ecumenical” category in order to be infallible? If so, then why isn’t the Council of Carthage and/or Hippo in that category? Was the canon of Scripture infallibly determined in these councils? If not, then is the Council of Trent the earliest infallible declaration of the canon?
B
bben15
Guest
A council is considered “ecumenical” if it is called by or approved by the Pope.
J
JRKH
Guest
AMEN - A very important point indeed.
Something else that needs to be included in this is the heart of those engaged in the discussions and debates. The purpose of a council needs to be to get at truth and not to promote any personal agenda. Thus humility and prayerful consideration needs to be at the heart of all debate, study and discussion. Such humility and prayer opens the participants to the active influence of the Spirit of God acting in Agape.
While voting is a mechanism used…consensus is the goal of such councils.
Peace
James
I
icamhif
Guest
Can a council be infallible even if it is not called by or approved by the Pope? If so, then were the local councils of Hippo and Carthage infallible when they determined the canon of Scripture?
B
bben15
Guest
No, a council cannot be infallible if not called or approved by the Pope.
po18guy
Well-known member
Of note here is that the canon did not change regardless of the nature of the council. The Deuterocanon books were always held as part of the sacred scriptures (both Catholic and Orthodox), but that canon was not set in stone until the reformation rather plainly called those books into question. The reformers seem to have fallen generally on the side of rejecting canonicity - by their actions as well as their statements. The subsequent demotion to “apocrypha” and their later exclusion from nearly all protestant bibles tends to bear this out, IMO. The fracturing within the reformation from early on resulted in no authoritative protestant authority to decide the canonicity of the books. Thus, the Church spoke up and settled the question for all time at Trent. Odd that no one ever seems to question the Orthodox Christians regarding these books being part of their canon. 
I
icamhif
Guest
Thanks, again.
So my conclusion is that the earliest infallible decree on the complete canon of Scripture is the Council of Trent. Correct me if I’m wrong.
And yes, I understand that that poses no problem for Catholics since you believe in development and clarification of doctrines when disputes arise.
So my conclusion is that the earliest infallible decree on the complete canon of Scripture is the Council of Trent. Correct me if I’m wrong.
And yes, I understand that that poses no problem for Catholics since you believe in development and clarification of doctrines when disputes arise.
T
TRH1292
Guest
No, it would be The Council of Florence.
po18guy
Well-known member
With a caveat or two, I believe that is correct. Please bear in mind that councils were normally called to combat heresy - division - in the Body of Christ. As well, there was no penchant in the early Church to infallibly define every precise detail of the faith, as is sometimes demanded today. Those points were generally dealt with as they were called into question, and the reformation most certainly called the canon into question. Yet, none of the reformers or their communities has ever answered the question to a certainty, or with universal authority.
I
icamhif
Guest
Which reminds me of another question I long held: What are the reasons the Eastern Orthodox Church consider canon that neither Catholics nor Protestants agree on (such as 3 Maccabees, Esdras, and Psalms 151)? What is the Catholic response to these claims?
po18guy
Well-known member
Just wondering: If Florence infallibly defined the canon, would there have been a need to do so at Trent?
po18guy
Well-known member
There are several Orthodox members who can shed some light on this. AlI I can say is that the Church tested them and for some reason, determined that they were not canonical.
T
TRH1292
Guest
It’s pretty common for Council’s and Church Authorities to restate things, especially in light of new challenges. The Nicene doctrine of the Trinity was restated in several councils in the middle ages.
J
JRKH
Guest
Actually - in light of the emphasis placed on the canon of Scripture by Sola Scriptura protestants - I think a better question might be why this difference never led to a schism - or even serious argument as far as I know - between East and West?
Pondering this question might help to she light on how the early, universal, Church viewed the canon of Scripture. It seems that they did not place the same type of emphasis on canonical uniformity that certain protestant denominations do.
Peace
James
J
JRKH
Guest
True.
I found this list some time ago and thought it quite interesting and informative.
From: catholicapologetics.org/ap031100.htm
**Council of Rome (382) **
Local church council under the authority of Pope Damasus, (366-384) gave a complete list of canonical books of the OT and NT which is identical with the list later approved by the Council of Trent.
**Council of Hippo (393) **
Local North African Church council in union with and under the authority of the Bishop of Rome approved a list of OT and NT canon (same as later approved by the Council of Trent)
**Council of Carthage (397) **
Local North African Church council in union with and under the authority of the Bishop of Rome approved a list of OT and NT canon (same as later approved by the Council of Trent)
**Pope Innocent I, Bishop of Rome, 401-417 (405) **
Responded to a request by Exuperius, Bishop of Toulouse, with a list of canonical books of Scripture; this list was the same as later approved by the Council of Trent.
*Council of Carthage (419) **
Local North African Church council in union with and under the authority of the Bishop of Rome approved a list of OT and NT canon (same as later approved by the Council of Trent)
The Council of Nicea II (787)
The Council of Nicea II in 787 ratified the same canon as authoritative for the Eastern Churches.
Council of Florence, an ecumenical council (1441)
Complete list of OT and NT canon was drawn up; this list later adopted by the Fathers of the Council of Trent
- In checking on second Nicea I have been unable to verify the above ratification. If someone else can clarify it would be appreciated.
Even with the Caveat on Nicea II, it can be seen that multiple councils over quite a range of dates looked at an approved the same canon of Scripture. Surely the Holy Spirit would not let an error stand through all of that even if error had somehow crept in early on…
James
po18guy
Well-known member
I know of zero heretical sects which have been founded on the 73 book bible. All have sprung from the 66 book bible, which relies on the Pharisee’s 39 book OT. A quick read of Matthew 23 seems to indicate that the Pharisees are not a group to be emulated. There is a spirit associated with the 66 book bible that seems to lead the faithful into error and division. I see it as the spirit of disobedience.
- Status