What’s so confusing about the infallibility of the Pope (which is connected to the infallibility of the Church)…
I am going to go on a tangent here, just to open up the discussion a little bit.
We all believe in the infallibility of the church. The church will always prevail.
The idea of infallibility of the bishop of Rome specifically is connected with the concept of universal jurisdiction of the bishop of Rome.
In other words, if one considers that ALL of the responsibility for the church is vested in one man, then it can plausibly be argued that ALL of the infallibility resides in that one man.
The claim for Papal Universal Jurisdiction does not pass muster, even if one looks only at the historical facts surrounding the western church (much the less when also considering the eastern church). This makes arguing for Papal Infallibility pointless.
My position is that the Honorius case is not a concern over infallibility claims directly, it actually impinges (further) on the claims for universal jurisdiction more than anything else, and on the claims for Papal Infallibility obliquely.
p.s. Do not confuse infallibility with impeccability.
It appears no one here does.
The accusation of “confuse infallibility with impeccability” is a mild canard.
This is a logical argument:
One group asserts that Jesus (God) intended the bishops of Rome, no matter who they might be from age to age, to have fully absolute control over the entire church.
To name bishops (and transfer them around) …
To call councils, to suppress councils, sessions, canons and decrees of councils …
To modify, edit, compose and codify the holy canons of the church …
To regulate the liturgy …
To canonize the saints and control the calendar …
To erect and suppress dioceses outside of his Metropolitan territory … etc.
And finally then, to proclaim or define dogma on his sole authority on behalf of the entire church.
If these powers had existed with the bishop of old Rome they would have automatically devolved onto the bishop of New Rome (as the next in priority) for the eastern church at the time of the schism. In fact, these rights and powers were unknown to the church at that time.
Really none of these universal powers were operative in the early church, and so they were unknown to anyone. In fact, the beginnings of each of these Papal powers can fairly accurately be dated. You probably know this, because you are intelligent and well read. (For example, Papal monopoly over the canonization of saints dates to the year 1200AD with Innocent III, yet today it is sometimes cited by apologists as a form or aspect of Papal infallibility at work. The power derives -in fact- from claims of Papal jurisdiction.)
And that there is no recourse to the man’s judgment, no matter whom he is or what he thinks. Whether he is a holy and prayerful man or not, whether he is thinking rightly or not, whether he is dissolute and corrupt or not, whether he keeps concubines, sells church offices, wages war or condones other sins, or even if he is a heretic. He is to be the head of the church, there is no recourse to his judgment and he cannot be removed, or even remonstrated with.
There has never been an impeccable man (with the exception of Our Lord) to walk the earth, much less in the church, so no one expects to see one in any bishops chair, anywhere. Orthodox believers will refuse to follow such a man, and this is what saved Holy Orthodoxy in times past. For Catholics though, there is no recourse, they must obey the heretic/simoniac/adulterous/bi-polar/what-have-you Pope in all matters of church administration and practice.
These fallible men who have already held that particular office then, make a very poor case for universal jurisdiction, on behalf of
any bishop of
any See (Rome or elsewhere). It cannot be seen how Jesus would have wanted the entire church under the absolute control of a single very peccable heretic (much less the various other aberrations that have somehow snared the prize through history).
Perhaps this is why Orthodox Catholics cannot accept this new idea, this novelty.
