Pope Infallibility in the Bible:

[MrZetterlund]

During my journey into the traditional religions of Christianity, I chose the Roman Catholic Church over the Greek Orthodox Church on the basis of their beliefs regarding the Pope and his significant role in the Church as the successor of St. Peter. It is evident that St. Peter carries a significant role in the Church. Jesus changes his name in John 2:42 to mean “rock.” As we know from Abraham and Israel in the OT, when God changes someone’s name its because that person plays an important role in God’s redempitive plan of salvation. In Peter’s case, Jesus says “Thou art Peter (petra,) and upon this rock (petros) I will build my church, and the gates of Hades (lit. the powers of hell) will not prevail against it.” (Matt. 16:18.) And of course, he goes on to give him the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven and St. Peter is given the position to represent the Church. However, I’ve had some questions regarding his infallibility. I’ve been having discussions with Orthodox Christians and they brought up how Paul rightfully opposes Peter over the issue as to whether or not circumcision is necessary for salvation Galatians 2:11-13.) Peter was wrong in saying that is was, and I’m certain that this would be considered a theological issue of faith and morals.

My question is, what are Catholics to say in regards to Paul’s opposition to Peter in Antioch? As well as Peter’s denial of Christ 3 times prior to Jesus’ crucifixion? Certainly this is a matter of theological faith and morals as well…

 

[Boulder257]

Actually, the circumcision issue is not a moral or theological issue, but is a custom. And, just like the customs we have today, they can be changed. Even more so, it is their argument over this point that proves it was a custom and not a debate on a doctrine or dogma.

As for Peter denying Christ three times, this was part of the conversion and not a matter of doctrine or dogma either. This is more a reflection of Peter as an individual and not as the vicar of Christ.

 

[SonCatcher]

My question is, what are Catholics to say in regards to Paul’s opposition to Peter in Antioch? As well as Peter’s denial of Christ 3 times prior to Jesus’ crucifixion? Certainly this is a matter of theological faith and morals as well…

Peter had not pronounced definitively concerning circumcision in Antioch. He was at that time being hounded by Judaizers and did not have the intestinal fortitude to deal with them by himself.

However, when the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15) was called, Peter spoke first and proclaimed how God called the Gentiles equally.

Jesus dealt with Peter’s threefold denial in John 21 by asking him 3 times “do you love me” and instructing him each time to feed his sheep.

 

[newyorkcatholic]

The Pope is not perfect or sinless (impeccable).

Actually the Pope isn’t infallible either, as a person.

However by virtue of his office, he can speak infallibly, under defined conditions.

Popes are often wrong though, and reading some history will show you some very disturbing situations in which popes disagreed with each other and condemned each other. The history of the Church isn’t always so neat!

However it’s amazing that in terms of defined doctine/dogma, even the worst popes never tried to change it.

 

[porthos11]

During my journey into the traditional religions of Christianity, I chose the Roman Catholic Church over the Greek Orthodox Church on the basis of their beliefs regarding the Pope and his significant role in the Church as the successor of St. Peter. It is evident that St. Peter carries a significant role in the Church. Jesus changes his name in John 2:42 to mean “rock.” As we know from Abraham and Israel in the OT, when God changes someone’s name its because that person plays an important role in God’s redempitive plan of salvation. In Peter’s case, Jesus says “Thou art Peter (petra,) and upon this rock (petros) I will build my church, and the gates of Hades (lit. the powers of hell) will not prevail against it.” (Matt. 16:18.) And of course, he goes on to give him the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven and St. Peter is given the position to represent the Church. However, I’ve had some questions regarding his infallibility. I’ve been having discussions with Orthodox Christians and they brought up how Paul rightfully opposes Peter over the issue as to whether or not circumcision is necessary for salvation Galatians 2:11-13.) Peter was wrong in saying that is was, and I’m certain that this would be considered a theological issue of faith and morals.

My question is, what are Catholics to say in regards to Paul’s opposition to Peter in Antioch? As well as Peter’s denial of Christ 3 times prior to Jesus’ crucifixion? Certainly this is a matter of theological faith and morals as well…

1. Peter had definitely pronounced at the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15) that circumcision was not required for salvation. Peter never taught in Galatians that circumcision was necessary for salvation, but behaved in poor witness to what was already Church teaching. Paul was not calling Peter out for teaching in favour of circumcision but for behaving in an inconsistent manner out of fear of the Jews.
2. Peter was not making a statement of faith or morals when he denied Christ. He sinned for sure, but this is not what infallibility is about.

Further, the Bible has at least three examples of Peter’s infallibility. The first is in Matthew 16 where he infallibly pronounced who Jesus was. We know this is so because Jesus himself confirmed the source of Peter’s insight.

The other two are the two Papal Encyclicals at the back your Bible, otherwise called I and II Peter.

 

[MrZetterlund]

You all have been very helpful, thank you for resolving this for me.

 

[Evan]

As for Peter denying Christ three times, this was part of the conversion and not a matter of doctrine or dogma either. This is more a reflection of Peter as an individual and not as the vicar of Christ.

This might raise the question: When did Peter become pope. Prior to being pope he could not speak as the Vicar of Christ. I would think that prior to the resurrection, he would not be pope.

WHEN Jesus establishes his Church, Peter would be pope.
WHEN Jesus command ‘feed my sheep’ ‘feed my lambs’ ‘feet my sheep’ he may be elevating him at that time.
OR it may be at Pentecost when he receives the holy spirit!!.. THE DAY THE CHURCH WA BORN.