How to explain to a Protestant that the RC Church is Infallible on all moral issues

[OurLadysServant]

So it is binding for the RC, Roman Catholic Church but not the Eastern Catholic Churches?

Yes. The Greek Orthodox Churches left the True Church, and most of it’s doctrines and beliefs that had been there nearly a thousand years from Christ Himself . Such as Papal authority of the Seat of Saint Peter,

 

[OurLadysServant]

All Catholic beliefs were practiced by Jesus own apostles, and the early church. The Holy Spirit and Jesus guided the apostles from the Resurrection and Pentecost and onwards. The apostles passed on catholic beliefs to their close companions who became known as the Early Church Fathers (the Bishops consecrated at the hands of the apostles themselves). Who passed them down to us.

catholic.com/blog/jon-sorensen/the-evidence-is-on-our-side

Historical evidence of Papal Authority being inspired by the Holy Spirit to the Apostles and Early Church (which Jesus Himself instituted to St Peter in the Bible), Eucharist as Jesus True Presence (which is Biblical), seeking Mary’s intercession as a saint to pray to God on our behalf, Holy Orders ordination of priests, the authority to forgive sins, etc

whynotcatholicism.net/view/the-early-church-was-catholic

catholicbridge.com/catholic/timeline_of_catholic_church.php

aboutcatholics.com/beliefs/proof-and-reason-for-the-papal-office/

 

[TMC]

I think that it’s a bit more complex than that. Yes, there’s been an evolution of the way that the doctrine has been expressed. More than that, though, the doctrine has been expressed to different audiences at different times. If you’re speaking to a group of Catholics who are in open heresy, you express this truth in a different way than if you’re speaking to, for example, a group of Christians who have never been Catholic. Moreover, if you presume that all humans have received the truth expressed by the Catholic Church, you frame up this principle differently than if you presume that there are those who have not (yet) received this truth.

Yes, there is much more to it. But I also think it is more than a change in the way the doctrine is expressed. It is also a change in the way the doctrine is understood. To keep with the example of EENS (there are obviously others), there were times in Church history when the doctrine was understood to mean that to be saved one must be a formal member of the Catholic Church. At other times in Church history (including now), the doctrine was understood to mean that salvation was possible without formal membership in the Church, but that salvation nonetheless flows from the Church. So the understanding of the doctrine has changed, along with the way it is expressed. This is not because the Truth has changed, but because a fuller understanding of the Truth has lead to a change in the way this particular doctrine is expressed and understood.

 

[Church_Militant]

Development (or evolution…) of doctrine is of our understanding, not the doctrines in question. Only a fool would say that they don’t come to better understand what they believe over the course of time.

The staff apologists have addressed this issue several times.

• Papal Infallibility
• Has the doctrine of papal infallibility been infallibly defined?
• In what sense is the Pope Infallible?
• How can corrupt Church leaders be infallible?

You might also see the following:

• How do we know that the pope can make an infallible statement concerning doctrine? Has this ever been infallibly defined?
• Scott Hahn explains Papal Infallibility
• Infallibility of the Pope
• Which Church teachings have been declared infallible?
• Does papal infallibility mean the pope is perfect or inerrant?

 

[Church_Militant]

Also from Radio Replies:
403. I see the Catholic viewpoint in this matter, hut a far greater difficulty arises for me concerning your Church in so far as she claims within her spiritual sphere to be infallible.

She makes that claim under certain conditions.

406. I find the Catholic assumption of infallibility simply appalling!

I should be appalled if a Church claiming to be established by Christ and to speak with His authority did not claim to be infallible. A fine sort of a guide to eternal destiny God would have given us, if that guide calmly admitted that she was not sure of the road herself.

**409. Upon what grounds does your Church claim infallibility?

**Christ established His church upon a foundation as solid as a rock, and declared that the gates of hell, or forces of evil, would not prevail against it. This implies the perpetual retention of the truth taught by Christ, forbidding its corruption. He commanded her to teach all nations, “all things whatsoever I have commanded you; and behold I am with you all days even to the consummation of the world.” Matt. XXVIII., 20. His presence guarantees that she will ever teach a doctrine identical With His own principles. He promised that the Holy Spirit would abide with the Church forever, undoubtedly a pledge of perpetual infallibility. Jn. XIV., 16. St. Paul clearly manifests this doctrine by his words, “Behave thyself in the house of God, which is the Church of the living God, the pillar and ground of truth.” I. Tim. III., 15. The early Fathers insist upon the infallibility of the Church, and reason also tells us that the unity of the Church could not be maintained if she could fail in her teaching of the truth; her very holiness forbids heresy; her catholicity demands expansion without loss of the self-same teaching; whilst her apostolicity requires perpetual duration of an unchanged Apostolic doctrine. Finally, if the Catholic Church be not infallible, then there is no Church on earth which is such as Christ predicted. **

1. It is intelligible that the whole Church would be preserved from error; but you go further, and claim that the Pope is personally infallible**.

It is the Catholic doctrine that he is infallible when he speaks for the whole church in defining a question of faith or morals.
**
429. The early Church did not admit that the Pope was infallible, nor did any Pope before Pius X. claim such a privilege.

**The doctrine is contained in Christ’s words to St. Peter, and the early Church was well aware of the fact. TertuUian, about the year 200 A.D. wrote concerning St. Paul’s rebuke to St. Peter, “If Peter was rebuked by Paul, it was certainly for a fault in conduct, not in teaching.” St. Cyprian, about 256, wrote of the See of Rome, “Would heretics dare to come to the very seat of Peter whence Apostolic faith is derived and whither no errors can come.” St. Augustine in the 4th century gives us the famous expression, “Rome has spoken; the cause is finished.” The early Popes had little need to insist often upon a doctrine which was denied by none of the faithful. The Council of Ephesus in 431 thus expressed its firm convictions, “No one doubts, nay it is known to all ages, that Peter, the chief and head of the Apostles, the pillar of the faith and foundation of the Catholic Church, received the keys of the kingdom from Our Lord Jesus Christ … Peter, who even to these our own days, and always in his successors, lives and exercises his authority.” In 451 Pope Leo wrote his decision to the Bishops of the Church assembled at Chalcedon, and when the letter was read all cried out, “Peter has spoken through Leo.” **

1. If the Popes are infallible**, the laws of earlier Popes must be those of later Popes—yet the laws of the Catholic Church have varied.

It is not necessary that all the laws of earlier Popes must be those of later Popes. Infallibility concerns doctrine, and morals, not necessarily discipline. Disciplinary laws adapted to particular times change with the times.

 

[JonNC]

Papal Infallibility, RC church authority on all moral issues, Bible evidence, early church evidence, private revelation, writing of the saints

The difficult time you will have is that, generally, western non-Catholic communions do not see papal infallibility ex cathedra as either scriptural or evident in the early Church. The same is true for EO Christians.
Lutherans, for example, will look to scriptures, and consider the early councils, even the ECF’s, but we find no evidence of infallibility ex cathedra there.
Other western non-Catholic communions will be an even tougher sell.

Jon

 

[Mystophilus]

How to explain it: “It’s Catholic belief.”

How to demonstrate its logic to someone who is interested in the theology or is willing to believe in it: see Church Militant’s post.

How to prove it to someone who is unwilling to believe in it: don’t try.

 

[Abu]

Listen to Christ.
**Four promises to Peter alone: **
“You are Peter and on this rock I will build My Church.” (Mt 16:18)
“The gates of hell will not prevail against it.”(Mt 16:18)
I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven.” ( Mt 16:19)
“Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven.” (Mt 16:19) [Later, also to the Twelve]

**Sole authority: **
“Strengthen your brethren.” (Lk 22:32)
“Feed My sheep.”(Jn 21:17).

Then, after His Resurrection, the Christ further mandates all eleven apostles: “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”

Who has the authority to challenge the Christ and His Church?

 

[Good_Fella]

St Thomas Aquinas

• “To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary. To one without faith, no explanation is possible.”*

This dictum applies to people who say “Convince me.” It’s better just to leave them with their popcorn.

Here are several quotes from the Saints for those of us who wish to defend and propagate our Catholic Faith to keep in mind:

" The proof of love is in the works. Where love exists, it works great things. But when it ceases to act, it ceases to exist."
Pope St. Gregory the Great

"At the end of our life, we shall all be judged by charity.
St. John of the Cross

“Whatever you do, think not of yourself, but of God.”
St. Vincent Ferrer

"To love God is something greater than to know Him. "
St. Thomas Aquinas

“When you feel the assaults of passion and anger, then is the time to be silent as Jesus was silent in the midst of His ignominies and sufferings”
St. Paul of the Cross

"My confidence is placed in God who does not need our help for accomplishing his designs. Our single endeavor should be to give ourselves to the work and to be faithful to him, and not to spoil his work by our shortcomings.
St. Isaac Jogues

“You must ask God to give you power to fight against the sin of pride which is your greatest enemy - the root of all that is evil, and the failure of all that is good.”
St. Vincent de Paul

“If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask God, who gives to all men generously and without reproaching, and it will be given him.”
**St. James the Less **

PAX
:heaven:

 

[dronald]

The Pope is infallible on matters of faith and morals when speaking ex cathedra (that is from the chair of Saint Peter) except that doesn’t ever really happen. Except twice… Maybe. Right?

 

[Abu]

dronald #29
The Pope is infallible on matters of faith and morals when speaking ex cathedra (that is from the chair of Saint Peter) except that doesn’t ever really happen. Except twice… Maybe. Right?

The following expresses the application of infallibility to faith and morals:
**Answer by David Gregson of EWTN to me on Nov-22-2002: **
“You are correct in stating that the Pope exercises his charism of infallibility not only in dogmatic definitions issued, ex cathedra, as divinely revealed (of which there have been only two), but also in doctrines definitively proposed by him, also ex cathedra, which would **include canonizations **(that they are in fact Saints, enjoying the Beatific Vision in heaven), moral teachings (such as contained in Humanae vitae), and other doctrines he has taught as necessarily connected with truths divinely revealed, such as that priestly ordination is reserved to men. Further details on levels of certainty with which the teachings of the Magisterium (either the Pope alone, or in company with his Bishops) may be found in Summary of Categories of Belief.” [My emphasis].

 

[dronald]

Thanks! Let’s break these down for clarity:

The following expresses the application of infallibility to faith and morals:
**Answer by David Gregson of EWTN to me on Nov-22-2002: **
“You are correct in stating that the Pope exercises his charism of infallibility not only in dogmatic definitions issued, ex cathedra, as divinely revealed (of which there have been only two),

So does this mean there are only two teachings outside of the Bible that the Pope has infallibly said are absolutely true and cannot be argued without anathema? Why isn’t Trent considered “Dogmatic definitions”? Or is it?

I apologize as I only ask out of ignorance and I can never get answers that I understand. No one seems to really get it, haha.

but also in doctrines definitively proposed by him, also ex cathedra, which would **include canonizations **(that they are in fact Saints, enjoying the Beatific Vision in heaven),

Do the Orthodox and Catholics all agree on who’s a Saint and is Canonized?

moral teachings (such as contained in Humanae vitae), and other doctrines he has taught as necessarily connected with truths divinely revealed, such as that priestly ordination is reserved to men. Further details on levels of certainty with which the teachings of the Magisterium (either the Pope alone, or in company with his Bishops) may be found in Summary of Categories of Belief.” [My emphasis].

Here’s I guess where Trent comes in?

 

[JoeT777]

Thanks! Let’s break these down for clarity:

So does this mean there are only two teachings outside of the Bible that the Pope has infallibly said are absolutely true and cannot be argued without anathema?

What the Pope teaches to be infallible will not conflict with Scripture.

Why isn’t Trent considered “Dogmatic definitions”? Or is it?

A little known author (to Americans), James Anthony Froude, a late 19th century Anglican, lectured on the history of Trent which was apparently more ridicule than history. The reference to “Dogmatic definitions” was made in several lectures.

The dogma that came out of Trent per-existed and was merely clarified to highlight the error of the protesters.

I apologize as I only ask out of ignorance and I can never get answers that I understand. No one seems to really get it, haha.

No doubt, haha.

Do the Orthodox and Catholics all agree on who’s a Saint and is Canonized?

How is this question relevant to the OP?

Here’s I guess where Trent comes in?

Do you not like the principles and tenets Trent taught concerning faith and morals? If so, which ones?

JoeT

 

[Abu]

dronald #31
So does this mean there are only two teachings outside of the Bible that the Pope has infallibly said are absolutely true and cannot be argued without anathema?

No. Christ gave the world His Catholic Church and She authorized what writings comprise the Word of God as the Sacred Scriptures. Post #30 indicates the infallible doctrine against contraception. The Marian dogmas are level one, below.

The three levels of teaching are:
1**) Dogma – infallible (Canon #750.1)** to be believed with the assent of divine and Catholic faith.
2) Doctrine – infallible (Canon #750.2) requires the assent of ecclesial faith, to be “firmly embraced and held”.
3) Doctrine – non-definitive (non-infallible) and requires intellectual assent (“loyal submission of the will and intellect”, Vatican II, Lumen Gentium 25), not an assent of faith. [See the Explanatory Note on ATF by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith*]

• ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDFADTU.HTM

Why isn’t Trent considered “Dogmatic definitions”? Or is it?

Answer by Dr. William Carroll (EWTN) on 04-06-2002:
The authoritative list of Scriptures is that of the Council of Trent, which was infallible.
tinyurl.com/l7my9pp

The Council of Trent is one of the greatest Councils alongside Vatican II and issued many doctrinal definitions.
Answer by Matthew Bunson (EWTN) on 06-12-2003:
Extract:
“Among the important decrees promulgated by the council were: the two primary sources for revelation are the Scriptures and Tradition; justification is achieved by man’s free cooperation with God’s grace through faith, hope, charity, and good works; there are seven sacraments, which produce their effect independent of faith and the virtue of the minister; the Eucharist is a true sacrament and Christ is present whole and entire under both species, bread and wine, and in each part of both species; the bread and wine are changed entirely into the substance of Christ’s body and blood, with only the appearance of bread and wine remaining; and Mass is a true sacrifice.”
tinyurl.com/msyzgst

Do the Orthodox and Catholics all agree on who’s a Saint and is Canonized?

As the Orthodox do not understand and recognise Christ’s institution of papal infallibility, they do not agree on Catholic canonizations.

 

[Good_Fella]

As the Orthodox do not understand and recognise Christ’s institution of papal infallibility, they do not agree on Catholic canonizations.

More specifically, what the Eastern Orthodox don’t agree with is the absolute need for a centralized canonization process with the Bishop of Rome acting as chief shepherd and ruler for the entire Church. For most of the time before the Great Schism the formal procedure of canonization was carried out by regional synods, and before the process was put into the hands of the greater ecclesiastical authority, the decisions reached by local bishops were honored by the Church. Canonizations were assumed to be infallible just as the sensus fidelium (the mind of the faithful) assumed them to be. The first papal canonization of a saint, according to extant written documents, was apparently that of St. Udalricus, Bishop of Augsburg, by Pope John XV in A,D. 973. Recourse to local synods gradually shifted to the papacy, since the pope’s formal sanction carried greater authority in the decision making process. However, it wasn’t until 1170 after the schism that Pope Alexander lll issued a decree that gave the exclusive prerogative to canonize someone to the Bishop of Rome in his capacity of universal shepherd. By that time other bishops still had the ecclesial. authority to canonize someone a saint in the exercise of his temporal authority The monk St. Walter of Pontoise, whose feast is still celebrated in the Catholic Church, was canonized by the French Archbishop Hugh de Boves of Rouen in 1153. But I’m sure he had to have the pope’s approval before carrying out the process under the same temporal authority.

Thus until the 12th century it was believed that God spoke through the ecclesiastical authority of an indefectible Church when someone was officially declared to be a saint in Heaven either by a local bishop or a regional synod after it was ascertained by thorough investigation that the person concerned with lived an exemplary holy life. This is how canonizations are usually practiced in the EO Church and have been since the Great Schism in the 11th century and can explain why the Eastern Orthodox see no need for a solemn papal declaration. The history of canonizations may also have provided for some Catholic theologians of today the opinion that papal infallibility as exercised in canonizations is of a slightly different quality from that of the definition reached by the Fathers of Vatican l with regard to the Bishop of Rome. I share their opinion, since if Pope Eugene lll did in fact ratify Archbishop de Bove’s decision under the temporal ruling authority of the Church, his act still was not an exercise under the universal magisterium. Papal infallibility as it has been infallibly defined by Vatican l and infallibly endorsed by Vatican ll applies to the Pope in union with all the bishops in the world unless he extraordinarily declares something ex cathedra. Certainly, Archbishop de Boves hadn’t made such a pronouncement, but yet we find St. Walter of Pontoise in the official Catholic Index of Saints. The Fathers of Vatican l did not include the canonization of saints in their definition after having debated that question.

*PAX *

:harp: