Papal infallibility simplified and explained

[AmbroseSJ]

“This gift, the sensus fidei, constitutes in the believer a kind of supernatural instinct that has a connatural life with the same object of faith. It is a criterion for discerning whether or not a truth belongs to the deposit of the living apostolic tradition. It also has a propositional value because the Holy Spirit does not cease to speak to the Churches and lead them to the whole truth. Today, however, it is particularly important to clarify the criteria used to distinguish the authentic sensus fidelium from its counterfeits. In fact, it is not some kind of public opinion of the Church, and it is unthinkable to mention it in order to challenge the teachings of the Magisterium, this because the sensus fidei can not grow authentically in the believer except to the extent in which he or she fully participates in the life of the Church, and this requires a responsible adherence

to her Magisterium.”
en.radiovaticana.va/storico/2…ion/en1-645511

Thus, further confirmation, again, that the faithful’s consent is predicated on obeying the teaching of the Magisterium and there is a passive infallibility of the faithful.

Abu, if you notice, I emphasized the salient phrase in your quote. It doesn’t say “slavish adherence” or “passive adherence” or “mindless adherence.” It says “responsible adherence” IOW, Pope Benedict is REAFFIRMING the Active Infallibility of the Faithful, not the Passive.

Also keep in mind that the Pope HIMSELF is a member of the Faithful, (as specified by LG25) and is also required to adhere responsibly to the infallible Magisterium. IOW, this responsibility on the Faithful applies to the Pope, as well as the whole people of God. I would go further and say the Pope is an EXAMPLE himself of the responsible adherence to the Magisterium. The Listening Church looks to him as an example, and as a teacher. IOW, the Pope ALSO is a participant in the passive infallibility of the Faithful (as well as the active.)

To put this expression of Pope Benedict’s in some context, it is helpful to remember that he is himself a Newman Scholar, and Beatified Newman. He is fully cognizant and in agreement with Newman’s theology of the active infallibility of the Faithful.

Terms:
The Listening Church: The lay faithful (generally). By its very title is passive.
The Teaching Church: The Magisterium/hierarchy. By its very title is active.
The Faithful: The Whole Church from the Pope down to the last layman.

It is VERY important to understand the difference between “the Faithful” and the Listening Church, or the lay faithful.

Carefully reread your quote from Pope Benedict Abu, and you will see that he is talking about the Faithful, the whole Church of God.

 

[mardukm]

You are so correct, brother. Those who see the statement “the Pope cannot contradict the sensus fidei” and immediately imagine that they must challenge it to “defend the papacy” (I put that in quotes because such a challenge is the furthest thing from a defense of the papacy, but actually opposes it) obviously do not have a very good grasp of what the term “sensus fidei” actually means.

Regardless, as the primary keeper of unity in the Church, does not the Pope actually have a greater responsibility and obligation than anyone else to be in accord with the sensus fidei? As the aphorism goes, with great power comes great responsibility.

Blessings,
Marduk

Abu, if you notice, I emphasized the salient phrase in your quote. It doesn’t say “slavish adherence” or “passive adherence” or “mindless adherence.” It says “responsible adherence” IOW, Pope Benedict is REAFFIRMING the Active Infallibility of the Faithful, not the Passive.

Also keep in mind that the Pope HIMSELF is a member of the Faithful, (as specified by LG25) and is also required to adhere responsibly to the infallible Magisterium. IOW, this responsibility on the Faithful applies to the Pope, as well as the whole people of God. I would go further and say the Pope is an EXAMPLE himself of the responsible adherence to the Magisterium. The Listening Church looks to him as an example, and as a teacher. IOW, the Pope ALSO is a participant in the passive infallibility of the Faithful (as well as the active.)

To put this expression of Pope Benedict’s in some context, it is helpful to remember that he is himself a Newman Scholar, and Beatified Newman. He is fully cognizant and in agreement with Newman’s theology of the active infallibility of the Faithful.

Terms:
The Listening Church: The lay faithful (generally). By its very title is passive.
The Teaching Church: The Magisterium/hierarchy. By its very title is active.
The Faithful: The Whole Church from the Pope down to the last layman.

It is VERY important to understand the difference between “the Faithful” and the Listening Church, or the lay faithful.

Carefully reread your quote from Pope Benedict Abu, and you will see that he is talking about the Faithful, the whole Church of God.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

You are so correct, brother. Those who see the statement “the Pope cannot contradict the sensus fidei” and immediately imagine that they must challenge it to “defend the papacy” (I put that in quotes because such a challenge is the furthest thing from a defense of the papacy, but actually opposes it) obviously do not have a very good grasp of what the term “sensus fidei” actually means.

Regardless, as the primary keeper of unity in the Church, does not the Pope actually have a greater responsibility and obligation than anyone else to be in accord with the sensus fidei? As the aphorism goes, with great power comes great responsibility.

Blessings,
Marduk

Amen brother!

 

[Isaiah45_9]

Just wanted to share this, since I have been reading on this subject. I quickly perused the thread and did not see it mentioned. My apologies if it did.

Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma
Book Four, Part 2, Chapter 4,Section 13

1. Possessors of the Infallibility

Possessors of the Infallibility are the Pope and the whole Episcopate, that is, the totality of the Bishops, including the Pope, the Head of the Episcopate.

a) The Pope

The Pope is infallible when he speaks ex cathedra. (De fide.) (See Par. 8.)

b) The whole Episcopate

**The totality of the Bishops is infallible, when they, either assembled in general council or scattered over the earth, propose a teaching of faith or morals as one to be held by all the faithful.** (De fide.)

The Council of Trent teaches that the Bishops are the successors of the Apostles (D 960); and so does the Vatican Council (D 1828). As successors of the Apostles they are the pastors and teachers of the faithful (D 1821). As official teachers of the faith, they are endowed with the active infallibility assured to the incumbents of the Church teaching office.

Two forms of the activity of the teaching office of the whole Episcopate are distinguished—an extraordinary form and an ordinary one.

α) The Bishops exercise their infallible teaching power in extraordinary manner at a general or ecumenical council. It is in the decisions of the General Councils that the teaching activity of the whole teaching body instituted by Christ is most decisively exercised.

It has been the constant teaching of the Church from the earliest times that the resolutions of the General Councils are infallible. St. Athanasius says of the Decree on faith of the Nicene Council: “The words of the Lord which were spoken by the General Council of Nicaea, remain in eternity” (Ep. ad Afros 2). St. Gregory the Great recognises and honours the first four General Councils as much as the Four Gospels; he makes the fifth equal to them (Ep. I 25).

In order that a Council should be a general one it is necessary: αα) That all the ruling Bishops in the world be invited; ββ) That in point of fact so many Bishops from the various countries come, that they may be regarded as being representative of the whole Episcopate; γγ) That the Pope summon the Council, or at least invest the assembly with his authority and preside personally or by his representative at the meeting, and ratify the resolutions. From the Papal ratifications, which can be explicit or implicit, the resolutions derive general legal binding power. CIC 227.

The first eight General Councils were summoned by the Emperor, who also, as a rule, assumed a presidency of honour or outer protection. The Second and the Fifth General Councils were held without the co-operation of the Pope or of his representative. According to the manner in which they were convened, their composition and their direction, they were plenary councils of the Orient, but achieved ecumenical validity by the subsequent supplementary recognition of their doctrinal decrees by the whole Church.

β) The Bishops exercise their infallible teaching power in an ordinary manner when they, in their dioceses, in moral unity with the Pope, unanimously promulgate the same teachings on faith and morals. The Vatican Council expressly declared that also the truths of Revelation proposed as such by the ordinary and general teaching office of the Church are to be firmly held with “divine and catholic faith” (D 1792). But the incumbents of the ordinary and general teaching office of the Church are the members of the whole episcopate scattered over the whole earth. The agreement of the Bishops in doctrine may be determined from the catechisms issued by them, from their pastoral letters, from the prayer books approved by them, and from the resolutions of particular synods. A morally general agreement suffices, but in this the express or tacit assent of the Pope, as the supreme head of the Episcopate, is essential.

An individual Bishop, when he makes a promulgation of faith, is not infallible. The history of the Church shows that individual members of the Episcopate, for example, Photinus, Nestorius, have fallen into error and heresy. In order to preserve the teaching of faith handed down by Tradition, in its purity, the collegiate infallibility of the whole Episcopate suffices. However, the individual Bishop, in what concerns his own diocese is, by virtue of his office, the authentic, that is the authoritative, teacher of faith, as long as he continues in communion with the Apostolic See, and as long as he adheres to the general teaching of the Church.

 

[Abu]

AmbroseSJ #199
It says “responsible adherence” IOW, Pope Benedict is REAFFIRMING the Active Infallibility of the Faithful, not the Passive.

The same foolishness repeated! You are quite unable to be faithful where your selfism is concerned. The refusal to acknowledge that “active infallibility” of the faithful is the petard on which you are hoist shows the lack of obedience to the Magisterium. Trying to twist Pope Emeritus Benedict’s words to suit your selfism is pathetic.

1. The “responsible adherence” of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI is precisely expressed in Vatican II: **“By this appreciation of the faith, aroused and sustained by the Spirit of Truth, the People of God, guided by the sacred teaching authority (Magisterium), and obeying it, receive not the mere word of men, but truly the word of God (cf. 1 Th 2:13), the faith delivered once for all to the saints (cf. Jude 3).” **Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, 12, Vatican II, my emphasis]

Thus the faithful’s real consent is predicated on obeying the teaching of the Magisterium.

1. So the selfists are concocting a straw man as many of the faithful Catholic hierarchy have been quoted that the faithful laity have only passive infallibility, NOT the active infallibility of the assenting hierarchy.

 

[MilesVitae]

This thread…:banghead:

 

[AmbroseSJ]

Abu:

AmbroseSJ #199
It says “responsible adherence” IOW, Pope Benedict is REAFFIRMING the Active Infallibility of the Faithful, not the Passive.

The same foolishness repeated! You are quite unable to be faithful where your selfism is concerned. The refusal to acknowledge that “active infallibility” of the faithful is the petard on which you are hoist shows the lack of obedience to the Magisterium. Trying to twist Pope Emeritus Benedict’s words to suit your selfism is pathetic.

Such venom Abu.

Why would you associate my alleged “selfism” with “the Faithful?”

Don’t you know YET, that the Faithful, according to Vatican II, LG-25 is the Pope, and all of the bishops right down to the last layman? IOW, the Whole Church of God (to use Vatican II’s own words.)

 

[Abu]

AmbroseSJ #205
Don’t you know YET, that the Faithful, according to Vatican II, LG-25 is the Pope, and all of the bishops right down to the last layman?

Don’t you know the shades of meaning in English?

Vatican II in Lumen Gentium, 25, refers to the faithful:

1. “In matters of faith and morals, the bishops speak in the name of Christ and **the faithful **are to accept their teaching and adhere to it with a religious assent.” (= those under the bishops)
2. “And this is the infallibility which the Roman Pontiff, the head of the college of bishops, enjoys in virtue of his office, when, as the supreme shepherd and teacher of all the faithful, who confirms his brethren in their faith,(166) by a definitive act he proclaims a doctrine of faith or morals.(42*) And therefore his definitions, of themselves, and not from the consent of the Church, are justly styled irreformable, since they are pronounced with the assistance of the Holy Spirit, promised to him in blessed Peter, and therefore they need no approval of others, nor do they allow an appeal to any other judgment. (= those under the Roman Pontiff).

Thus no approval is needed from ANYONE ELSE.

1. Lumen Gentium, 26:
   This Church of Christ is truly present in all legitimate local congregations of [1]the faithful which, united with their pastors, are themselves called churches in the New Testament.(50*) For in their locality these are the new People called by God, in the Holy Spirit and in much fullness.(167) In them [2]the faithful are gathered together by the preaching of the Gospel of Christ, and the mystery of the Lord’s Supper is celebrated, that by the food and blood of the Lord’s body the whole brotherhood may be joined together.(51*). (**=[1]the laity **and [2]priests and laity).

Thus, the repetitive misconceptions and thus misrepresentations by AmbroseSJ of not only “the faithful”, but consequently of “active infallibility” and of papal primacy, are indicative of the morass of confusion under which some labour and confuse others.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

I’m sorry, I should have said LG-12 (not 25)

You have to be able to understand when LG is speaking of the Faithful (the holy people of God) or the lay faithful (the laity). It is easy to understand IN THE CONTEXT OF THE TEXT.

1. The holy people of God shares also in Christ’s prophetic office; it spreads abroad a living witness to Him, especially by means of a life of faith and charity and by offering to God a sacrifice of praise, the tribute of lips which give praise to His name.(110) The entire body of the faithful, anointed as they are by the Holy One,(111) cannot err in matters of belief. They manifest this special property by means of the whole peoples’ supernatural discernment in matters of faith when “from the Bishops down to the last of the lay faithful” (8) they show universal agreement in matters of faith and morals. That discernment in matters of faith is aroused and sustained by the Spirit of truth. It is exercised under the guidance of the sacred teaching authority, in faithful and respectful obedience to which the people of God accepts that which is not just the word of men but truly the word of God.(112) Through it, the people of God adheres unwaveringly to the faith given once and for all to the saints,(113) penetrates it more deeply with right thinking, and applies it more fully in its life.*

THIS is the Faithful I am referring to (not just the lay faithful) This is who I am referring to when I speak of the active infallibility of the Faithful as shown above. Also; LG12 cross references this use of “the Faithful” to 1 Cor 10:17

 

[Peter_J]

We both believe this, but he believes the Pope is the ONLY one who is infallible in the Church

Quite frankly, it amazes me that anyone can think that in spite of the fact that St Paul actually wrote more books of the bible than St Peter did.

 

[Abu]

mardukm #159
The active infallibility of the laity does not have the role of judge, but the role of witness. Witnessing is an active infallibility.

The activity of witnessing by the laity to truth demonstrates the passive infallibility of assent to truth, and then the activity of offering the truth. The universitas fidelium (the university of the faithful) referred to in LG art 12, constitutes those who are agreed on the truth - what God has revealed, under the guidance of the sacred Magisterium. This is what gives them universality - spiritual unity. “The truth interiorly possessed gives them consensus, and not the other way around, as though their consensus on some doctrine made it true.” ’ The Catholic Catechism, Doubleday, 1975, p 225-227]

AmbroseSJ #207
THIS is the Faithful I am referring to (not just the lay faithful) This is who I am referring to when I speak of the active infallibility of the Faithful as shown above.
Also; LG12 cross references this use of “the Faithful” to 1 Cor 10:17

Your reference refers to the sensus fidei of the “whole people when from the bishops to the last of the lay faithful they, manifest a universal consent”, which merely means that the bishops have active infallibility, and the laity have passive infallibility. You have no support from any Gospel source or faithful prelate quoted for your redefining of “active’ infallibility to include the laity.

Your stilted constructions contradict the accepted meaning, as repeatedly shown.

In reality:
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA
True meaning of infallibility
It is only in connection with doctrinal authority as such that, practically speaking, this question of infallibility arises; that is to say, when we speak of the Church’s infallibility we mean, at least primarily and principally, what is sometimes called active as distinguished from passive infallibility. We mean in other words that the Church is infallible in her objective definitive teaching regarding faith and morals, not that believers are infallible in their subjective interpretation of her teaching. This is obvious in the case of individuals, any one of whom may err in his understanding of the Church’s teaching; nor is the general or even unanimous consent of the faithful in believing a distinct and independent organ of infallibility. Such consent indeed, when it can be verified as apart, is of the highest value as a proof of what has been, or may be, defined by the teaching authority, but, except in so far as it is thus the subjective counterpart and complement of objective authoritative teaching, it cannot be said to possess an absolutely decisive dogmatic value. It will be best therefore to confine our attention to active infallibility as such, as by so doing we shall avoid the confusion which is the sole basis of many of the objections that are most persistently and most plausibly urged against the doctrine of ecclesiastical infallibility.
newadvent.org/cathen/07790a.htm

‘Infallibility is “active” in the “Church teaching” and “passive” in the “Church believing.” The “Church teaching” consists of the successors to the Apostles, namely, the Pope of Rome and all the Bishops of the world united under him; the “Church believing” is the entire body of all the faithful professing the Catholic Faith.’
theworkofgod.org/Library/Apologtc/R_Haddad/Course/Book1A.htm

“The active infallibility lies in the Pope and Bishops – the passive in the ‘universitas’ of the faithful.”
cardinalnewmansociety.net/theology.html

The faithful laity have only passive infallibility, NOT the active infallibility of the assenting hierarchy.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

Abu:

Your reference refers to the sensus fidei of the “whole people when from the bishops to the last of the lay faithful they, manifest a universal consent”, which merely means that the bishops have active infallibility, and the laity have passive infallibility. You have no support from any Gospel source or faithful prelate quoted for your redefining of “active’ infallibility to include the laity.

My reference is Lumen Gentium 12. NOT LG 35 Please re-read. No where does it mention the sensus Fidei. In fact it EXPLICITLY speaks of the infallibility of the Faithful, in active terms: “Through it, the people of God adheres unwaveringly to the faith given once and for all to the saints,(113) penetrates it more deeply with right thinking, and applies it more fully in its life.”

I’m convinced that you are incapable of separating the concepts of the Faithful (the Holy Church of God) and the Lay faithful (the Laity) It is TIRESOME repeating this over and over for you.

LG 12 is under the Chapter heading of “People of God” LG 12 is NOT talking about the laity, it is talking about the entire Church.

LG 35 (where you find sensu fidei) is under the Chapter heading of “The Laity” and is concerned with the laity specifically.

 

[Rimrock]

The Pope himself cannot be infallible (if I understand the meaning of the word from the dictionary) because he is a human being born like the rest of us.

The dogma of the Catholic church really puts a strain on people trying to keep all the teachings like the sacraments etc. when in fact Jesus came into the world to save it from all those things.

All you have to do is to believe on him. It says that in the Bible. The Bible says nothing about obeying the laws set out by a Pope or the Catholic church.

 

[Abu]

Rimrock #211
The Bible says nothing about obeying the laws set out by a Pope or the Catholic church.

Such is myopia.

Sacred Scripture:
Jesus founded His Church on Peter:
All 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).

How could these commands be fulfilled if Peter or his successors could TEACH error? Do you think that the Christ lied?

What the Bible says about obeying the Church:
Jesus warned dissenters: “if he refuses to hear even the Church let him be like the heathen and a publican.” (Mt 18:17).

St John counsels you: “We belong to God, and anyone who knows God listens to us, while anyone who does not belong to God refuses to hear us. This is how we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of deceit.” (1 Jn 4:6).

The Church is “the pillar and bulwark of the truth (1 Tim 3:16).” St. Paul says also, “through the Church the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places (Eph 3:10).” The Church teaches even the angels! This is with the authority of Christ!

 

[Abu]

AmbroseSJ #210
My reference is Lumen Gentium 12. NOT LG 35
LG 12 is under the Chapter heading of “People of God” LG 12 is NOT talking about the laity, it is talking about the entire Church.
LG 35 (where you find sensu fidei) is under the Chapter heading of “The Laity” and is concerned with the laity specifically…

Lumen Gentium 12 expressly confirms that **obeying the Sacred Magisterium in faith, the People of God ACCEPTS **the truth.That discernment in matters of faith is aroused and sustained by the Spirit of truth. It is exercised under the guidance of the sacred teaching authority, in faithful and respectful obedience to which the people of God accepts that which is not just the word of men but truly the word of God.(112)
Note:
112 Cf. 1 Thess. 2:13.

That reference confirms “you welcomed it (the word of God) as the truth.”

In fact it EXPLICITLY speaks of the infallibility of the Faithful, in active terms

The myopia descends to “active terms” – the last of the stilted misrepresentations scraping the barrel to find what no respected, faithful Catholic priest has been quoted as supporting – your mirage of “active infallibility” of the laity.

All of the faithful Catholic priests quoted show only the active infallibility of the hierarchy, and the passive infallibility of the laity.

 

[Jon_S_1]

The Pope himself cannot be infallible (if I understand the meaning of the word from the dictionary) because he is a human being born like the rest of us.

The dogma of the Catholic church really puts a strain on people trying to keep all the teachings like the sacraments etc. when in fact Jesus came into the world to save it from all those things.

All you have to do is to believe on him. It says that in the Bible. The Bible says nothing about obeying the laws set out by a Pope or the Catholic church.

The Bible says nothing about itself. Where do you get that the Bible is the Word of God? How do you know Hebrews belongs in there or Mark, or James?

Where does it say what books belong in the Bible in the Bible.

You are right the pope is not infallible. The Office he holds is. This means that God protects the office of the Pope from teaching wrong teachings. This was his promise that he gave us and it is done through the Holy Spirit just as it says in sacred scripture.

Being a Chrisitian is not supposed to be easy. Remember Paul said he fought the good fight he finished the race. Races and Fights are not easy.

Jesus also said that narrow is the road and few find it. If Christianity was easy as you describe it sounds as if many find it.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

Lumen Gentium 12 expressly confirms that **obeying the Sacred Magisterium in faith, the People of God ACCEPTS **the truth.That discernment in matters of faith is aroused and sustained by the Spirit of truth. It is exercised under the guidance of the sacred teaching authority, in faithful and respectful obedience to which the people of God accepts that which is not just the word of men but truly the word of God.(112)
Note:
112 Cf. 1 Thess. 2:13.

That reference confirms “you welcomed it (the word of God) as the truth.”
The myopia descends to “active terms” – the last of the stilted misrepresentations scraping the barrel to find what no respected, faithful Catholic priest has been quoted as supporting – your mirage of “active infallibility” of the laity.

All of the faithful Catholic priests quoted show only the active infallibility of the hierarchy, and the passive infallibility of the laity.

You ARE desperate for a sparring partner aren’t you Abu? You wait a whole month to reply to my post?

I’ve TRIED valiantly to educate you as to the difference between “THE FAITHFUL” which is referred to in LG 12, AND to which I am also referring,

AND

The “Lay faithful” which is discussed in LG 30.

You just can’t understand the difference in meaning, nor can you sustain any meaningful conversation about it.

Unfortunately, you perpetuate YOUR OWN misunderstanding among those who ARE trying to understand.

EVERYTHING WITH YOU IS A MATTER OF DISSENT.

That is why you are incapable of finer understanding. You just don’t realize that there is more to the doctrine of infallibility than that. That is why you couch all of your quotes and replies in terms of DISSENT. If it was a simple misunderstanding, or failure to grasp concepts, it would be less egregious. But it is not. Many posters beside myself have vainly tried to make you understand.

You love to use the term “myopia.” You should look very closely in the mirror some time and see what myopia looks like.

 

[casrim]

The Bible says nothing about itself. Where do you get that the Bible is the Word of God? How do you know Hebrews belongs in there or Mark, or James?

Where does it say what books belong in the Bible in the Bible.

You are right the pope is not infallible. The Office he holds is. This means that God protects the office of the Pope from teaching wrong teachings. This was his promise that he gave us and it is done through the Holy Spirit just as it says in sacred scripture.

Being a Chrisitian is not supposed to be easy. Remember Paul said he fought the good fight he finished the race. Races and Fights are not easy.

Jesus also said that narrow is the road and few find it. If Christianity was easy as you describe it sounds as if many find it.

Not sure I understand your reply and I realize that you can’t express yourself in a forum like you can in writing a letter. However…

Bible not the Word of God? Hmmm, guess I can throw the recording of creation out the
window. Guess the prophecy of Jesus coming can be thrown out as well.

How do I know what books of the Bible belong there? Well, I can’t believe you even posted that so there is no reply. Sorry.

The office of the pope is infallible? THE OFFICE? The whole structure of the Catholic church is man made (just read its history) and not
Godionspired

 

[Jon_S_1]

Not sure I understand your reply and I realize that you can’t express yourself in a forum like you can in writing a letter. However…

Bible not the Word of God? Hmmm, guess I can throw the recording of creation out the
window. Guess the prophecy of Jesus coming can be thrown out as well.

How do I know what books of the Bible belong there? Well, I can’t believe you even posted that so there is no reply. Sorry.

The office of the pope is infallible? THE OFFICE? The whole structure of the Catholic church is man made (just read its history) and not
Godionspired

Please retread what I wrote.

I believe that the books of the Bible are the Word of God. I can believe that because the Church of Jesus Christ declared it so,

Why do you believe that it has the books it is supposed to and is the word of God?

The only way you can is to rely on the church.

If the church is not protected by the Holy Spirit then why does JESUS command us to go to the church to settle any dispute including theological ones?

Why does Jesus say the gates of hell will not prevail against the church?

Why does he promise the church the guidance and protection of the Holy Spirit (John 14:15-26)

Your Bible is a gift to you from the Catholic Church. Without the Catholic Church you would not have a Bible and Even Luther and Calvin acknowledge that fact. It is only in recent times that people forget history and assume the Bible has just always existed or fell from the sky or something.

Seriously do some research.

Or better yet explain to me where the Bible comes from and why you believe the New Testament is complete. (Helpful fact Luther wanted to get rid if several NT books, James being one of them)

 

[Abu]

casrim #216
How do I know what books of the Bible belong there? Well, I can’t believe you even posted that so there is no reply…

As Christ wrote nothing for our benefit but gave us His Church – see post #212 – not knowing how the Sacred Scriptures came to be collected and authorized is tragic for the truth.

Since Christ gave us His Church to teach infallibly on faith and morals and She has infallibly declared which books are the inspired Word of God as the Sacred Scriptures, no one would know without that authorization. The root of the error is the assumption that Christ cared so little about us that He failed to give His authority to His Church.

Protestant Bibles generally omit seven books resulting in the loss of not knowing the necessity of praying for the departed, emphasised when the true Bible is available – the Book of Machabees teaches that “It is a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead that they may be loosed from their sins.” (2 Mac 12:46).