And, this is why Christ gave one person the keys to the kingdom of Heaven to safeguard the full deposit of faith and its true meaning, and in the very next statement, firmly prophesied that the gates of hell, i.e. division/schism/heresy, would never prevail over His Church. The Catholic Church is both divine and human, just as Christ Himself is.
We can know with 100% the things that matter, the things that are explicitly taught in scripture that are agreed to by Christianity as a whole. The early Creeds summarize those explicit teachings.
First we need to define infallible. The basic definition is an adjective meaning incapable of making mistakes or being wrong.
The ECF’s don’t need to be infallible to give an understanding of the Scriptures during the first few centuries. The only thing I am asking is if you are skeptical of their writings why aren’t you skeptical of your interpretation or or your pastors interpretations?
The problem is that the popes and bishops are fallible as well and subject to the same things as everyone else. And these fallible men only have the ability to teach the Gospel as it was presented by Christ and taught through a supernatural gift by the Apostles. When proclaiming something as binding on the church the church must adhere to the teaching of the Gospel as it was given to the Apostles. Just saying “they taught it because we say they taught it isn’t good enough”. We are warned to not accept a gospel that was not given by the apostles. We are to test all teachings, no matter who they are from, by the teachings of the apostles. If they are not found in those teachings we are to reject them.
The Pope is not fallible on faith and morals. This charism of infallibility comes from Christ and is ordained by Christ. This is why Christ gave the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven to Saint Peter and his successor, to protect the Church from heresy/schism/error on faith and morals.
I am skeptical of my interpretation and my pastors interpretation. I’m aware of my selfishness and sinfulness and how it can skew my belief system. That is why I’m studying and examining the scriptures daily. However, I’m also confident that God’s grace is more powerful than any bad theology I may have. That my faith and trust in Christ and my adoption as a Son of God outweighs mistakes I may make in the flesh concerning theology.
The creeds are Oral tradition. The earliest written form of the Creeds dates to the 300’s. Why would you accept them?
On who’s authority? I’m not being unfair here. It’s an honest question. Forget everything you believe to be true and just imagine for one second that Jesus did leave Peter as His Chief Steward here on earth. Jesus tells Him who hears you hears me. (I’m not trying to prove anything here, just trying to get you to imagine that there might be the slightest possibility it might be true). Now imagine someone questions the authority Jesus left in charge. Jesus said who hears you hears me. It would be like not agreeing with Jesus. Can you even fathom the mortality of that sin? It blows my mind to even think about telling Jesus you don’t agree.
So Jesus left us in the dark?
The problem with that is there have been a bunch of unfaithful Popes. How can you be unfaithful (even to the point of murder) and yet still be infallible on faith and morals? That is like trusting the Gambino family to write and uphold the laws on murder and racketeering.
This is my point. How can you be confident? How do you know your selfishness and sinfulness isn’t just telling you what you want to hear. Maybe deep down you don’t want to have a visible authority in your life, that’s human nature we all despise authority. Maybe deep down you don’t want to believe you have to go to a priest for confession, because like on another thread a Catholic convert said I’m having troubles with confession, because when I was a non-Catholic I said sorry directly to God and never thought about it again. Now that I confessed to a Priest I worry more because I more often notice my sins now and it is troubling when I commit that sin again. Maybe you don’t want to have that greater responsibility.
Because Christianity is not about a religious system. It is about a change in our hearts and souls. It isn’t information that we process in our brains that then provides us with a to do list. Is about the Holy Spirit giving us a new heart that produces love, joy, peace, patience, goodness, kindness, gentleness and self-control.
Because I trust Christ to do what He said He would do. That I will be saved by grace through faith. Not grace through perfect theology.
I love this statement. To me this is the proof that defines Jesus promise in …
You’re confusing individual morals, or lacktherof, with the charism to accurately define morals. Just because the Pope is sinful, does not negate the charism of infallibility as it pertains to faith and morals. You are mixing moral impeccability with papal infallibility.
But here’s the rub, wouldn’t you agree that your selfish sinful self has no way of knowing if Jesus actually made them clear and it’s your subconscious, that has a hang up with organized religion, refusing to see the clearly because you just prefer doing your own thing.
So a murder and a liar has the moral authority to tell others to not kill or lie?
Saint Peter denied Our Lord three times. Yet, Our Lord gave him the Keys to the Kingdom to bind and loose matters of faith and morals. That charism does not prevent Saint Peter from sinning, but from promulgating error when defining faith and morals.
When you say “Church fathers” why not begin with the founding Church fathers of the faith? Why skip over to “father” that were actually hundreds of years after the apostolic church?
I never said I skip over the founding fathers. Do you honestly believe, with all the verses I sight, that I don’t read the Bible?
No disagreement on interpretation is what causes your breakdown. I fully see and understand the teachings about Mary, the Pope and the Eucharist in the Bible. The difference between you and me is you read it and say that is man made tradition. When I read it I see the New Testament concealed in the Old and the Old Testament revealed in the New and my mind is blown. Only an all powerful God could have written such and amazing intertwined history. There is no way these connections between the Old and the New could be thought up by man. Not possible. These revelations could have only come from God who planned them from the beginning of time.
Nope I have nothing to gain here. I am fully aware that I am not the one who can convince you of the truth. My only goal is to convince you of a truth that we can historically prove, that nothing that has ever been or ever will be can exist without authority. This is the only claim I make. When dealing with fallible, selfish, sinful humans, there always has to be an authority. I believe Jesus being smart than all of us combined knew this and showed us His authority, that will be with us to the end of the age in 2 Timothy 2. You have two choices continue to ignore my questions on the meaning of 2 Timothy 2 or pray that the Holy Spirit will tear down that wall that makes you ignore this verse.
I might be misreading this statement but it sure looks like you reject ecumenism here?
Jesus taught it was possible during the old covenant, why wouldn’t we believe He couldn’t make it possible under the New and greater Covenant?
God Bless