G
guanophore
Guest
You are not alone, Granny. I am not sure what the OP meant when he made the statement either.
- Status
G
grannymh
Guest
Probably some charity would help clear things.
P
PRmerger
Guest
Indeed.
The poignant and trenchant question we ought to be asking our non-Catholic brethren is: what would it mean to you if you were to accept that papal infallibility could actually be a charism given to the Catholic Church?
That is, do you disagree with it because it cannot possibly be true? Or do you fear that life-changing event that must logically follow were you to embrace this truth?
G
guanophore
Guest
I have just finished reading a number of insightful posts from you and am grateful for your “humble opinion”, which I take as good advice.
I would further posit that the HS led Peter infallibly to this activity, which for the first time established the Sacred Tradition of Apostolic Succession. .
He, in communion with the others, prayed and decided in accordance with the HS, just as the first infallible Council in Jerusalem did with regard to the treatment of mixed communities of Gentiles and Jews.
I have also had many Protestants here say that the Canon of Scripture was not defined until Trent, which I find absurd.
But not necessarily. The same questions I have posed in discussions about Apostolic succession, and particluarly, the primacy of the Successor of Peter. Although they are related, they may not necessarily be germaine. Itwin was commenting “if you assume apostolic succession”, which was the proximate cause of these questions.
And a bit distressing in the context of the op for this thread. It was not till I came here to CAF that I actually learned about the various levels of confidence in Catholic teaching.
But the OP has a specific question/issue that should not be addressed in this way, IMNSHO.
Kriminy! I just got this TODAY!!! You are pretty on top of it Granny!
Yes and no. The point about Judas was a response to the doubt over Apostolic Succession. It is quite clear in Acts that the Apostles chose a successor for Judas. The Scripture is a product of infallibility, and it testifies to Apostolic Succession.
I would further posit that the HS led Peter infallibly to this activity, which for the first time established the Sacred Tradition of Apostolic Succession. .
He, in communion with the others, prayed and decided in accordance with the HS, just as the first infallible Council in Jerusalem did with regard to the treatment of mixed communities of Gentiles and Jews.
I think this is a major part of the answer Itwin is seeking in asking the question “what is Sacred Tradition”.
Yes, I think this helps a great deal when people are seeking to understand the ongoing teaching of the Church with the once for all revealed Truth. Many people think that the CC has “added” doctrines.
I have also had many Protestants here say that the Canon of Scripture was not defined until Trent, which I find absurd.
G
guanophore
Guest
So Itwin, when you have time, can we go through this document and discuss your objections?
G
guanophore
Guest
Thank you for your careful research, Anna. I know this has been an issue of ongoing exploration for you.
Yes, it would be foolish to disregard the actions of some previous popes, but one must also keep in mind that these articles are referring to “encyclicals”, which are a very specific form of teaching/pastoral direction. The popes who have been corrupt, fortunately, had very little interest in teaching and guiding the flock of God, so did not offer such instruction. The most scandalous activities of popes have been confined to personal letters.
In answer to your question, I think each person will have to answer to God for acting in accord with their conscience. A well informed conscience will know the Scriptures and the Sacred Tradition, and therefore, be better able to discern in all things that they read, including papal encyclicals.
I think the concept of subjecting ourselves to authority is particularly difficult for Americans, since we have grown up in a culture of “don’t tread on me” and our national legacy is one that has been born out of rebellion.
We can speculate that the authority of the Apostles would have been easier for us to accept had we been part of those converted on the first Pentecost.
G
guanophore
Guest
Do you deny the validity of the Petrine gifts?
G
grannymh
Guest
I believe that this sentence is misleading considering all the various books, content, styles of writing, and human authors. Infallibility is basically a designation for Catholic doctrines. I do not understand how infallibility per se produces some kind of product. Perhaps you are claiming that the Holy Spirit is infallible? My Irish mother would call that gilding the lily.
When speaking with non-Catholics, we should not tinker with the simple concepts of infallibility by using them in a creative, and possibly confusing way. Actually, it is the responsibility of the Catholic Church to search out Divine truths from Scripture such as Apostolic Succession. Consequently, it is Catholicism which testifies to Apostolic Succession.
B
batman1973
Guest
See, this is the kind of stuff I’m talking about. Look, you have nothing in your arsenal that’s going to convince me of what your selling. One true church? Been there. Done that. Got the t-shirt, the soundtrack, the tour jacket, the limited edition blu-ray, the all access pass, and pics and autographs of all the band members. I’m gonna be blunt. There will be no unification of any of the Christian Churches until Jesus comes and sets everything straight. Yes, it’s something to pray for. Yes, it’s something to hope for. But, it will only happen when Jesus makes it happen. Protestants and Catholics are too far apart on differences that neither side will give on. Now, I remember why I took a six month leave of absense from this bored. I think it’s time to leave again. It’s fun to learn, but, I get tired of people trying to tell me how wrong I am, telling me that the man who had the stones to stand up for himself and the truth was a crazed heretic, that my church isn’t a church, and other ad nauseum garbage.
P
PRmerger
Guest
G
grannymh
Guest
I have had excellent conversations with two Missouri Synod CAF participants. One had been working on the items which we share with each other. The other shared his beliefs on the Eucharist which helped my understanding of their position. Some of the Missouri Synod Churches have joined in support of religious liberty. I go with my friend’s husband to his Missouri Synod Church which has closed Communion. I also attend the Catholic Church of my friend.
No one told me I was wrong and I did not tell them they were wrong. Maybe our individual churches are not unified with each other. Yet, we were not enemies with each other.
I just thought you should know that “little people” like myself and some others from a different faith can be friends seeking Our One Lord.
B
benjohnson
Guest
I don’t think we vehemently disagree on the first point, only that that we’re hold the two sacraments as being penultimate - I think our teaching on the difference between sacraments and rites has value and I’ll let our confession explain:
“If we define the sacraments as rites, which have the command of God and to which the promise of grace has been added, it is easy to determine what the sacraments are, properly speaking. For humanly instituted rites are not sacraments, properly speaking, because human beings do not have the authority to promise grace. Therefore signs instituted without the command of God are not sure signs of grace, even though they perhaps serve to teach or admonish the common folk.”
That said, if my church said that all seven are sacraments while holding the two as being ‘grace filled’ then I wouldn’t be upset in the slightest.
For traditional apostolic succession, I think we’d be happy to have it again. While not quite dealing with apostolic succession, the issue of church governance could be an issue - and I can certainly see the appeal of the Catholic model, yet there’s something good about the laity owning (congregationalist polity) their individual churches as we are all very much involved, on task, and engaged. Bad pastors are loudly expelled, for example. But the lack of structure can also make us susceptible to “new thinking” that can be quite dangerous as some of our churches have fallen prey to the world’s thinking.
That said, our governance would not preclude us from voluntarily joining a larger group as long as our membership remained voluntary. Our form of polity, perhaps, fits with the Catholic principal of subsidiarity.
L
ltwin
Guest
This thread has been very informative, and makes me wonder if I should not have used some broader term than “papal infallibility” when describing the Pope’s authority or that authority of all the bishops gathered together?
As for the link, I’ll check back after reading it.
As for the link, I’ll check back after reading it.
po18guy
Well-known member
There have been exactly two ex catherda pronouncements. 1870 and 1950. The Assumption and the Immaculate Conception.
Exactly 2 in 1979 years. Yet, the Popes did not make these pronouncements from the Batcave, or by surprise, or during a hissy fit. They simply set in concrete beliefs that were long held. Had they been held all the way back to the first council? Of course not! The Trinity was not even establsished at that point, from all avaiable evidence.
As to a listing of all available infallible infallible teachings, here is a link. If the Holy Spirit indeed guides the Church in her teaching, and Christ bestowed the teaching authority upon His Church, then, by definition, all that the Church has defined and teaches is without error. And, so it is. All teachings from the “normal Magisterium” of the Church may be considered to be infallible.
If your Church’s teachings are not guaranteed infallible by the Holy Spirit, why belong?
Exactly 2 in 1979 years. Yet, the Popes did not make these pronouncements from the Batcave, or by surprise, or during a hissy fit. They simply set in concrete beliefs that were long held. Had they been held all the way back to the first council? Of course not! The Trinity was not even establsished at that point, from all avaiable evidence.
As to a listing of all available infallible infallible teachings, here is a link. If the Holy Spirit indeed guides the Church in her teaching, and Christ bestowed the teaching authority upon His Church, then, by definition, all that the Church has defined and teaches is without error. And, so it is. All teachings from the “normal Magisterium” of the Church may be considered to be infallible.
If your Church’s teachings are not guaranteed infallible by the Holy Spirit, why belong?
po18guy
Well-known member
Rhetorical musing: In converts, we see that they often possessed a seeming aversion to infallibility as they wended their way through various “bible-based” denominations, finding each to be lacking or disappointing in some way or other. Was infallibility something to be feared, as it limited one’s freedom? Was assigning infallibility solely to the privately interpreted written word simply a method of creating an escape hatch for ourselves, when infallible truth impinged upon our preferred beliefs?
P
PRmerger
Guest
It always does come down to that, doesn’t it? The authority question.
I think that this question is laid to rest when one considers the tens of thousands of differing Christian denominations, each claiming that their interpretation of the Bible is the correct one.
Without a central authority to discern where they have gone astray, we are left with the chaos and confusion of these differing theologies.
And we are giving permission for each and every Christian to form this:
http://d3r43eq3z18ja8.cloudfront.ne...files/imagecache/event_image_175/scwebart.jpg
Each Christian becomes his own authority/pope/church starter based on creating a religion in his own image, rather than conforming his views to Christ’s.
G
grannymh
Guest
While I agree that the authority question is indeed important…
The real basic question is – Is Jesus Christ God?
There are religions which consider Christ as a “prophet among prophets”. There are many individuals who consider Him a wise person. The attack on the Divinity of Christ has existed since I learned to read and for centuries before that.
G
guanophore
Guest
I don’t want to get too far afield of Itwin’s OP, because he already agrees that the Holy Scriptures are a product of infallibliity, so his issues relate to other matters.
What I mean by an infallible product is that the result of the human action was protected by error from the HS. In this case, the Holy Scripture was written by men, who were moved by God to write God’s Word. The primary author is considered the HS, who is infallible.
It is the same for the Sacred Councils, where fallible men met together in prayer and discernment and were able to write "it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us… ". The product of such a council is infallible because it is presided by the HS.
I agree with you, but it is also useful in such discussions when a non-Catholic is able to recognize that they do accept the gift of infallibility, especially with regard to the Sacred Scriptures. Most of them have been contaminated by the Sola Scriptura heresy, and are therefore blinded by the fact that it is the Church that testifies to the Scriptures, a principle that defies sola scriptura.
Here is an interesting article on Papal Encyclicals
catholicapologetics.info/thechurch/encyclicals/docauthority.htm
G
guanophore
Guest
Your heart seems very hardened, batman, to the unitifying work of the Holy Spirit. This is your perogative, of course, but a dangerous course. The Spirit of God is ALWAYS leading toward unity in the One Body of Christ. To assume such an adamant and oppositional position cuts you off from His work.
It is hurful to here you characterize our understanding of Jesus’ Truth as “what you are selling”. This calumny is against the Scriptures and the Teachings of the Apostles. It also gives the impression that you are still wounded by the impious behaviors of so called Catholics who lived 500+ years ago.
po18guy
Well-known member
Sadly, this is the result of the divisions in the Body of Christ. The incessant search for the Truth, combined with the inevitable disappointment that comes from failed searches and denomination hopping can produce such spiritual damage. You hear it in so many of the stories told by converts on “The Journey Home” for example. Some fell into atheism after becoming disillusioned along the way. It comes from exposure to the spirit of division and is healed only by submission to the Holy Spirit - the Unifier.
- Status