What is infallible, and how do we know?

[Cimachol]

My adult son has read about the Catholic faith extensively, but I am concerned about where some of his ideas are headed. He seems to be under the impression that everything written by the Church fathers, everything written in the documents of the Council of Trent, and everything written in the Catechism of the Council of Trent is infallible. I suspect he is wrong about this, but I don’t know how one would find out for sure. I can pull up a Catholic Answers web page, but he will simply say that Catholic Answers is wrong. Is there some source I can go to on this?

Also, my understanding is that there is no official list of Fathers of the Church, and that at least two eventually fell into heresy. Did Tertullian or Origen actually write anything clearly heretical? Maybe that would help him see why simply claiming that something is infallible because it was written by the Church fathers does not hold up.

 

[Genesis315]

What the whole Church has handed on always and everywhere (catechisms would be taken into account here) is certainly true–the true Church cannot defect from the faith. Individual Christians, including those counted among the Fathers, certainly can make errors .

Likewise, those universal, definitive judgments of Church–that is, those requiring definitive assent from all the faithful–whether from the college of bishops in Council or spread throughout the world, or from their head (the Pope) alone, are also infallible (if they were to be in error, the whole Church would definitively fall into error, which is impossible).

The canons of the Council of Trent certainly fall in this latter category. Obviously, like everything else including the Scriptures, they must be understood with the mind of the Church.

Is there any particular idea or doctrine that concerns you?

 

[LittleFlower378]

When is a teaching of the Church infallible? | the reproach of Christ

 

[Lou2U]

I don’t know about writings, but could you and he sit down with a Priest and discuss it?

 

[Cimachol]

That wouldn’t really help, because the possibility of a priest misunderstanding Church teaching about infallibility is high. I suspect the only thing my son might consider is something from one of the sources he seems to consider infallible clarifying that it is not infallible. A second possibility might be clear contradictions among those sources.

 

[Magnanimity]

everything written by the Church fathers, everything written in the documents of the Council of Trent, and everything written in the Catechism of the Council of Trent is infallible. I suspect he is wrong about this, but I don’t know how one would find out for sure.

Ah, good ole “infallibility.” What a messy concept! I really love the opening lines of the current catechism because they don’t miss the forest (encountering God) for the trees (like infallibility).

“God, infinitely perfect and blessed in himself, in a plan of sheer goodness freely created man to make him share in his own blessed life. For this reason, at every time and in every place, God draws close to man. He calls man to seek him, to know him, to love him with all his strength. He calls together all men, scattered and divided by sin, into the unity of his family, the Church. To accomplish this, when the fullness of time had come, God sent his Son as Redeemer and Saviour. In his Son and through him, he invites men to become, in the Holy Spirit, his adopted children and thus heirs of his blessed life.” -CCC [1]

The above lines are 100% what we are to be up to–drawing close to God, since He is ever seeking to deepen the relationship between us and Him.

Individuals who get hung up on infallibility can miss this crucial point. They can begin to think that, rather than encountering God, the Catholic life is about knowing all the right things or doing all the right things or entering into a contract with God so I can get my golden ticket to Heaven…

OK, I’ll get off my soap-box about “infallibility” now and give you something useful. Here’s an easy one–St Augustine noted that the vast majority (immo quam plurimi) of early church fathers rejected the notion of a neverending, inescapable, punitive Hell. In other words, they rejected the teaching that the Catholic church eventually adopted from St Augustine onwards.

Some, not all but some of Origen’s teachings were indeed anathematized by the emperor Justinian during the time of the 2nd Council of Constantinople. Basically, the church fathers did not all agree with each other. Two of the main ones–St Gregory of Nyssa and St Augustine could not be further apart on either the notion of original sin or eschatology (last things).

One of the best things you could do for your son is to regularly remind him of the point of all this–which is to grow and deepen your relationship with God. The point most certainly ain’t knowing all the right things. Even if there were a tabulation of all the infallible teachings of the church (and there isn’t), how could you guarantee that you will infallibly apprehend all those truths? Are there two Catholics anywhere on the planet who 100% agree with each other in every single matter of faith and morals? Nope. So, maybe infallibility isn’t the point. Maybe, even it’s adventures in missing the point.

OK, I’ll stop now. Best of luck with your son!

 

[CRV]

Not exactly sure how to help you here, but the following may be of some help to you -

A Discussion of Infallibility - By: Fr. John TrigilioCatholic Encyclopedia - Infallibility

Catholic Encyclopedia - Infallibility - whilst a long read it does mention the church Fathers in various places. … …

Under the subheading - Proof of the Church’s infallibility, we read
" Instances of this will be given below and from these it will appear that, though the word infallibility as a technical term hardly occurs at all in the early councils or in the Fathers, the thing signified by it was understood and believed in and acted upon from the beginning."

There is a section titled Proof of papal infallibility from Tradition which mentions different Fathers & Councils

 

[thistle]

My adult son has read about the Catholic faith extensively, but I am concerned about where some of his ideas are headed. He seems to be under the impression that everything written by the Church fathers, everything written in the documents of the Council of Trent, and everything written in the Catechism of the Council of Trent is infallible. I suspect he is wrong about this, but I don’t know how one would find out for sure. I can pull up a Catholic Answers web page, but he will simply say that Catholic Answers is wrong. Is there some source I can go to on this?

Also, my understanding is that there is no official list of Fathers of the Church, and that at least two eventually fell into heresy. Did Tertullian or Origen actually write anything clearly heretical? Maybe that would help him see why simply claiming that something is infallible because it was written by the Church fathers does not hold up.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church per se as a document is not infallible, nor does it contain only infallible teachings.
The Catechism contains a summary of Church teachings (both infallible and non-infallible) with footnotes on how these teachings are supported by Scripture and other Church documents.
The Catechism also contains Church disciplines.

It does not list which of the teachings are infallible and which are non-infallible because it makes no difference on a practical level as Catholics are bound by both.
The

 

[Cimachol]

It does not list which of the teachings are infallible and which are non-infallible because it makes no difference on a practical level as Catholics are bound by both.

I think the reason it is an issue is that, when reading the writings of previous popes and doctors and fathers of the Church, my son finds that some of what the current pope says conflicts with that. So whom does one obey – the current pope without question? Previous popes who seem more in keeping with the Church fathers and the Council of Trent? Are we not supposed to reason, but just force ourselves to believe something because the pope said it, and if so, how does one force oneself to believe something? And is that what God really wants?

 

[thistle]

I think the reason it is an issue is that, when reading the writings of previous popes and doctors and fathers of the Church, my son finds that some of what the current pope says conflicts with that. So whom does one obey – the current pope without question? Previous popes who seem more in keeping with the Church fathers and the Council of Trent? Are we not supposed to reason, but just force ourselves to believe something because the pope said it, and if so, how does one force oneself to believe something? And is that what God really wants?

Like I said, the Church teachings, both infallible and non-infallible are in the CCC. If your son wants to know what the Church teaches that is where to find it.
The official Church teachings are to be believed and not individual writings of Popes or Church Fathers if they disagree with the teachings of the Church.

For example, Saint Thomas Aquinas wrote that he did not believe in the Immaculate Conception. He was wrong but it was not officially documented as a dogmatic teaching of the Church in his day.

 

[Genesis315]

If the current Pope is not making a definitive judgment (and this one hasn’t) and his teaching is the novelty or aberration, then we certainly should go with what was consistently taught before. But the Pope should be given the benefit of the doubt that what he is teaching is true and we should make a good faith effort to accept it in consonance with what has come before. But it is possible for one in good conscience to be unable reconcile the word of a Pope what the Church has handed down and defined.

If our authorized teachers do not fulfill their duty and instead introduce novel doctrine and unorthodox practices at odds with what the Church has defined and always taught, God permits it as a trial.

Here’s what a Catholic believes:

St. Vincent de Lerins, Commonitorium:

The Notes of a true Catholic.

[48.] This being the case, he is the true and genuine Catholic who loves the truth of God, who loves the Church, who loves the Body of Christ, who esteems divine religion and the Catholic Faith above every thing, above the authority, above the regard, above the genius, above the eloquence, above the philosophy, of every man whatsoever; who sets light by all of these, and continuing steadfast and established in the faith, resolves that he will believe that, and that only, which he is sure the Catholic Church has held universally and from ancient time; but that whatsoever new and unheard-of doctrine he shall find to have been furtively introduced by some one or another, besides that of all, or contrary to that of all the saints, this, he will understand, does not pertain to religion, but is permitted as a trial, being instructed especially by the words of the blessed Apostle Paul, who writes thus in his first Epistle to the Corinthians, There must needs be heresies, that they who are approved may be made manifest among you: 1 Corinthians 2:9 as though he should say, This is the reason why the authors of Heresies are not immediately rooted up by God, namely, that they who are approved may be made manifest; that is, that it may be apparent of each individual, how tenacious and faithful and steadfast he is in his love of the Catholic faith.

In light of that, if error is spread wide:

St. Vincent:

[7]…What, if some novel contagion seek to infect not merely an insignificant portion of the Church, but the whole? Then it will be his care to cleave to antiquity, which at this day cannot possibly be seduced by any fraud of novelty.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3506.htm

 

[1Lord1Faith]

everything written by the Church fathers, everything written in the documents of the Council of Trent, and everything written in the Catechism of the Council of Trent is infallible

It’s not the documents, catechisms or other writings that are infallible. It’s a particular teaching on faith or morals that can be considered infallible, not the whole document.

That wouldn’t really help, because the possibility of a priest misunderstanding Church teaching about infallibility is high.

Why is that?