Questions on councils

[ST100]

I have a few questions on church councils and infallbility. These dont have to do with papal infallibility, just infallibility in regards to councils.

1. Which councils are proclaimed as being infalliblie? Is it just the 21 ecumenical councils or are there more?
2. Why is it that some places try to say Vatican II was not an ecumenical council and not infallible?
3. Are the canons that are defined in the councils also infallible or are those instead just disciplines of the church?

Thanks in advance.

 

[Catholic2003]

1. Which councils are proclaimed as being infalliblie? Is it just the 21 ecumenical councils or are there more?

All the ecumenical councils, and only the ecumenical councils, are endowed with the charism of infallibility.

2. Why is it that some places try to say Vatican II was not an ecumenical council and not infallible?

Because they disagree with what Vatican II said and they are looking for any way to justify their position.

3. Are the canons that are defined in the councils also infallible or are those instead just disciplines of the church?

The infallible teachings of an ecumenical council are exactly those teachings on matters of faith and morals where the bishops are in agreement on one position as definitively to be held. This standard needs to be applied to any conciliar output, whether canon or decree or document. As a general rule though, canons typically relate to matters of discipline instead of matters of faith and morals.

 

[ST100]

so just to be clear, besides papal infallibility statements, the only infallible statements given by the Church have been in the 21 ecumenical councils and no others?

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

ST100:

I have a few questions on church councils and infallbility. These dont have to do with papal infallibility, just infallibility in regards to councils.

1. Which councils are proclaimed as being infalliblie? Is it just the 21 ecumenical councils or are there more?
2. Why is it that some places try to say Vatican II was not an ecumenical council and not infallible?
3. Are the canons that are defined in the councils also infallible or are those instead just disciplines of the church?

Thanks in advance.

All Councils can teach infallibly. Specifically an Ecumenical Councils canons and decrees when approved by the Pope.
Because people cannot get their minds around the idea that a Council can teach infallibly, the doctrines already held by the Church in the Deposit of Faith. Even though the Council did not specifically promulgate or define new Dogmatic formulas.

 

[ST100]

so wait, are there other councils that are infalliblie besides ecumenical councils or not? and are the canons in councils infallible or just disciplinary? theres been two different answers…

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

ST100:

so wait, are there other councils that are infalliblie besides ecumenical councils or not? and are the canons in councils infallible or just disciplinary? theres been two different answers…

Look in the *Enchiridion Symbolorum *and you will find thousands of Dogmatic/Doctrinal statements as well as Disciplinary canons from Ecumenical Councils approved by Popes, Local Councils approved by Popes and from the Popes themselves.

 

[Catholic2003]

Sacred Scripture, i.e., the Old and New Testaments, is infallible. Aside from that, there are three modes of infallibility granted to the Church by the Holy Spirit: (1) counciliar infallibility; (2) papal infallibility; (3) the infallibility of the ordinary and universal magisterium. This last mode of infallibility is defined by Vatican II as follows:

(Lumen Gentium 25.) Although the individual bishops do not enjoy the prerogative of infallibility, they nevertheless proclaim Christ’s doctrine infallibly whenever, even though dispersed through the world, but still maintaining the bond of communion among themselves and with the successor of Peter, and authentically teaching matters of faith and morals, they are in agreement on one position as definitively to be held.

The teaching that the Church does not have the ability to ordain women priests is infallible by the ordinary and universal magisterium.

As for the canons of ecumenical councils, you need to examine the individual canon. For example, the first canon from Nicaea I was disciplinary:

If anyone in sickness has undergone surgery at the hands of physicians or has been castrated by barbarians, let him remain among the clergy. But if anyone in good health has castrated himself, if he is enrolled among the clergy he should be suspended, and in future no such man should be promoted. But, as it is evident that this refers to those who are responsible for the condition and presume to castrate themselves, so too if any have been made eunuchs by barbarians or by their masters, but have been found worthy, the canon admits such men to the clergy.

 

[ST100]

ok thanks that helps. just one more thing though in regards to counciliar infallibility. so r the only infallible conucils the ecumenical councils or are others also infallible. sory to ask again, just seems that ive gotten two answers on that so far

thanks

 

[Catholic2003]

ST100:

ok thanks that helps. just one more thing though in regards to counciliar infallibility. so r the only infallible conucils the ecumenical councils or are others also infallible. sory to ask again, just seems that ive gotten two answers on that so far

Only ecumenical councils have the charism of infallibility, that is, their act of teaching is an infallible act.

Local councils can teach doctrines which happen to be infallible via one of the modes I’ve listed above. But their teaching isn’t infallible in and of itself.

 

[ST100]

so arethe councils of carthage and hippo, the ones that told us the canon of scriptures if i am not mistaken, not infallible because they were not ecumenical councils?

 

[BulldogCath]

**A pastoral council is not protected by the Holy Spirit and it has NO authority to pronounce any new dogma. **

**Pope John XXIII clearly insisted that Vatican II was to be a pastoral council which would not define any new dogma : **

***`` The greatest concern of the Ecumenical Council is this: ***

*** that the sacred deposit of Christian doctrine should be guarded and taught more efficaciously… The salient point of this Council is not, therefore, a discussion of one article or another of the fundamental doctrine of the Church.`` * **

** -Pope John XXIII, Opening Speech to the Council, 11 October, 1962 **

** The closing statement of the Council, given by Pope Paul VI clearly re-iterates that no infallible dogmas were defined : **

** *`` The magisterium of the Church did not wish to pronounce itself ***

*** under the form of extraordinary dogmatic pronouncements…``* **

** -Pope Paul VI, discourse closing Vatican II, 7 December, 1965 **

How Does Vatican II Stack Up Against Other Ecumenical Councils?

Previous 20 Ecumenical Councils

Vatican** II **

Called at a time of emergency in the Church.

Called at a time of peace in the Church.

Purpose was to address a serious problem and to condemn errors that threatened the Church.

Purpose was to make the Church which had been flourishing under Pope Pius XII even better.

Doctrinal.

Pastoral.

Holy Ghost solemnly invoked to protect Council from error.

Holy Ghost not solemnly invoked in the traditional way.

Errors of the time were condemned.

No errors condemned. Atheistic Communism and Modernism ignored.

Teachings contained in Council documents were always built on past Tradition and are clear and unambiguous.

Teachings in this Council’s documents are often ambiguous and sometimes contrary to past Tradition.

Council documents (teachings) are binding upon all Catholics under pain of excommunication.

Council documents are not binding upon all Catholics due to their “pastoral” nature.

Council teaching is always infallible.

Council teaching is not always infallible.

These Councils were followed by a great renewal and growth after their implementation.

This Council was followed by a great disaster after its implementation. Nowhere do the fruits of Vatican II show real growth.

ST100:

I have a few questions on church councils and infallbility. These dont have to do with papal infallibility, just infallibility in regards to councils.

1. Which councils are proclaimed as being infalliblie? Is it just the 21 ecumenical councils or are there more?
2. Why is it that some places try to say Vatican II was not an ecumenical council and not infallible?
3. Are the canons that are defined in the councils also infallible or are those instead just disciplines of the church?

Thanks in advance.

 

[BulldogCath]

The following is a quoted from past archives. I get a laugh at how many have tried to make Vatican II a binding council when it was clearly called to be pastoral. Many in the pro-vatican II community have even stated that this is in direct contradiction to what was called out in Vatican I

The difference between doctrinal and pastoral teachings has great implications at an Ecumenical Council. To ensure that the teachings at doctrinal Ecumenical Councils are true and contain no error, the Holy Ghost is solemnly invoked at such Councils. As Pope Pius IX taught on March 12, 1870, at the time of Vatican Council I: “The Ecumenical Council is governed by the Holy Ghost… it is solely by the impulse of this Divine Spirit that the Council defines and proposes what is to be believed.”

Doctrinal Ecumenical Councils form part of the Church’s solemn Extraordinary Magisterium. By the solemn invocation of the Holy Ghost, each and every doctrinal teaching of the Extraordinary Magisterium is assured to be infallible.

Because pastoral pronouncements are neither “true” nor “false”, and because they must be expressed in language that is vague and ambiguous, they cannot be the subject of infallibility. Thus it follows that the Holy Ghost simply cannot be solemnly invoked at a strictly pastoral Council, because the pastoral pronouncements could not be infallible anyway. All pastoral pronouncements, even those of Ecumenical Councils which are partly doctrinal and partly pastoral, form part of the Church’s day to day Ordinary Magisterium. Thus, what is taught in a pastoral pronouncement is not assured to be infallible.

It is a consequence of the Church’s infallibility that the doctrine contained in any new teaching must not contradict doctrine that had previously been taught “always and everywhere” in the Church. If a new “teaching” does contradict what was taught before, then the new teaching is obviously not infallible. This is confirmed by the infallible proclamation of Vatican Council I on July 18, 1870: “For the Holy Ghost was not promised to the successors of Peter that by His revelation they might disclose new doctrine, but that by His help they might guard sacredly the revelation transmitted through the apostles and the deposit of Faith [Tradition], and might faithfully set it forth.”

Thus we may conclude from this that if a “teaching” proposed to us by the Ordinary Magisterium of the Church is contrary to previous Church teaching, then the new teaching is not infallible, not from the Holy Ghost, and is not to be believed or obeyed. Archbishop Felici, the Council’s General Secretary, at the closing of Vatican II, confirmed that we must judge the infallibility of individual pronouncements made by Vatican II by comparing them with previous Church teaching : "We have to distinguish according to the schemas and the chapters those which have already been the subject of dogmatic [infallible] definitions; as for the declarations which have a novel character, we have to make reservations."

The Pope said that Vatican II was not Infallible

Pope Paul VI, at the close of Vatican II on Dec. 7, 1965, confirmed that the Council did not make infallible pronouncements. He said that the Council “as much as possible wanted to define no doctrinal principle of an extraordinary dogmatic sentence.”

Later, on Mar. 8, 1972, the same Pope repeated that “it was one of the programmed items [of the Council] not to give solemn dogmatic definitions.”

The most explicit confirmation that Vatican II was not infallible was given by Pope Paul VI on Jan.12, 1966, when he stated that: “Given the pastoral character of the Council, it avoided proclaiming in an extraordinary manner dogmas endowed with the note of infallibility.” (A. de Lassus, Vatican II: Rupture or Continuity, (French publ.), p. 11).

Thus we conclude that because Vatican II was not infallible like the previous doctrinal Ecumenical Councils had been, it was possible that not only mere ambiguities but actual errors were able to creep into the Council documents. It is shocking enough to realize that errors were possible in the documents of Vatican II

ST100:

I have a few questions on church councils and infallbility. These dont have to do with papal infallibility, just infallibility in regards to councils.

1. Which councils are proclaimed as being infalliblie? Is it just the 21 ecumenical councils or are there more?
2. Why is it that some places try to say Vatican II was not an ecumenical council and not infallible?
3. Are the canons that are defined in the councils also infallible or are those instead just disciplines of the church?

Thanks in advance.

 

[bear06]

Catholic2003:

Only ecumenical councils have the charism of infallibility, that is, their act of teaching is an infallible act.

Local councils can teach doctrines which happen to be infallible via one of the modes I’ve listed above. But their teaching isn’t infallible in and of itself.

Where’s your source for this? I’m probably just misunderstanding something because you quoted LG. What do you mean by

their teaching isn’t infallible in and of itself.

What I’m guessing your saying is that the teachings of, say, VII aren’t infallible because it wasn’t an ecumenical council but that it was infallible because of #2 an #3. So your basically saying it is infallible but just not because it was an ecumenical council?

 

[bear06]

The following is a quoted from past archives.

Oh, SSPX-asia says so - it must be true. I get a kick out of how many think this. No defining dogma does not mean that there is no infalliblity in a council’s teaching.

The simple answer after looking at my last post would be that a council is infallible as long as Catholic2003’s #3 (

1. the infallibility of the ordinary and universal magisterium

comes into play.

 

[TNT]

The following is very important to me as it may effect some family.
How would it effect an SSPX member?
From VATII, is this infallible?
UNITATIS REDINTEGRATIO - DECREE ON ECUMENISM

Moreover, some and even very many of the significant elements and endowments which together go to build up and give life to the Church itself, can exist outside the visible boundaries of the Catholic Church: the written word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, and visible elements too. All of these, which come from Christ and lead back to Christ, belong by right to the one Church of Christ.
The brethren divided from us also use many liturgical actions of the Christian religion. These most certainly can truly engender a life of grace in ways that vary according to the condition of each Church or Community. These liturgical actions must be regarded as capable of giving access to the community of salvation.
It follows that the separated Churches and Communities as such, though we believe them to be deficient in some respects, have been by no means deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Church.

 

[Catholic2003]

ST100:

so arethe councils of carthage and hippo, the ones that told us the canon of scriptures if i am not mistaken, not infallible because they were not ecumenical councils?

Correct. Those local councils did not possess the charism of infallibility, any more than the earlier local councils that put forth a slightly different canon.

The council of Trent was the first ecumenical council that proclaimed the canon infallibly. However, I personally think that the thousand years of constant use prior to Trent was enough to qualify the Biblical canon as infallible by the ordinary and universal magisterium even prior to Trent. But that’s just my opinion.

 

[Catholic2003]

bear06:

What I’m guessing your saying is that the teachings of, say, VII aren’t infallible because it wasn’t an ecumenical council but that it was infallible because of #2 an #3. So your basically saying it is infallible but just not because it was an ecumenical council?

I think there’s been a misunderstanding somewhere.

Vatican II was an ecumenical council; thus it possessed the charism of infallibility, i.e., it could perform infallible acts of teaching by its own authority. Vatican II did in fact perform such infallible acts of teaching, however, it did so only a handful of times, and only for well established doctrine.

Local councils, such as the early councils of Carthage and Hippo, did not possess the charism of infallibility, even though they managed to get the Biblical canon correct.

 

[Catholic2003]

BulldogCath:

I get a laugh at how many have tried to make Vatican II a binding council when it was clearly called to be pastoral.

I get a laugh at how many have tried to use the overall pastoral orientation of Vatican II as an excuse to ignore its teachings, especially when that Sacred Ecumenical Council promulgated not one but two Dogmatic Constitutions.

BulldogCath:

Doctrinal Ecumenical Councils form part of the Church’s solemn Extraordinary Magisterium.

Every ecumenical council forms a part of the Church’s extraordinary and universal magisterium:

(Lumen Gentium 22). The supreme power in the universal Church, which this college enjoys, is exercised in a solemn way in an ecumenical council. A council is never ecumenical unless it is confirmed or at least accepted as such by the successor of Peter; and it is prerogative of the Roman Pontiff to convoke these councils, to preside over them and to confirm them.

(Lumen Gentium 25). Although the individual bishops do not enjoy the prerogative of infallibility, they nevertheless proclaim Christ’s doctrine infallibly whenever, even though dispersed through the world, but still maintaining the bond of communion among themselves and with the successor of Peter, and authentically teaching matters of faith and morals, they are in agreement on one position as definitively to be held. This is even more clearly verified when, gathered together in an ecumenical council, they are teachers and judges of faith and morals for the universal Church, whose definitions must be adhered to with the submission of faith.

These passages clearly indicate that the solemn extraordinary magisterium and the charism of infallibility attach to all ecumenical councils, not just the quote-unquote “dogmatic” ecumenical councils.

 

[Catholic2003]

Sorry, that should have been quote-unquote “doctrinal” ecumenical councils.

 

[Catholic2003]

TNT:

From VATII, is this infallible?

No, that particular section of Unitatis Redintegratio is not infallible. Prior ecumenical councils often used anathemas to indicate the doctrinal and thus infallible teachings. However, in light of its pastoral orientation, Vatican II used a different verbal formula. The only infallible teaching in Unitatis Redintegratio is the following (infallible part in bold, verbal formula underlined):

1. Already from the earliest times the Eastern Churches followed their own forms of ecclesiastical law and custom, which were sanctioned by the approval of the Fathers of the Church, of synods, and even of ecumenical councils. Far from being an obstacle to the Church’s unity, a certain diversity of customs and observances only adds to her splendor, and is of great help in carrying out her mission, as has already been stated. To remove, then, all shadow of doubt, this holy Council solemnly declares that the Churches of the East, while remembering the necessary unity of the whole Church, have the power to govern themselves according to the disciplines proper to them, since these are better suited to the character of their faithful, and more for the good of their souls. The perfect observance of this traditional principle not always indeed carried out in practice, is one of the essential prerequisites for any restoration of unity.