Question about infallibility

[AdvanceAlways]

I had a quick question about papal infallibility. I’ve been having a lively but friendly debate with a Greek Orthodox friend of mine regarding the nature of the papacy. We’ve both learned a lot about each other’s creeds so it’s been quite the joyous lesson in ecumenism.

Anyway, he linked me to an article from an Orthodox website which made reference to an old Catholic catechism called the “Controversial Catechism” which explicity denied Papal infallibility (it was from a little before Vatican I) and it carried the stamp of four bishops. Does anyone have any info on this? Normally I’ve been pretty quick in our exchange but he’s stumped me here… I know its refutable… I just don’t know how haha…

 

[DavidFilmer]

Anyway, he linked me to an article from an Orthodox website which made reference to an old Catholic catechism called the “Controversial Catechism” which explicity denied Papal infallibility (it was from a little before Vatican I) and it carried the stamp of four bishops.

Yes, this is true. There was such a catechism published in England. It was in the typical Question/Answer format of the time. One such exchange read:

Q: Must not Catholics believe the Pope in himself to be infallible?

A: This is a Protestant invention; it is no article of the Catholic faith; no decision of his can oblige, under pain of heresy, unless it be received and enforced by the teaching body; that is, by the bishops of the Church.

The answer is perfectly orthodox within its time - Papal infallibility had not yet been defined, so no Catholic could be required to believe it.

Of course, the doctrine is part of the Deposit of Faith, which was clearly apparent even to protestant critics of the Church (who sought to use it against the Church even before it was formally defined).

 

[jfoges]

Yes, this is true. There was such a catechism published in England. It was in the typical Question/Answer format of the time. One such exchange read:

The answer is perfectly orthodox within its time - Papal infallibility had not yet been defined, so no Catholic could be required to believe it.

Of course, the doctrine is part of the Deposit of Faith, which was clearly apparent even to protestant critics of the Church (who sought to use it against the Church even before it was formally defined).

Sounds like this representative of the Conciliar movement that was active in the centuries before Vatican I. The Conciliar movement was a movement that sought to make the College of Bishops supreme, and above the Papacy.

Remember, the doctrine of papal infallibility was so controversial that a group of Catholics went into schism after Vatican I. They are now known as the Old Catholic Church, and are increasingly marginal and distant from Catholicism.

 

[EnchantedEve]

Sounds like this representative of the Conciliar movement that was active in the centuries before Vatican I. The Conciliar movement was a movement that sought to make the College of Bishops supreme, and above the Papacy.

Remember, the doctrine of papal infallibility was so controversial that a group of Catholics went into schism after Vatican I. They are now known as the Old Catholic Church, and are increasingly marginal and distant from Catholicism.

Probably because they were only concerned with papal infallibility. Hard to found a solid institution by rebelling against a single dogma.