The infallable pope

  • Thread starter Thread starter Irene72
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Those that initially broke away from the Church were said to be preaching heresy, and therefore the Church called them heretical.
I’m sure that someone will accuse me of being a heretic or a Catholic basher for this but have you ever spoken to a non-Catholic about the Protestant Reformation? If you read Luther’s 95 theses you’ll get it straight from the horse’s mouth.
 
Americanrevert;4182576 said:
**

Catholics are not saying the Pope is perfect in everything he says and does. They are just saying that he is always correct when he teaches about faith and morality.**
You should stop saying that Protestants here are claiming otherwise, we know this too, and that is what we are saying.

Even with a superficial study of it; it is obvious that the principles of Gregory VII and Innocent III are still the principles of the Roman Catholic Church. And had she but the power, she would put them in practice with as much vigor now as in past centuries.
 
ron77nyc;4182871:
You should stop saying that Protestants here are claiming otherwise, we know this too, and that is what we are saying.

Even with a superficial study of it; it is obvious that the principles of Gregory VII and Innocent III are still the principles of the Roman Catholic Church. And had she but the power, she would put them in practice with as much vigor now as in past centuries.
I’m not sure about what you are trying to say. Please clarify.
 
ron77nyc;4182871:
You should stop saying that Protestants here are claiming otherwise, we know this too, and that is what we are saying.

Even with a superficial study of it; it is obvious that the principles of Gregory VII and Innocent III are still the principles of the Roman Catholic Church. And had she but the power, she would put them in practice with as much vigor now as in past centuries.
I didn’t say anything at all about Protestants. I was just giving our Muslim friend the definition of infallibility. I’m not even saying I agree with that definition. My own personal opinion is that actions speak louder than words so if a Pope is killing anyone he sets the example for all his followers that it’s OK to kill.
 
Those that initially broke away from the Church were said to be preaching heresy, and therefore the Church called them heretical.

There is too much to learn about the Catholic Church on a thread at CAF. Those are just a beginning, a hint of what you can learn. You need to do some studying on your own and see if once again, you can find the Truth.
They still teach heresy. Those who have been raised in their heretical traditions, and through no fault of their own do not accept the fullness of Catholic teaching are not formal heretics because they have made no formal break with Catholic teaching. Still, they remain material heretics because they hold heretical doctrines.

They are “separated brethren” because they hold an orthodox doctrine of God (belief in the Trinity) and claim the Name of Jesus Christ as Lord.

ron77nyc is judging 20 century Christians by 13th and 16th century standards.
 
Americanrevert;4182576:
And yes, about this other question being asked, the killings on both side of the fence so to speak, but to say that the Pope is infallible (you say in morals and speech etc.) then wouldn’t this classify as going against the Pope being infallible? I mean, “Thou shall not kill” One of the top ten! Or does he think he has the power to go against God? Just curious.
Catholics are not saying the Pope is perfect in everything he says and does. They are just saying that he is always correct when he teaches about faith and morality.
I’m sorry, but you are wrong as well. The Catholic Church doesn’t claim that the Pope is infallible whenever he teaches anything about faith and morals. (If you haven’t already seen it, you should take a look at the thread Is this heretical?)
 
They still teach heresy. Those who have been raised in their heretical traditions, and through no fault of their own do not accept the fullness of Catholic teaching are not formal heretics because they have made no formal break with Catholic teaching. Still, they remain material heretics because they hold heretical doctrines.

They are “separated brethren” because they hold an orthodox doctrine of God (belief in the Trinity) and claim the Name of Jesus Christ as Lord.

ron77nyc is judging 20 century Christians by 13th and 16th century standards.
Well that is something I can understand and accept. Those who make the break are the actual heretics. That’s pretty simple to get but I’m not judging 20th century Christians at all by the standards of the 13th or 16th or any century. I don’t know what you mean by that.
 
I’m sorry, but you are wrong as well. The Catholic Church doesn’t claim that the Pope is infallible whenever he teaches anything about faith and morals. (If you haven’t already seen it, you should take a look at the thread Is this heretical?)
Peter J Im sorry I just don’t understand what you are saying. I was brought up in the Roman Catholic Church and I was taught that the Pope is infallible in his teachings. My proof was when what Jesus Said I will give you the words. That is what I was taught referred to scripture. That was our promise from Jesus that Peter had the keys to the kingdom (the kingdom on earth is the church) the Keys I was taught in the OT meant KNOWLEDGE. so i AM VERY CONFUSED HERE. If Peter was given the key to the kingdom, he was given the KNOWLEDGE OF FAITH, If we can not believe that the Pope (PETER) still has the keys where is the Roman Catholic Church to turn, Now you tell me? The Keys were given to Peter through the one and Only Jesus Christ. So i dont know what else to say.
 
Hi rinnie,

I’m pretty sure that your question has already been addressed in this thread, but I don’t remember where exactly. So rather than telling you to read 300+ posts, I would suggest looking at the thread Is this heretical? (which is a lot shorter).

If you’re still confused after that, you might try talking to your parish priest.
 
They still teach heresy. Those who have been raised in their heretical traditions, and through no fault of their own do not accept the fullness of Catholic teaching are not formal heretics because they have made no formal break with Catholic teaching. Still, they remain material heretics because they hold heretical doctrines.
You should find out what they really teach and not put them all in one basket. That mentality is outdated and contageous. They teach people to love Jesus. That’s why Catholics send their kids to vacation bible school.
 
You should find out what they really teach and not put them all in one basket. That mentality is outdated and contageous. They teach people to love Jesus. That’s why Catholics send their kids to vacation bible school.
I think you’re misunderstanding what mercygate said. He/she never denied that Protestants teach a lot of good things, too.
 
I think you’re misunderstanding what mercygate said. He/she never denied that Protestants teach a lot of good things, too.
Heretic is a derogatory term. They teach heresy? You can’t put all in the same category. Many people leave the Catholic Church because they want a closer walk with God.
 
You should find out what they really teach and not put them all in one basket. That mentality is outdated and contageous. They teach people to love Jesus. That’s why Catholics send their kids to vacation bible school.
Heresy is heresy, however politically incorrect it might be. It is dangerous to teach otherwise.
 
Heretic is a derogatory term. They teach heresy? You can’t put all in the same category. Many people leave the Catholic Church because they want a closer walk with God.
Heresy is not a derogatory term. The root of the word is the Greek word for “choice.” It means that one has chosen to embrace a belief that is inconsistent with Christianity, as understood by the font of the Faith: the Catholic Church. Even a Protestant may properly use the term “heresy” correctly when speaking of aberrant doctrines of God, such as those held by the JWs and LDSs.
 
Hi rinnie,

I’m pretty sure that your question has already been addressed in this thread, but I don’t remember where exactly. So rather than telling you to read 300+ posts, I would suggest looking at the thread Is this heretical? (which is a lot shorter).

If you’re still confused after that, you might try talking to your parish priest.
I will tell you what Peter J, On Friday it is my 28 wed aniversary, I will be with Father all day because my daughter is getting married the next day, I will find out where i was either mislead on this, or what I am missing. Because I just cant understand what you are trying to get to. Im not saying your are wrong, but I really believe you are. But I will let you know if not before, come Monday. (if im still alive that is),
 
No, Ron. . .

People (mistakenly) leave the Catholic Church because they fall into error and think that there is someplace ‘else’ where they will be ‘closer to God’. (There isn’t.) If these people had truly wanted to be close to God on **His terms **instead of their own, they’d still be in **His church. **They’ve chosen wrongly by leaving the Catholic Church, even if their intentions and their ‘feelings’ were good and loving.
 
I will tell you what Peter J, On Friday it is my 28 wed aniversary, I will be with Father all day because my daughter is getting married the next day, I will find out where i was either mislead on this, or what I am missing. Because I just cant understand what you are trying to get to. Im not saying your are wrong, but I really believe you are. But I will let you know if not before, come Monday. (if im still alive that is),
Sounds like a plan.

There’s really no great mystery here: the Catholic Church does not teach, and has never taught, that the Pope is infallible whenever he teaches on faith and morals. (That’s why I suggests talking to your priest if you were still confused after reading the “Is this heretical thread?”)

I could quote Vatican I and Vatican II for you, but they’ve already been quoted in that other thread.

God bless you, and congratulations in advance on your wedding anniversary,
 
Heretic is a derogatory term. They teach heresy? You can’t put all in the same category. Many people leave the Catholic Church because they want a closer walk with God.
I assume you’re aware, ron, that Protestants consider Catholics to be heretics? How did that fit in with your thinking?

BTW, I agree that lumping Protestants all into the same boat can be a problem, but I don’t see that mercygate was doing that.
 
Peter, is what you are saying that the Pope doesn’t teach infallibly on faith and morals unless he makes an ‘ex cathedra statement’ or otherwise some kind of 'doctrinal act?

But. . .and this is where I think people get confused. . .if the Pope is speaking about infallible teachings (like say Pope John Paul 2 speaking about women not being able to be ordained as priests), even if he is not making an ‘infallible declaration’. . .if he is speaking and reiterating already determined ‘infallible teachings’, aren’t the TEACHINGS themselves ‘still’ infallible?

I mean, just because “Ordinatio Sacerdotalis” was not promulgated as an ex cathedra statement, it is still an infallible teaching, isn’t it, and the pope did speak on an infallible subject, didn’t he?
 
Ron, it is true that there are differences in doctrine between Methodists and Anglicans, between Lutherans and Quakers, etc.

But every single Protestant group has at least ‘one’ significant heretical teaching that denies the ‘fullness’ of truth that Catholicism possesses.

Say a person has committed 1 mortal sin, and another person has committed 6, and another 100, and another 10,000?

ONE mortal sin is sufficient to send a person to hell. The only difference is that of ‘degree’. The ‘destination’ is the same no matter how ‘many’ mortal sins were committed.

NOT that I am saying Protestants are condemned to hell, by any means.

Lutherans and Anglicans may in some ways have fewer doctrinal differences from Catholics than a Seventh Day Adventist or Quaker. . .but even one error is one error too many, and that any error exists needs to be ‘repaired’. Some churches will only need a ‘few errors’ fixed’; others will need many–but all Protestant churches have some errors.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top