The Irony of Tradition

  • Thread starter Thread starter GerardPaul
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
As for which teachings have been declared infallible, did you read all that I posted above? I know it’s a lot, but it comes from the Catechism and should help you in understanding that the Church has indeed undertaken a massive exercise to do just what you’ve asked and this has resulted in The Catechism of the Catholic Church.

Please, if nothing else, read the text that I highlighted in Green. It makes clear that the Catechism “is a statement of the Church’s faith and of catholic doctrine, attested to or illumined by Sacred Scripture, the Apostolic Tradition, and the Church’s Magisterium. I declare it to be a sure norm for teaching the faith and thus a valid and legitimate instrument for ecclesial communion.”

It is frustrating that even many Catholics do not understand the concept of the infallible nature of the Magisterium. This infallibility, unfortunately, doesn’t extend itself to each of us individual members of the faithful. We have to fuddle about and take responsibility for learning the rudiments of our faith. Unfortunately, at this time in history, we have come to a place where many have neglected the religious aspect of their education, believing secular demands to be of greater importance.

What I have come to understand is that we are called to accept that which the church teaches through the magisterium. We are also called to accept the need for personal humility and accept the authority which God has put over us. The first authority we are to accept is always God. A wife has her husband as authority over her. A married couple, after God, have the Church as authority to light the way to God.

This is a tough teaching, but Christ didn’t promise us that being Christian would be easy. He did promise us that the pillar and foundation of Truth would be the Church (1 Tim 3:15).

God Bless you EA_Man, as you continue to grapple with the foolishness of God. Only God would have the strength to use such weak vessels as Man to accomplish his work.

CARose
 
40.png
CARose:
No, it’s not a fallible list of infallible teachings, it’s a list which is as complete as is needed at any given time in history.

As humans, we are constantly finding new ways to confuse ourselves regarding the beauty which is Christ. And to illuminate our path to God, we have clarifications given to us by the church over time.

But the list given at one time, the truths, once clarified, remain infallible as ever.

CARose
Click to expand...
The answer that you patiently provides makes one thing perfectly clear; at any given point in time there is a definite list of infallible teachings. What is that list currently (i.e. today)? The other alternative is that no one in the Magesterium is sure of what constitutes the body of infallible teachings that were urgently required at various points in history.

Peace
 
EA_Man,

Are you sincere in your belief that this question remains unanswered?

We are called to accept as true that which is taught by the Magisterium of the Church. This has been provided to us in the Catechism.

This is not the same as saying that the Catechism is Infallible. It is not. But it does provide us with a sure means of teaching the truths of the Catholic Church.

Here is how the CCC defines Infallibility:The gift of the Holy Spirit to the Church whereby the pastors of the Church, the pope and bishops in union with him, can definitively proclaim a doctrine of faith or morals for the belief of the faithful (891). This gift is related to the inability of the whole body of the faithful to err in matters of faith and morals (92).

Does this clarify things at all for you?

It’s not a short list of things which are infallible, although you will find those who insist that there are only 2 infallible teachings of the Church, as given to us by the pope en cathedra (sic?). These individuals misunderstand the nature of infallibility. It resides in the ability of the magisterium to profess the truth for the faithful to learn.

CARose
 
The church has provided to the faithful at many points in history, catechisms which the faithful have used in learning the teachings of the Church. I am not a scholar on these documents, other than perhaps the Baltimore Catechism (published 1885), which remains an excellent tool for understanding the basics of Catholicism.

While that document does not teach everything that needs to be known, or in the depth that is needed by an adult to be fully formed in his faith, the truths taught there in no way contradict the richer version of these truths which has been published more recently as the CCC.

These, in some way, are the very list you’re asking for.
CARose
 
There was a long thread about a list of infallible statements on these forums over a year ago. Here is a post which may answer help.

June 29, 2004, 12:49 PM

Matt16_18 vbmenu_register(“postmenu_63351”, true);

Senior Member

Join Date: May 23, 2004

Posts: 1,856

Re: List of infallible statements

The English version of “Denzinger-Schönmetzer” (DS) is:

The Sources of Catholic Dogma, 30th edition,
Heinrich Joseph Denzinger
B. Herder Book Co., St. Louis, Missouri, 1957

Denzinger’s The Source Of Catholic Dogma

This is the ultimate reference for Catholic doctrine. This quality reprint (Skivertex) of the 1957 B. Herder edition is a must for serious students of theology. This work is often referred to in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, but until now, has not been available. This edition also includes the Corridenda. Hardcover.
$29.95

​

Denzinger’s book is a reference work for anyone interested in knowing exactly the infallible teachings of the Church. The Catholic Catechism Hardon, John A. S.J. Doubleday & Co. is a good source for answering the questions concerning who is infallible, how the pope is infallible and what is the scope of papal infallibility.
 
Hi EA_Man,

I don’t know much about Catholic theology but I am learning that is why I ask questions on this forum. Sometimes it takes a simple man like me to give a simple answer. My understanding of the entire Bible is that God wants ONE FAITHFUL PEOPLE TO BELIEVE IN HIM AND TO OBEY HIS LAWS FROM THE CALL OF ABRAHAM TO JESUS AND THE APOSTLES TO TODAY IT IS CLEAR THAT HE USED THE BIBLE AND TRADITION TO TEACH US. SATAN WAS A REBEL AND CAUSED DIVISION AND FROM THAT TIME ON HAS WANTED TO STOP GODS PLAN OF LOVING UNITY OF HIS PEOPLE. ALL CHRISTIANS MUST SEEK UNITY.

In christs LOVE, jeff
 
quote: Della
47 years of thought. And this is the best you could come up with?
Click to expand...
from another thread:
quote: reen12
The sacrifice of Christ is offered to the Father - as the
imperfect sacrifices were offered in the Temple.

The bread and wine become the Body and Blood in
reality, and this reality…Jesus…is offered to the Father,
again and again, through time itself, until He returns
in glory.

He died, once, for all…so that sin may be forgiven,.and
the *reality *of that “once, for all” is our continual sin-offering, through every generation, to the Father. It is Christ’s gift to
us and our sacrificial offering, through Him, to the Father.

And if only a handful of people recognize this reality…
a “priestly people”…it is enough.

It is the glory of Catholicism, to recognize and carry
forward, the Reality of all realities on earth.
Click to expand...
God be with you, Della, while we both wait for Christ
to come again,

reen12
 
That was nicely said Jeff. Good work!

(although, you could lose the all caps, it’s often seen to be shouting)

CARose
 
Thank you CaRose for clarifying what I attempted to get accross to E.A. Man. I had forgotten about that case in the 2 creations stories…hey E.A., can you tell us which is the infallible and correct one? No one can…except God Himself.

I might turn the question around on you E.A. Man:

Is it infallibly stated that there are dinosaurs in the Word of God?

Is Ecclesiates correct in its apparent denial of an afterlife?

Are all the census numbers in Numbers and all the numbers of troops in battles accurate in fine detail?

Did the Book of Job, (the oldest book in the Bible) really happen, or is it a parable?

When you have answered all these questions, can you prove in any way that you are infallible in your opinions and that they were shared by the early church who gave their lives as martyrs for the faith, like Polycarp, Ignatrius of Antioch, and Clement of Rome? (Please be sure to offer specific and verifiable quotes from any that you cite in support of your position.)
Pax tecum,
 
Church Militant:
I had forgotten about that case in the 2 creations stories…hey E.A., can you tell us which is the infallible and correct one? No one can…except God Himself.
Click to expand...
First, your premise assumes that there are two. Prove first that there are two - as opponents to Christianity allege - then I will present the opposing view.

Secondly, you should answer the question yourself, by your own measuring rod; using works from the ECF “like Polycarp, Ignatrius of Antioch, and Clement of Rome? (Please be sure to offer specific and verifiable quotes from any that you cite in support of your position.)”

Did they believe in one Creation account or two?
Furthermore, did they believe in the Traditional Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch or in the higher critical methods of biblical interpretation (a la JP2 or Benedict 16)? Trent refers to the first five books of the O.T. as the “books of Moses”, why have the last two popes adopted a contrary view?
Church Militant:
Is it infallibly stated that there are dinosaurs in the Word of God?
Click to expand...
Of course not. The word “dinosaur” appears nowhere in scripture.

The words “leviathan” and “behemoth” do appear:
Leviathan in Job 3:8, Job 41:1, Psalm 74:14, Psalm 104:26, Isaiah 27:1

And of course the references to the “behemoth” in Job 41 are well known.

What creatures these verses refer to, I cannot say for certain.
Can you state infallibly that they DO NOT refer to dinosaurs?
Church Militant:
Is Ecclesiates correct in its apparent denial of an afterlife?
Click to expand...
The real question is: Is your interpretation that Ecclesiastes is denying an afterlife correct?

The Word of God is always correct and it never contradicts itself.
It is clear from the whole of Scripture that there is an afterlife.

So your interpretation is lacking, not the text.
Church Militant:
Did the Book of Job, (the oldest book in the Bible) really happen, or is it a parable?
Click to expand...
Ezekiel 14:14
even if these three men—Noah, Daniel and Job—were in it, they could save only themselves by their righteousness, declares the Sovereign LORD.

Ezekiel 14:20
as surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD, even if Noah, Daniel and Job were in it, they could save neither son nor daughter. They would save only themselves by their righteousness.

James 5:11
As you know, we consider blessed those who have persevered. You have heard of Job’s perseverance and have seen what the Lord finally brought about. The Lord is full of compassion and mercy.

Even if you want to treat James 5:11 as a literary allusion, the other verses clearly are the Lord speaking.

The Lord says Job was a real person, that settles it in my mind.
Church Militant:
When you have answered all these questions, can you prove in any way that you are infallible in your opinions and that they were shared by the early church who gave their lives as martyrs for the faith, like Polycarp, Ignatrius of Antioch, and Clement of Rome? (Please be sure to offer specific and verifiable quotes from any that you cite in support of your position.)
Pax tecum,
Click to expand...
Opinions are not infallible, they are opinions. So your entire question is a contradiction in terms. Be that as it may, I can be sure that where the ECF agree with the Truth of God and where I agree with the Truth of God, then at those points the ECF and I agree.

Peace
 
40.png
GerardPaul:
Many non-Catholic christians say the Church has too many “traditions of men” that make it a false religion that does not look like the Christianity of the Bible. The irony is that the Church has the authority of Jesus,The Holy Spirit and the Apostles teaching office to say what is true God given Tradition and what is not. So the traditions that the non-Catholics have come up with after the Reformation are just “traditions of men”. Am I correct?

Jeffrey
Click to expand...
Ironically, no.
 
EA_Man,

Please let me apologize for CM’s post. I don’t think it added value to our discussion here (and I’m not at all certain that it accurately portrays the Catholic perspective). This thread is meant to be focused on the concept of Tradition and the Infallibility of the Church.

Have any of my posts helped you in any way to better understand where we are coming from with regards to the teaching authority of the church and how this ties into the Traditions given by Christ himself and retained primarily through the litergy of the Mass? The truths which have been passed down from the Apostles and guided by the Holy Spirit reside in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

Does any of this help you to better understand where we’re coming from?

And again, please excuse CM. I’m certain he wasn’t really intending to be uncharitable.

CARose
 
40.png
CARose:
EA_Man,

Please let me apologize for CM’s post. I don’t think it added value to our discussion here (and I’m not at all certain that it accurately portrays the Catholic perspective). This thread is meant to be focused on the concept of Tradition and the Infallibility of the Church.

Have any of my posts helped you in any way to better understand where we are coming from with regards to the teaching authority of the church and how this ties into the Traditions given by Christ himself and retained primarily through the litergy of the Mass? The truths which have been passed down from the Apostles and guided by the Holy Spirit reside in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

Does any of this help you to better understand where we’re coming from?

And again, please excuse CM. I’m certain he wasn’t really intending to be uncharitable.

CARose
Click to expand...
Rose,

I want to thank you sincerely for taking the time to explain these things. I do not agree with you on many points of doctrine but you have been very patient with me.

Your explanations do clarify your position to me.

Thank you for your time, patience, and charity.

May God bless you and keep you
 
Thank you,

And may God Bless you and keep you as well.

I have enjoyed trying to find the words to explain what the Church teaches. I truly love Christ with all my heart and all my soul and I thank God that he has been so generous with us, his Children.

I am constantly amazed at his generosity with me, wretched sinner that I am. For so many years I wandered, steeped in sin. But when I looked for him, he found me and brought me home. The strength of his call and the gentleness of his entire family, the communion of the Saints has been incredible.

It is this which I wish I could share with all who sincerely seek Christ.

Take care of yourself. I’m certain I’ll be talking with you on other subjects here.

Sincerely,

CARose
 
40.png
CARose:
EA_Man,

Please let me apologize for CM’s post.

And again, please excuse CM. I’m certain he wasn’t really intending to be uncharitable.

CARose
Click to expand...
I offer no such apologies as none are necessary. There was no lack of charity in my post or my questions, but sincere efforts to see where E.A. is coming from.

I suggest that his initial questions have long since been answered by many posters, (not the least of which the most patient CARose.) and yet he persists in what I see as rhetorical comments that seem to indicate a complete unwillingness to accept anything that we offer.

Re: the 2 creation accounts Genesis 1 is one and chapter 2:4B-25 is the other. The sequence of events is different. Which is correct?

I am not “digging” on the Bible…but simply pointing out that the Word of God can be inspired and inerrant in matters of faith and morals, without having to be inerrant or even literal in every fine detail.

Personally, I like Job and figure it probably is a factual account.

As for the numbers etc…they may not be right, because they seem astronomically high for that era of history and if they are wrong…it doesn’t bother me a bit. It still happened, whether someone’s math was off or not.
Pax vobiscum,
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top