Thinking Differently, but staying in the Church?

[jinc1019]

Don’t you think the Apostles would know if Mary had other children? Why would they teach their disciples that she was “ever virgin”?

Actually, she does not. The Church has the responsibility to preserve the once for all divine deposit of faith. She must preserve the completed public revelation that closed with the death of the last Apostle. It is not a matter of “policies on issues”. The Apostles commanded that what was handed down was to be preserved without alteration.

I don’t think that someone can obtain a theological virtue like faith by “deciding”. That being said, I do think one can obey in spite of lacking in conviction on a dogma. One must decide to obey, and rather than hold obstinantly to a contrary position on doctrine or dogma, take a positoin of humility that seeks to be conformed to Christ (present in His Church).

All of this is getting very far off topic…I have replies to all of your questions I assure you, but the question I have is…What is the official Church position on my situation. If I am willing to do all the Church asks but I am incapable of forcing myself to believe something I simply do not believe because of the evidence I have seen…Am I allowed to be a member of the Church and receive the sacraments or not? One person has already suggested no. Can someone point to the official Church teaching on this?

 

[jinc1019]

So, do you think that there can be no such thing as infallibility? So, you think that no Christian today can know Christ’s truth, that no one can know what Christ really teaches?

I’m just trying to understand your view.

I think infallibility is possible, as I already stated. But, I do not believe it is the truth given all of the evidence. Of course I believe we can know what Christ taught. The idea that infallibility is absolutely necessary for that is ridiculous. We have the Bible and sacred tradition to tell us. Do we have answers to every single question imaginable? No. But we have enough answers to live the way God wants us to and to figure the rest of it out.

 

[guanophore]

I appreciate the advice. I have learned long ago in this process (before I was a Christian at all) that keeping my mind open is essential to discovering the truth. However, my question still remains…if this is what I believe, am I allowed to be a member of the Church or not?

If you are validly baptized, then you are a member of the Church. If you have been confirmed as a Catholic, then you remain a Catholic. You may be a Catholic not in a state of grace, not in full communion, in a condition of heresy, lapsed, defiant, dissenting, and any number of other things, but you remain a subject of the Roman Pontiff. You may be a rebellious subject, but no less a subject.

Baptism leaves an indelible and eternal mark on the soul. Once you were transferred from the kingdom of darkness into the Kingdom of Light, you were joined to Christ in His death and resurrection, and made a member of the Body. You can’t get “unadopted” again. You can, like the Prodigal son, squander your birthright, and throw away the faith into which you were baptized. You can even try to redefine that One Faith to suit your own ideas. None of that will change the fact that you are Catholic. You may pass through the gates of Hell and remain there for eternity, still “Catholic”.

All that being said, it sounds like you have lost your Catholicity, if indeed it was ever present, with regard to some of the basic doctrines of the faith. Unfortunately, this does not sound like it results from a case of invicible ignorance, but rather, hubris and rebellion.

Thanks for the information. However, I am still left with a lot of questions you may be able to clarify. You say assent to Church teaching is required, but I am not “assenting” to it. I don’t believe it. Doesn’t that mean I cannot receive most of the sacraments?

The Sacrament of Reconciliation is always open to Catholics. If you partake of any other sacraments in this state of mind, then you will be committing sacrilege.

When you present yourself for Communion, the Host is raised and you hear the words “The Body of Christ”, you say “Amen”. In this act, you are saying that you agree/assent to the Teachings of Jesus that are infallibly preserved in the Church He founded. If you don’t believe those teachings, then you are lying with your words and your body, but approaching the altar and saying “Amen”.

I have heard many of the Church’s arguments in favor of it, including from some of the best modern apologists, and I just do not believe the evidence lines up with their conclusions.

You have made yourself the standard by which Truth should be determined. You are rejecting the Spirit of Christ in His Church. You believe that your apprehension of the Truth is better/greater/more accurate than what the Holy Spirit has already revealed to the faithful.

wow - wanna judge my salvation while you’re on a roll?

We have been given objective criteria to determine whether we are in the faith, or not. The Teachings are not a matter of opinion. If a baptized Catholic rejects the Teachings of Jesus, then they have lost their Catholicity.

It would be inappropriate to judge anyone’s salvation. When we observe someone who has fallen away from the faith we are to attempt to restore such a person, and pray for them. We must hope that they will come to repentance before the hour of death.

 

[owensjo]

wow - wanna judge my salvation while you’re on a roll?

No one’s judging your salvation, I’m simply stating a fact: Catholicism is an all or nothing proposition. You have a right to believe as you wish, but if you do not believe one or more tenets of the faith, then you are not in communion with the Church. It is not charitable to refuse to speak up when you see someone about to step off a cliff. The fact is, catholics have received terrible catechesis over the past 40 years or so, and your point of view is actually very common.

 

[jinc1019]

If you are validly baptized, then you are a member of the Church. If you have been confirmed as a Catholic, then you remain a Catholic. You may be a Catholic not in a state of grace, not in full communion, in a condition of heresy, lapsed, defiant, dissenting, and any number of other things, but you remain a subject of the Roman Pontiff. You may be a rebellious subject, but no less a subject.

Baptism leaves an indelible and eternal mark on the soul. Once you were transferred from the kingdom of darkness into the Kingdom of Light, you were joined to Christ in His death and resurrection, and made a member of the Body. You can’t get “unadopted” again. You can, like the Prodigal son, squander your birthright, and throw away the faith into which you were baptized. You can even try to redefine that One Faith to suit your own ideas. None of that will change the fact that you are Catholic. You may pass through the gates of Hell and remain there for eternity, still “Catholic”.

All that being said, it sounds like you have lost your Catholicity, if indeed it was ever present, with regard to some of the basic doctrines of the faith. Unfortunately, this does not sound like it results from a case of invicible ignorance, but rather, hubris and rebellion.

The Sacrament of Reconciliation is always open to Catholics. If you partake of any other sacraments in this state of mind, then you will be committing sacrilege.

When you present yourself for Communion, the Host is raised and you hear the words “The Body of Christ”, you say “Amen”. In this act, you are saying that you agree/assent to the Teachings of Jesus that are infallibly preserved in the Church He founded. If you don’t believe those teachings, then you are lying with your words and your body, but approaching the altar and saying “Amen”.

You have made yourself the standard by which Truth should be determined. You are rejecting the Spirit of Christ in His Church. You believe that your apprehension of the Truth is better/greater/more accurate than what the Holy Spirit has already revealed to the faithful.

We have been given objective criteria to determine whether we are in the faith, or not. The Teachings are not a matter of opinion. If a baptized Catholic rejects the Teachings of Jesus, then they have lost their Catholicity.

It would be inappropriate to judge anyone’s salvation. When we observe someone who has fallen away from the faith we are to attempt to restore such a person, and pray for them. We must hope that they will come to repentance before the hour of death.

I appreciate your passion but you have yet to answer the question. I would like a source that states that the Catholic Church will not allow me to receive the sacraments if I believe infallibility is wrong. I am not saying it doesn’t exist; I am just saying that was the point of this post. We can debate all of these issues in another thread.

 

[guanophore]

I appreciate all of the information and for your opinion. No need to apologize for it; it’s why I asked.

I believe I have answered your question already, but just to make myself clear…I believe that all churches have at least one important teaching wrong.

I believe in the importance of the sacraments, which rules out most churches as it is…and I reject double predestination, among other Calvinist teachings, so there really are not a whole lot of other Christian churches left. By the time you weed out the churches which have gone off the deep end in the last fifty years, theologically speaking, there are even less churches available.

Generally speaking, I believe the most important thing in a church is that it is as close to the teachings of the apostles as possible. Given my options, the Catholic Church is one of the closest and possibly the closest church to those teachings, even if some of it is not right, in my opinion of course. Where else do I go? That’s the whole point.

Yes, but I think to just "swallow everything whole" without doing the research for yourself can be just as damaging.

I agree. It is incumbent upon us to study our faith, and to pursue the points of disagreement/doubt fully, completely, and perpetually.

I think of the parable of the seed that is tossed into shallow soil.
If you just accept xyz merely because someone says you have to, then how much of a believer are you?

Just that kind, and when persecution arises, such believers are lost, because they dont have deep roots. The roots grow in the study and in spiritual formation.

 I think it's great you're looking into, and doing your own research - we're called to be constantly working out our salvation. :)

Best of luck to you,
~ PetiteFoi

It sounds like jinc has already completed the research deemed necessary, and has evaluated the results based upon the “I” around which all standards apparently revolve.

 

[bzkoss236]

I think infallibility is possible, as I already stated. But, I do not believe it is the truth given all of the evidence. Of course I believe we can know what Christ taught. The idea that infallibility is absolutely necessary for that is ridiculous. We have the Bible and sacred tradition to tell us. Do we have answers to every single question imaginable? No. But we have enough answers to live the way God wants us to and to figure the rest of it out.

But it is because of Sacred Tradition, and the Bible too, in a way, that infallibility is possible at all.

The teaching on infallibility says that for something to be able to be considered infallible, which means that it is absolute truth, it has to match up to certain criteria, of which the Pope, as leader of the Church, has final say. Some of those criteria are:

1. It has to be a teaching on faith and/or morals
2. It cannot contradict sacred scripture or sacred tradition, also meaning it cannot contradict an already existing doctrine
3. It must be declared ex cathedra
4. It has to be something that is already taught by the Church (meaning it can’t be something made up)

I think #4 may also imply something derived from what is already taught, such as the use of artificial birth control.

So, since you believe that infallibility is possible, why do you not think that any Christian church has the ability to declare something infallible? Do you think you anyone has authority to declare something as infallible?

 

[guanophore]

If he had it his way, the Catholic Church in America would be virtually non-existent in much of the country, especially in the very same areas it has been so successful as of late.

Actually, I think that the majority of American Catholics have lost their Catholicity, if indeed they ever had it. 8/10 persons identifying as Catholic disagree with major portions of the moral teachings of Jesus held by the Church.

Truth is not a matter of majority opinion. Truth remains Truth, even if the majority reject it.

I appreciate the response. However, you are basing the idea that I should be obedient on a doctrine I don’t believe is accurate…so the whole thing kind of goes out the window.

I know you answered my post before you could read the article on conscience, so I will take that into consideration.

I am not basing the idea that you should be obedient on any belief of yours. The Teachings of the Church come from Christ. If you wish to be in good standing with teh One Church, founded by Christ, then you will be obedient to the teachings of the Church, even if you think they are inaccurate. I know this is a very difficult concept, especially for Americans, because America is founded upon principles of rebellion against authority they believe is unjust. There seems to be a cultural predilection to disobedience. The motto of “don’t tread on me” is applied to religious as well as political venues. If you don’t believe that Jesus has the right to make the doctrine and the rules, then you are right, the whole thing is out the window.

Just so you realize it, many religions require their believers to be obedient...Should you believe in Islam because Muhammad told you to? Why don't you believe in Islam? If Muhammad is right, you should be a Muslim. You choose not to be a Muslim using reason, logic, history, etc.

Yes. When you read the article I linked on conscience you will see that this is the teaching of the Church. If I believe the precepts of Islam then I have a moral obligation to follow them.

You are also right that we use reason, logic, and history in making such decisions. However you have left out the MAIN and most important factor, that being what God has revealed about Himself. I believe what the Church teaches because it has been revealed by God.

Where I have difficulty (and there are many areas where I do) then I submit my will and intellect in obedience, and pray that I may come into the fullness of faith. This is an attitude of humility that acknowledges that, though I believe myself to be “right” in certain matters of conscience, I may not be, and the Church is right. I am ready, willing, and able to be brought into conformity with the Teachings. This is the attitude I am not seeing in your posts. If one cannot be docile and teachable, then one cannot be brought into conformity.

The Orthodox Church also teaches infallibility, just in a different way.

Yes. Perhaps you are just thinking that Jesus was outright lying when He promised that He would lead His One Church into “all Truth”?

Or maybe He was just a weakling, and though He meant to do it, he failed.

Or maybe He was a charletan and was just trying to dupe people?

As we all are…despite the many voices throughout Catholic Answers that seem to suggest they have it all figured out.

Yes, there are some. I have learned a great deal since coming here, and highly recommend it.

It is true that not every Catholic accurately represents the faith. It is good that you are asking for official documents.

 

[guanophore]

I understand your point. I can appreciate it.

However, I do understand.
I do believe Jesus intended for there to be one unified church, but that has not happened…in large part because of the Catholic Church’s own actions by the way.

No, this is not accurate jinc. The CC is the holy and pure bride of Christ, and as such, cannot err.

Fallible men, attached to her, and acting within and on behalf of her, however can and do err. The schisms and divisions within the Body of Christ come only from the sins and shortcomings of humankind, not from Christ, who is the Head. The Church is ensouled by the Holy Spirit, and it is this divinity that preserves her from error. Like Jesus, however, the Church is incarnational, with both divine and human elements. Just as Jesus grew hungry and tired, so the human part of the Church is subject to the ailments of the fallen human nature. But it is wrong to blame Jesus for the betrayal of Judas, or to lay the sins of men at the feet of His Holy and spotless bride.

One of the major reasons I want to be in the Catholic Church is because of the unity. I do believe Christians should be as unified as possible and only the Catholic Church can really offer that. That does not automatically mean the Catholic Church has everything right. Try reading their position on charging interest as a sin in the 18th century and then today in modern times and try to make sense of the difference. **There are a million examples of small things the Catholic Church is likely wrong about…but all of them go back to Church infallibility./**QUOTE]

This statement reveals that you really do have a deficient understanding of infallibility. I am glad to read this, because it means that, at least in part, you have based your decisions on erroneous foundations. When one makes choices based upon misunderstandings, they can be corrected more easily when that individual becomes educated.

 

[bzkoss236]

There are a million examples of small things the Catholic Church is likely wrong about…but all of them go back to Church infallibility.

How do you know they are wrong? And what examples? Even from most anti-Catholic Protestants, they point out no where near a million ‘small’ things the Church is wrong about.

 

[Aloysium]

I have, after a great deal of study, come to the conclusion that papal infallibility is simply not true.

What took you on that course?
I can’t say that that I have given the issue any thought.
I suppose if I find that something a Pope wrote seems to be taking we away from God, I might question it, but likely, given my ignorance, I will reflect on my own understanding.
You may be focussing on the wrong things; the right “Thing” being God.

 

[jinc1019]

If you are validly baptized, then you are a member of the Church. If you have been confirmed as a Catholic, then you remain a Catholic. You may be a Catholic not in a state of grace, not in full communion, in a condition of heresy, lapsed, defiant, dissenting, and any number of other things, but you remain a subject of the Roman Pontiff. You may be a rebellious subject, but no less a subject.

Baptism leaves an indelible and eternal mark on the soul. Once you were transferred from the kingdom of darkness into the Kingdom of Light, you were joined to Christ in His death and resurrection, and made a member of the Body. You can’t get “unadopted” again. You can, like the Prodigal son, squander your birthright, and throw away the faith into which you were baptized. You can even try to redefine that One Faith to suit your own ideas. None of that will change the fact that you are Catholic. You may pass through the gates of Hell and remain there for eternity, still “Catholic”.

All that being said, it sounds like you have lost your Catholicity, if indeed it was ever present, with regard to some of the basic doctrines of the faith. Unfortunately, this does not sound like it results from a case of invicible ignorance, but rather, hubris and rebellion.

The Sacrament of Reconciliation is always open to Catholics. If you partake of any other sacraments in this state of mind, then you will be committing sacrilege.

When you present yourself for Communion, the Host is raised and you hear the words “The Body of Christ”, you say “Amen”. In this act, you are saying that you agree/assent to the Teachings of Jesus that are infallibly preserved in the Church He founded. If you don’t believe those teachings, then you are lying with your words and your body, but approaching the altar and saying “Amen”.

You have made yourself the standard by which Truth should be determined. You are rejecting the Spirit of Christ in His Church. You believe that your apprehension of the Truth is better/greater/more accurate than what the Holy Spirit has already revealed to the faithful.

We have been given objective criteria to determine whether we are in the faith, or not. The Teachings are not a matter of opinion. If a baptized Catholic rejects the Teachings of Jesus, then they have lost their Catholicity.

It would be inappropriate to judge anyone’s salvation. When we observe someone who has fallen away from the faith we are to attempt to restore such a person, and pray for them. We must hope that they will come to repentance before the hour of death.

I appreciate your passion but you have yet to answer the question. I would like a source that states that the Catholic Church will not allow me to receive the sacraments if I believe infallibility is wrong. I am not saying it doesn’t exist; I am just saying that was the point of this post. We can debate all of these issues in another thread.

 

[7armyrugrats]

Do you have other problems with the Church or is it just papal infallibility? The reason I am asking is if there are no other problems, apparently you DO believe in this dogma because you believe what has been spoken infallibly by the popes. If there are other problems then maybe you need to look into why you don’t believe those specific issues. Clearing your other doubts up may very well help resolve this for you as well. As for a specific Church teaching on whether or not you can receive the Eucharist, have you asked a priest about this? My understanding is that if you are obedient to the Church as you continue to seek answers you are ok to receive the sacraments. But you should probably ask a priest, even anonymously in the confessional. That is your best option on getting an official teaching. But if you don’t believe in infallibility, why do you think it’s important to know what is taught? The Church might be wrong about it afterall.

 

[jinc1019]

Do you have other problems with the Church or is it just papal infallibility? The reason I am asking is if there are no other problems, apparently you DO believe in this dogma because you believe what has been spoken infallibly by the popes. If there are other problems then maybe you need to look into why you don’t believe those specific issues. Clearing your other doubts up may very well help resolve this for you as well. As for a specific Church teaching on whether or not you can receive the Eucharist, have you asked a priest about this? My understanding is that if you are obedient to the Church as you continue to seek answers you are ok to receive the sacraments. But you should probably ask a priest, even anonymously in the confessional. That is your best option on getting an official teaching. But if you don’t believe in infallibility, why do you think it’s important to know what is taught? The Church might be wrong about it afterall.

Great point…however, it is irrelevant. In fact, your question actually shines the light on just how absurd this requirement is. If a person believes in everything the Church teaches except infallibility, that person is still not eligible to receive the sacraments or engage fully in the Church.

 

[jinc1019]

No, this is not accurate jinc. The CC is the holy and pure bride of Christ, and as such, cannot err.

Fallible men, attached to her, and acting within and on behalf of her, however can and do err. The schisms and divisions within the Body of Christ come only from the sins and shortcomings of humankind, not from Christ, who is the Head. The Church is ensouled by the Holy Spirit, and it is this divinity that preserves her from error. Like Jesus, however, the Church is incarnational, with both divine and human elements. Just as Jesus grew hungry and tired, so the human part of the Church is subject to the ailments of the fallen human nature. But it is wrong to blame Jesus for the betrayal of Judas, or to lay the sins of men at the feet of His Holy and spotless bride.
jinc1019;10541394:

One of the major reasons I want to be in the Catholic Church is because of the unity. I do believe Christians should be as unified as possible and only the Catholic Church can really offer that. That does not automatically mean the Catholic Church has everything right. Try reading their position on charging interest as a sin in the 18th century and then today in modern times and try to make sense of the difference. There are a million examples of small things the Catholic Church is likely wrong about…but all of them go back to Church infallibility./

QUOTE]

This statement reveals that you really do have a deficient understanding of infallibility. I am glad to read this, because it means that, at least in part, you have based your decisions on erroneous foundations. When one makes choices based upon misunderstandings, they can be corrected more easily when that individual becomes educated.

You believe it cannot err because it told you it cannot err and the reason you believed it when it told you it could not err is because you believed it could not err. It’s completely circular logic and it proves nothing, especially not that it cannot err. Simply saying it does not make it so.

 

[jinc1019]

Once again, we are getting way off topic here. Can we please get back to the original question?

 

[jinc1019]

No, this is not accurate jinc. The CC is the holy and pure bride of Christ, and as such, cannot err.

Fallible men, attached to her, and acting within and on behalf of her, however can and do err. The schisms and divisions within the Body of Christ come only from the sins and shortcomings of humankind, not from Christ, who is the Head. The Church is ensouled by the Holy Spirit, and it is this divinity that preserves her from error. Like Jesus, however, the Church is incarnational, with both divine and human elements. Just as Jesus grew hungry and tired, so the human part of the Church is subject to the ailments of the fallen human nature. But it is wrong to blame Jesus for the betrayal of Judas, or to lay the sins of men at the feet of His Holy and spotless bride.
jinc1019;10541394:

One of the major reasons I want to be in the Catholic Church is because of the unity. I do believe Christians should be as unified as possible and only the Catholic Church can really offer that. That does not automatically mean the Catholic Church has everything right. Try reading their position on charging interest as a sin in the 18th century and then today in modern times and try to make sense of the difference. There are a million examples of small things the Catholic Church is likely wrong about…but all of them go back to Church infallibility./

QUOTE]

This statement reveals that you really do have a deficient understanding of infallibility. I am glad to read this, because it means that, at least in part, you have based your decisions on erroneous foundations. When one makes choices based upon misunderstandings, they can be corrected more easily when that individual becomes educated.

Trust me, I assure you I understand how it works. You are way off topic.

 

[Trebor135]

Basically you seem to be making this choice based upon your own investigations and standards of perfection. You have made yourself the moral standard by which “all of the major denominations” should be measured.

…

What we are called upon to do, as Catholics, is called “the obedience of faith”. That means that we will obey the Teachings of the Church as they are from Christ Himself. We may not be pursuaded about the doctrines, but we make a conscious and willful decision to obey in spite of our lack of conviction. We say, as Thomas did “Lord, help my unbelief!”.

…

It appears to emanate from a state of hubris, which is common to humankind.

Would a Protestant who investigates Christian history and decides to leave his denomination for Catholicism or Eastern/non-Chalcedonian Orthodoxy be guilty of “[making] [himself] the moral standard by which ‘all of the major denominations’ should be measured”?

Also, the Eastern and non-Chalcedonian Orthodox Churches both deny papal infallibility as an apostolic teaching–are they guilty of “hubris”?

PS: [Since this issue has been commented upon in this thread:] If I am not mistaken, the Eastern Orthodox Church doesn’t have a dogma about infallibility in the same way the Catholic Church does. (I can’t speak to what stance the Oriental Orthodox Church takes on this issue, though.)

 

[guanophore]

  I appreciate your passion but you have yet to answer the question. I would like a source that states that the Catholic Church will not allow me to receive the sacraments if I believe infallibility is wrong.

I don’t believe you have read the documents I posted for you, so until you do, I am not inclined to produce any more.

I also don’t think the “source” you are seeking exists. The Church does not disallow people from receiving sacraments, especially reconciliation.

It is the responsibility of the individual to present themselves for the sacraments in a state of grace.

“Examine yourselves to see whether you are living in the faith.” 2 Cor 13:5

From your posts, it seems clear that you have not only examined yourself in the light of your own standards, but you have examined “all the denominations” in the light of yourself as the standard. It seems clear that you have determined that you are not living in the Catholic faith. And yet, for some reason, you wish to continue to participate in a communion to which you do not belong.

I am not saying it doesn’t exist; I am just saying that was the point of this post. We can debate all of these issues in another thread.

The original documents of the Church are in the NT. What exists is a commandment that you examine yourself to see if you are in the faith.

“Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be answerable for the body and blood of the Lord. 28 Examine yourselves, and only then eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For all who eat and drink without discerning the body, eat and drink judgment against themselves.” 1 Cor 11:27-29

For me, pretending to agree when I do not would be unworthy. However, it is up to you if you want to risk eating and drinking judgment upon yourself. It seems like a gross lack of integrity to present oneself with an “Amen” when one does not have an “Amen” in their heart.

There are no persons, or documents, however, that can discern this for you. It is a matter between you, and God. If you want to pretend you are in communion when you are not, that is between you and Him. It is His Church that you are treating with disrespect, and to Him you will answer for it.

 

[guanophore]

Do you have other problems with the Church or is it just papal infallibility?

In reading the posts I keep having that one line from the Matrix where Neo is late for work, and the boss tells him “You have a problem with authority, Mr. Anderson”.

Making oneself the standard by which all truth is measured is the ultimate form of hubris.

If there are other problems then maybe you need to look into why you don’t believe those specific issues. Clearing your other doubts up may very well help resolve this for you as well.

I certainly hope this trip to CAF will serve in that capacity.

My understanding is that if you are obedient to the Church as you continue to seek answers you are ok to receive the sacraments.

Yes, this is well said. However the problem here is that the “answers” have already apparently been arrived at, and are in contradiction with the One Faith passed down to us by the Apostles.

. That is your best option on getting an official teaching.

I wish this were true, but there are plenty of priests who either don’t espouse the officual teaching , or don’t know it.

But if you don’t believe in infallibility, why do you think it’s important to know what is taught? The Church might be wrong about it afterall.

As it turns out there is a great discrepancy here. jinc claims to know that it is possible to infallibly know what Jesus taught, but that the Church is “wrong” on other things. I guess the only way to know what is right and wrong is in the almighty high court of jinc?