Pope and Infallibility

  • Thread starter Thread starter blacktiger057
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

blacktiger057

Guest
Well, I thought the Pope John Paul II was a very good person and pope. Not sure about the new one yet, but anyways. All the popes are believed to be infallible when it comes to religious matters. I know many Catholics who say that war is the devil. So, when the pope declared the crusades, was he doing the devil’s work? I mean, they lost the war, so the whole matter was rather pointless. In other words, the pope was wrong in declaring a religious war.

And then when the pope said it was okay to burn ‘witches’. That, again, was the wrong thing to do, and the pope even broke one of his commandments: thy shall not kill. I don’t think the pope personally killed witches, but he said it was morally acceptable to do so, didn’t he? So, how can the pope be infallible about religious matters if he has been wrong two major times in history so far?
 
A couple of refinements.

The Pope is not infallible on “religious matters.” Infallibility means that, when he teaches on faith and morals for the whole Church, he is protected by God the Holy Spirit from teaching an error.

Also, history reveals that burning witches was a Protestant thing.

Blessings,

Gerry
 
blacktiger057 said:
Well, I thought the Pope John Paul II was a very good person and pope. Not sure about the new one yet, but anyways. All the popes are believed to be infallible when it comes to religious matters. I know many Catholics who say that war is the devil. So, when the pope declared the crusades, was he doing the devil’s work? I mean, they lost the war, so the whole matter was rather pointless. In other words, the pope was wrong in declaring a religious war.

And then when the pope said it was okay to burn ‘witches’. That, again, was the wrong thing to do, and the pope even broke one of his commandments: thy shall not kill. I don’t think the pope personally killed witches, but he said it was morally acceptable to do so, didn’t he? So, how can the pope be infallible about religious matters if he has been wrong two major times in history so far?
Click to expand...
Dear Blacktiger (I really like the name you chose:)

The respective pope’s attitude toward the crusades may be comparable to the respective pope’s attitude toward Galileo Galilei. Such attitudes was not the Church teaching. No encyclical letter was issued supporting such actions. Even JPII apologized on behalf of the church to Galileo. The pope is still human being, and not error free. Infallibility only applies to the teaching.
 
blacktiger057 said:
Well, I thought the Pope John Paul II was a very good person and pope. Not sure about the new one yet, but anyways. All the popes are believed to be infallible when it comes to religious matters.
Click to expand...
Not quite.

The Pope is prevented from teaching error when defining doctrine pertaining to faith and morals binding on the entire Church faithful.
blacktiger057 said:
I know many Catholics who say that war is the devil.
Click to expand...
There may be Catholics that say this. However, the Church does not teach that war is inherently wrong. I suggest you read up on the just war doctrine of the Church.
blacktiger057 said:
So, when the pope declared the crusades, was he doing the devil’s work? I mean, they lost the war, so the whole matter was rather pointless. In other words, the pope was wrong in declaring a religious war.
Click to expand...
So, first, war is not inherently wrong. Just war, and self defense are certainly not wrong.

Secondly, there were 8 Crusades and several of those were quite successful.

Thirdly, the Crusades were in no way “wrong” nor was the Pope wrong to call for them to defend Christians and their lands from invasion.
blacktiger057 said:
And then when the pope said it was okay to burn ‘witches’. That, again, was the wrong thing to do, and the pope even broke one of his commandments: thy shall not kill. I don’t think the pope personally killed witches, but he said it was morally acceptable to do so, didn’t he? So, how can the pope be infallible about religious matters if he has been wrong two major times in history so far?
Click to expand...
The secular governments of the day did punish heresy with the death penalty. The Church did not. Heresy is very serious.

During the time of the Cathar heresy in the south of France, Toulouse, there were some heretics condemned for witchraft-- by the government, not the Church.

The mass persecutions and “hunting” of witches was a Protestant phenomenon, not a Catholic one.
 
Gerry_Hunter said:
A couple of refinements.

The Pope is not infallible on “religious matters.” Infallibility means that, when he teaches on faith and morals for the whole Church, he is protected by God the Holy Spirit from teaching an error.

Also, history reveals that burning witches was a Protestant thing.

Blessings,

Gerry
Click to expand...
absolutely not true.
 
blacktiger057 said:
Well, I thought the Pope John Paul II was a very good person and pope. Not sure about the new one yet, but anyways. All the popes are believed to be infallible when it comes to religious matters. I know many Catholics who say that war is the devil. So, when the pope declared the crusades, was he doing the devil’s work? I mean, they lost the war, so the whole matter was rather pointless. In other words, the pope was wrong in declaring a religious war.

And then when the pope said it was okay to burn ‘witches’. That, again, was the wrong thing to do, and the pope even broke one of his commandments: thy shall not kill. I don’t think the pope personally killed witches, but he said it was morally acceptable to do so, didn’t he? So, how can the pope be infallible about religious matters if he has been wrong two major times in history so far?
Click to expand...
You are right. The Scriptures also never speak of such a thing.
 
Originally Posted by blacktiger057
I know many Catholics who say that war is the devil.

I know Catholics who say that President Bush is the devil LOL
 
Tim_Kirchoff said:
Easy example- the Salem witch trials- by Puritans, not Catholics.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Nope. As the statement was made, not so. No “witches” were burned at Salem. All so convicted were hanged; one man died under the *peine forte et dure *method of attempting to extract testimony.

GKC
 
The penal code known as the Carolina (1532) decreed that sorcery throughout the German empire should be treated as a criminal offence, and if it purported to inflict injury upon any person the witch was to be burnt at the stake. In 1572 Augustus of Saxony imposed the penalty of burning for witchcraft of every kind, including simple fortunetelling. On the whole, greater activity in hunting down witches was shown in the Protestant districts of Germany than in the Catholic provinces. Striking examples are given by Janssen. In Osnabrück, in 1583, 121 persons were burned in three months. At Wolfenbuttenl in 1593 as many as ten witches were often burned in one day. It was not until 1563 that any effective resistance to the persecution began to be offered. This came first from a Protestant of Cleues, John Weyer, and other protests were shortly afterwards published in the same sense by Ewich and Witekind. On the other hand, Jean Bodin, a French Protestant lawyer, replied to Weyer in 1580 with much asperity, and in 1589 the Catholic Bishop Binsfeld and Father Delrio, a Jesuit, wrote on the same side, though Delrio wished to mitigate the severity of the witch trials and denounced the excessive use of torture. Bodin’s book was answered amongst others by the Englishman Reginald Scott in his “Discoverie of Witchcraft” (1584), but this answer was ordered to be burned by James I, who replied to it in his “Daemonologie”.
 
Since BlackTiger057 identified himself as a Wiccan on another thread, he may feel personally offended by historical cases of witches being prosecuted for their behavior.

And BrewMax, if you have an argument, please present it for discussion. “Of course that isn’t in the Bible!” is very weak Protestant apologetics. Besides, the OT specifically lists witchcraft/sorcery as a death penalty level offense. (Exodus 22:18 “You shall not permit a sorceress to live.” RSV)

1ke gave you an excellent, well thought-out response. Maybe you should look it over again and reply to him, if you’re really looking for understanding and not just an argument.
 
Thank you all for going into detail about these events. I understand it much better now, and can see the opinions on both sides. I guess the pope would be infallible in the Catholic religion after all, but, yes, I’m not catholic!

Thanks for the calrificatiosn!
 
Since BlackTiger057 identified himself as a Wiccan on another thread, he may feel personally offended by historical cases of witches being prosecuted for their behavior.
Click to expand...
I don’t really feel personally victimized, but to think that people were killed for disagreeing on religion does make me sick. And it still happens today, in all religions. The thing that really horrifies me is that I would’ve been burned or hung had I lived a few centuries before.:eek:
 
More relevant is the fact that the execution was motivated by politics, not religion. Heresy was the excuse to be rid of this inspirational figure. This was in no way Church-sponsored.
 
blacktiger057 said:
Well, I thought the Pope John Paul II was a very good person and pope. Not sure about the new one yet, but anyways. All the popes are believed to be infallible when it comes to religious matters. I know many Catholics who say that war is the devil. So, when the pope declared the crusades, was he doing the devil’s work? I mean, they lost the war, so the whole matter was rather pointless. In other words, the pope was wrong in declaring a religious war.

And then when the pope said it was okay to burn ‘witches’. That, again, was the wrong thing to do, and the pope even broke one of his commandments: thy shall not kill. I don’t think the pope personally killed witches, but he said it was morally acceptable to do so, didn’t he? So, how can the pope be infallible about religious matters if he has been wrong two major times in history so far?
Click to expand...
Here is a realy good question you want to ask

Am I A GOOD Person??

find out…click on the link.

livingwaters.com/good/
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top