K
Koineman
Guest
Has the Roman Catholic Church ever produced an infallible list of its infallible teachings?
- Status
D
Della
Guest
How could the list not be infallible if the teachings are? 
But seriously, the Church has defined very few doctrines/dogmas as infallibly true. But, there’s no “list” of them that I know of. They are simply interwoven into the fabric of Catholic belief and teachings. People have made lists of them, but the Church itself has produced no such list, again, that I am aware of.
We do have creeds and the divine praises which pretty much sum up the major beliefs of our faith, if you wish to look into those.
But seriously, the Church has defined very few doctrines/dogmas as infallibly true. But, there’s no “list” of them that I know of. They are simply interwoven into the fabric of Catholic belief and teachings. People have made lists of them, but the Church itself has produced no such list, again, that I am aware of.We do have creeds and the divine praises which pretty much sum up the major beliefs of our faith, if you wish to look into those.
M
MarcoPolo
Guest
What infallible statement would verify that the infallible list is infallible? And what infallible statement would verify that statement that verifies the infallible list? And on and on. But if you understand infallibility is something proper to God alone, through the agency of His Church, then you understand that infallibility is recognized with the same faithful eye by which one recognizes the infallibility of God’s word.
See also
Is Certainty a Bad Thing? Certainty, Infallibility, and the Reformed Tradition (jump to the sub-head “Certainty and the Catholic Tradition”)
Fallacies on Infallibility
See also
Is Certainty a Bad Thing? Certainty, Infallibility, and the Reformed Tradition (jump to the sub-head “Certainty and the Catholic Tradition”)
Fallacies on Infallibility
J
JReducation
Guest
It’s called the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
I think that folks are confusing infallible with Ex Cathedra. All Ex Cathedra statements are infallible. Not all infallible statements are Ex Cathedra.
Anything that is dogmatic or moral is infallible.
All canonizations are Ex Cathedra; therefore, infallible.
I think that folks are confusing infallible with Ex Cathedra. All Ex Cathedra statements are infallible. Not all infallible statements are Ex Cathedra.
Anything that is dogmatic or moral is infallible.
All canonizations are Ex Cathedra; therefore, infallible.
K
Koineman
Guest
So one knows what teachings are infallible simply by faith? Or have I misunderstood you?
D
DavidFilmer
Guest
Most theologians believe that most Catholic doctrine is infallible. But the only way to know for sure if something is infallible is for the Church to tell us so.
After Vatican-1, some Papal Constitutions have been worded in such a way as to make the infallible nature of the teaching plain. But the only doctrine that I know of that the Church has flat-out said is infallible (using word “infallible”) is the teaching that the Church has no authority to admit women to priestly ordination. That doctrine was laid out in JP2’s Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, but it is not an ex cathedra teaching, but a teaching of the ordinary Magesterium. The flat-out statement that this doctrine is infallible was released by Joseph Card. Ratzinger, at the time prefect of CCD, in this letter, which states:
Of course, the question of infallibility is of interest only to theologians. All Catholics are bound by all doctrine, regardless of whether it has been declared infallible. I’ll never understand why there are many questions on CAF about infallibility. The guy in the pew has no reason to care about it.
After Vatican-1, some Papal Constitutions have been worded in such a way as to make the infallible nature of the teaching plain. But the only doctrine that I know of that the Church has flat-out said is infallible (using word “infallible”) is the teaching that the Church has no authority to admit women to priestly ordination. That doctrine was laid out in JP2’s Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, but it is not an ex cathedra teaching, but a teaching of the ordinary Magesterium. The flat-out statement that this doctrine is infallible was released by Joseph Card. Ratzinger, at the time prefect of CCD, in this letter, which states:
To my knowledge, only this one doctrine has been described as infallible in such direct terms, actually using the word “infallible.”
Of course, the question of infallibility is of interest only to theologians. All Catholics are bound by all doctrine, regardless of whether it has been declared infallible. I’ll never understand why there are many questions on CAF about infallibility. The guy in the pew has no reason to care about it.
K
Koineman
Guest
That’s odd. I’ve been told by Catholics, when I’ve quoted the Catechism at times, that it’s not an infallible document. So you’re saying that the CCC is in fact infallible from cover to cover?
What do you mean by dogmatic or moral?
D
DavidFilmer
Guest
It is not. The Catechism is an authoritative statement of Catholic doctrine, and all Catholics are bound by everything it teaches (as we are bound by all Catholic doctrine), and it may contain statements that are infallible, but it is not infallible itself.
Why does anyone care about this? It makes no difference to anyone except a handful of theologians.
D
Della
Guest
Yes, I was going to mention the CCC, but it’s confusing to people who are used to thinking in terms of everything being absolute. The either/or type of thinking common among certain Protestants. Catholics don’t generally classify everything as “either/or” it’s usually both/and on a lot of issues. It’s really at the heart of Christianity, paradox. Christ is both in heaven and yet on the earth. He is both God and man. We are both saved and being saved, and so on.
P
PaulfromIowa
Guest
No, I am quite sure there is no list of the infallible teachings of the Church. The same must be said in response to the oft heard question: “What is the bare minimum I can believe to be saved?” The fact is that Christians must not think in those minimalist terms.
F
Filioque
Guest
Dogmatic and Moral statements in the CCC are infallible. The printer of the book is not.
You may also want to find a copy of The Church Teaches, and Sources of Catholic Dogma You can pick up used copies.
The important thing to know is that they are simply a synopsis of the teachings of the Catholic Church. A starting point to understand the teachings of the Church. Taken out of a Catholic context they can and frequently are twisted to mean something that the Church does not teach. So don’t forget to look at the footnotes, (filled with scriptural references) and find a good Catholic source to get a fuller understanding of the brief statements of these sources.
You may also want to find a copy of The Church Teaches, and Sources of Catholic Dogma You can pick up used copies.
The important thing to know is that they are simply a synopsis of the teachings of the Catholic Church. A starting point to understand the teachings of the Church. Taken out of a Catholic context they can and frequently are twisted to mean something that the Church does not teach. So don’t forget to look at the footnotes, (filled with scriptural references) and find a good Catholic source to get a fuller understanding of the brief statements of these sources.
M
MarcoPolo
Guest
Well, one can, with sound reasoning and principles make an objective case to identify a source which is infallible. It’s not just some blind faith.
See also Seeking Certainty
K
Koineman
Guest
Several reasons:
1.) If something is fallible, that means it’s open to question because it is subject to error. But how can something be binding on the conscience if it is fallible? Because of this, I would think it’s absolutely vital to know what teachings are infallible and which are not.
2.) In the past, sometimes when I’ve quoted the CCC or some other fallible document to Catholics, I’ve gotten the reply, “Well, remember, that’s not infallible” or words to that effect, as if my bringing it up was totally negated.
3.) If a church claims to have the power/authority to make infallible statements, then why wouldn’t it produce an infallible list of those infallible statements? That would ensure that nobody confuses something that is binding with what is not binding (see point 1).
E
Eufrosnia
Guest
All doctrinal teaching of the Church require assent by faith. Hence they are binding. Speaking of binding, even Church laws are binding though they are not infallible.
So the Church does not need to produce a separate list because the faithful must assent by faith to all teachings and whatever else the church makes in to a law are indeed binding on the will.
To get a better understanding, I recommend the following. It is very short and concise and should answer your question.
ewtn.com/vexperts/showmessage.asp?number=564105&Pg=&Pgnu=&recnu=
As it makes clear
Now if you are about to ask how I know the Apologist who answered has interpreted Church teaching correctly, please know that he/she has been certified and given authority by the Church to teach. In other words, the Church has tested or studied the person’s education and views to some reasonable degree and certified them as being orthodox in their thinking. So until the Church corrects them or there is evidence in Church teaching to suspect what is claimed, we assume that the Apologist is correct.
S
snarflemike
Guest
Why do you want to know (or why should a Catholic want to know)? That’s not a combative question, but a serious one. Is it to find which teachings one can plausibly dissent against?
I’m also curious about something else. As a Protestant, how would you respond if I asked you for a list of all the teachings in the bible?
J
JReducation
Guest
50% of Catholics think they understand infallibility. 20% admit that they don’t. And I’m not too sure about the other 30%.
When a Catholic tells you that something is or is not infallible, check it out with an orthodox theologian or good resource book. The CCC is the most authoritative resource book out there.
When I, as a theologian, speak about the CCC, I’m speaking about it’s content. The CCC contains all of the moral and doctrinal teaching of the Catholic Church, either specifically stated or in a euchological way. Herein lies the problem for many Catholics who are not theologians. One has to be trained to read euchology.
This may be one of the weaknesses of the CCC, that not every truth is explicitly stated. However, it’s all there. One has to flesh it out. The CCC contains nothing that is in error. There is nothing in the CCC that is someone’s private opinion. Everything in the CCC is grounded in Catholic Tradition. If one reads the apostolic declaration by Bl. John Paul, he tells us that the CCC is the paradigm that all catechism have to follow. The Church does not put out comic books and asks its people to follow them and to model its religious education material on said comic book.
Those who say that the CCC is not infallible are not understanding what we mean when we say that it is. We’re not talking about the publisher, the organization, the spelling or even the use of language. We’re talking about the content. The content is true and error free. By error, we mean doctrinal and moral error, not other kinds of error. It has plenty of other kinds of error, including grammatical whoppers. So does the bible.
Dogmatic or dogma, teachings that have been revealed to us through scripture, sacred tradition and the magisterium.
Moral – the rightness and the wrongness of things which has been divinely revealed through natural law, scripture, sacred tradition and the magisterium.
Laws about not eating meat on Good Friday are not moral laws. Those are given to us by the Church and the Church can take them away. Thou shalt not kill is of divine origin. See the difference?
You’re absolutely correct.
Excellent advice.
A very good rescript of the CCC is the Catholic Catechism for Adults published by the USCCB.
usccbpublishing.org/client/client_pages/usccaindex.cfm
For some reason, people on CAF are always preoccupied with infallibility and Ex Cathedra statements. I often get the distinct impression that people are looking for a loophole not to comply with something or they’re looking for a handcuff to force someone into compliance. Both are very inappropriate and very unprofessional ways of doing theology.
M
MarcoPolo
Guest
This doesn’t quite admit to what the Church claims infallibility is. The Church doesn’t just “turn on” infallibility. Infallibility is not a “positive” charism. It is a protection against teaching error. The very word, in-fallible, means without error. And ultimately, the Church is always subject to the movement of the Holy Spirit when exercising this protection in Her teaching capacity.
As to why the Spirit would not move the Church to attempt to produce the hypothetical infallible list is a speculative enterprise. But one reason is obviously what was stated prior, that the infallible list would require an infallible declaration to alert the faithful to its infallible character, and then an infallible statement to validate the verifier, and so on to infinity. Let’s say some skeptic demands an infallible list of the infallible books of Scripture. Then you produce for him your Bible. Then he demands you verify that infallible list with an infallible statement, and then that statement, and on down the line. It’s like refusing to say God teaches without error unless you get some infallible statement saying so. But then you beg the question as to why the statement should be viewed as such. And again on to infinity. So you can see the certain perversity in demanding an infallible “list.”
And again, since infallibility is God’s protection, then basically the demand is to know why God doesn’t create an infallible statement (i.e. list) verifying Himself. As well, as Eufrosnia pointed out, the faithful are called to assent to the Church’s teachings whether or not the charism of infallibility has technically been exercised to guard the truth. One could argue God does not expect the faithful to play “gotcha” games about what to believe, but rather He calls the faithful as children into trust of the Lord.
D
DavidFilmer
Guest
If it is not infallible then it is not binding upon conscience (known as assent of the heart). But it is binding upon intellect (known as assent of the mind). In other words, we are expected to say, “Well, that doesn’t sound right to me, but I will accept it because you have teaching authority.” It’s like when scientists tell us that objects can disappear from one place and reappear in another (quantum shift). It sounds crazy, but I believe it because I accept the teaching credentials of the physicists who teach it.
The difference between doctrine that has been acknowledged as infallible and that which is not is like the difference between being bound by chains or ropes. Properly secured, we cannot escape from either one. The fact that chain has a higher tensile strength is irrelevant to the person who is tied up. They both bind us equally well.
The CCC is not infallible, but it is authoritative. If anyone claims that Catholics are free to dismiss ANY of its teachings, they are sadly mistaken.
You seem to think that Catholics are bound by only infallible teaching. Catholics are bound by ALL teaching of the Magisterium.
Again, ALL doctrine is binding. Most theologians believe that most doctrine is infallible, but the Church does not express the infallible nature of the teaching unless there is a pastoral reason to do so. This is rare. The Doctrines that are now commonly accepted as infallible were taught for centuries before the infallible nature of the teaching was made known.
To the guy in the pew, it makes absolutely no difference. Any Catholic who thinks he can use artificial birth control because the Church has not acknowledged the infallible nature of Humanae Vitae is sadly mistaken.
S
snarflemike
Guest
Yes, it is a very strange approach to salvation and full and complete union with God.
“Yes dear, I’d love to be married to you, but can you please list for me in detail all that I will need to do in our marriage, so I can do the minimum and not one drop more?”
po18guy
Well-known member
All of the teachings given by the normal magisterium of the Church are considered infallible teachings. Period. As Brother JR said: the catechism.
Source: Fr. John Trigilio, ThD, PhD, co-author of Catholicism for Dummies. All Christians should have a copy.
- Status