Infallibily, is this correct?

[brotherrolf]

Jesus would not suffer and die on the cross, establish His Church with Peter as first leader (pope) and then abandon His church without the infallible guidance of the Holy Spirit. Jesus: “But when he, the spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is to come.” (Jn 16:13)

Fundamentalists will agree that Peter was infallible in writing 1 and 2nd Peter, and the doctrines Peter taught; why should not Peter’s successors be infallible? God gave the Catholic Church infallibility so there would be only ONE church and not 25,000 Protestant churches. If not for the Supreme Court in the US, everyone would be free to make up his own laws.

If the Catholic Church is not infallible, how could it rule on the infallibility of the scriptures? It was the Catholic Church that declared that the books of the Protestant Bible are inerrant. We cannot separate the infallibility of Scripture from the infallibility of the Catholic Church.

The pope is infallible only when he speaks on matters of faith and morals and Ex Cathedra, from the chair of authority and in accord with the bishops of the world. The last time this happened was in 1950.
Caution the Fundamentalist that if he rejects the true church he is rejecting Jesus: “He, who listens to you, listens
to me; he, who rejects you, rejects me; but he who rejects me rejects the one who sent me.”
(Lk 10:16)

The Holy Spirit has guided the Church from the beginning. “It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements; …” (Acts 15:28)

“I will ask the Father, and he will give you another counselor to be with you forever―” (Jn 14:16)
The only alternative to infallibility is for everyone to judge for themselves what truth is. Clearly not what God intended. “So in Christ we who are many form one body…” (Rom 12:5) If Christ’s Church is fallible than the gates
of hell have prevailed, contrary to what Jesus promised: “I tell you that you are Peter, [Rock] and on this rock I will build my church and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. (Matt 16:18)

Tertullian: “Suppose now that all [The churches in various provinces] have erred… [This would mean that] the Holy Spirit has not watched over any of them so as to guide it into the truth, although he was sent by Christ, and asked of the Father for this very purpose―that He might be the teacher of truth.”

 

[Other_Eric]

Jesus would not suffer and die on the cross, establish His Church with Peter as first leader (pope) and then abandon His church without the infallible guidance of the Holy Spirit. Jesus: “But when he, the spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is to come.” (Jn 16:13)

Fundamentalists will agree that Peter was infallible in writing 1 and 2nd Peter, and the doctrines Peter taught; why should not Peter’s successors be infallible? God gave the Catholic Church infallibility so there would be only ONE church and not 25,000 Protestant churches. If not for the Supreme Court in the US, everyone would be free to make up his own laws.

If the Catholic Church is not infallible, how could it rule on the infallibility of the scriptures? It was the Catholic Church that declared that the books of the Protestant Bible are inerrant. We cannot separate the infallibility of Scripture from the infallibility of the Catholic Church.

The pope is infallible only when he speaks on matters of faith and morals and Ex Cathedra, from the chair of authority and in accord with the bishops of the world. The last time this happened was in 1950.
Caution the Fundamentalist that if he rejects the true church he is rejecting Jesus: “He, who listens to you, listens
to me; he, who rejects you, rejects me; but he who rejects me rejects the one who sent me.”
(Lk 10:16)

The Holy Spirit has guided the Church from the beginning. “It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements; …” (Acts 15:28)

“I will ask the Father, and he will give you another counselor to be with you forever―” (Jn 14:16)
The only alternative to infallibility is for everyone to judge for themselves what truth is. Clearly not what God intended. “So in Christ we who are many form one body…” (Rom 12:5) If Christ’s Church is fallible than the gates
of hell have prevailed, contrary to what Jesus promised: “I tell you that you are Peter, [Rock] and on this rock I will build my church and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. (Matt 16:18)

Tertullian: “Suppose now that all [The churches in various provinces] have erred… [This would mean that] the Holy Spirit has not watched over any of them so as to guide it into the truth, although he was sent by Christ, and asked of the Father for this very purpose―that He might be the teacher of truth.”

I would say that this, in essence, is correct. That there mey be something to add to it would only be discovered when someone questions it.

 

[Trishie]

Hi! I think that it is possible that this poll may receive the greater number of responses in a forum other than Prayer Intentions!

God bless you in your support of the Church and truth.

 

[Ocarm]

I think its a very good summary. Just two points, which you may or may not think are relevant.

Fundamentalists will agree that Peter was infallible in writing 1 and 2nd Peter, and the doctrines Peter taught;

He would be infallible if the letters are understood as ex cathedra statements, and only in those elements of the letters that relate to faith or morals as opposed to pastoral advice or disciplinary canons. As you are probably aware, some commentators think that the second letter is either the work of a different author to the first, or has been redacted/ edited by a second author (which also happens even today with revisions to papal statements being suggested by other contributors).

The pope is infallible only when he speaks on matters of faith and morals and Ex Cathedra, from the chair of authority and in accord with the bishops of the world. The last time this happened was in 1950.

Or when he speaks definitively through an ecumenical council, also in accord with the bishops, which happened twice in the 1960’s - in the dogmatic constitutions Lumen Gentium (1964) and Dei Verbum (1965).

If neither adds anything to your thinking, or if they aren’t points that you wished to address, sorry for the interruption.

 

[brotherrolf]

I am thinking that because Christians believe in the inerrancy of the Bible, they would believe Peter to be infallible in what he wrote.