What must be believed?

[Michael_N_1]

This is a pretty basic question, or at least I used to think so.

What exactly must someone believe to be a faithful Catholic? I had the idea that whatever the Church taught must be believed, and was infallible. But when has the Church “taught” something? I have a friend in RCIA (she’s in RCIA, I’m not) who told me that there are only two things that have ever been declared infallibly, the Assumption and something else (I forgot). Obviously those are not the only things one must believe in to be Catholic. Everyone would agree (I hope) on the Resurrection, etc., etc.

This becomes an issue when it is claimed … well … the priest apparently believes in “supremacy of conscience”, that is, that you ought to go with your conscience if you believe that the Church is wrong. In this case, the issue is homosexuality.

Surely this doesn’t make sense, in my understanding. Can someone shed some light?

 

[theden]

This is a pretty basic question, or at least I used to think so.

What exactly must someone believe to be a faithful Catholic? I had the idea that whatever the Church taught must be believed, and was infallible. But when has the Church “taught” something? I have a friend in RCIA (she’s in RCIA, I’m not) who told me that there are only two things that have ever been declared infallibly, the Assumption and something else (I forgot). Obviously those are not the only things one must believe in to be Catholic. Everyone would agree (I hope) on the Resurrection, etc., etc.

This becomes an issue when it is claimed … well … the priest apparently believes in “supremacy of conscience”, that is, that you ought to go with your conscience if you believe that the Church is wrong. In this case, the issue is homosexuality.

Surely this doesn’t make sense, in my understanding. Can someone shed some light?

Whoa! You need to pray for that priest.

What you need to believe is everything the Church teaches which is summarized in the Catechism.

In regards to what the Pope has said infallibly, there have been two things. The Assumption of Mary and the Immaculate Conception. That said, all Church Councils (e.g. Vatican 2) are declared infallible as well.

What’s MOST important, above all of this is a solid relationship with Christ. Seek Him first through 1. The Eucharist, 2. Reading of Sacred Scripture in light of the Catechism and 3. Daily Prayer seeking to earnestly do His will. When that is done, then “supremacy of conscience” is a good guide.

Peace,

Dennis

 

[Nathan_Wagar]

Get a copy of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. This gives you the barebones outline of Catholic teaching. You are obligated to hold to these teachings, or you are not Catholics.

The priest is correct in stating that only two dogmas have been defined infallibly. However, this does not mean that only two dogmas are true and must be believed.

You must understand what the Church actually means by infallibility. There is a revealed truth, and the Church reveals it. The infallible definition of the Assumption, for instance, is not “declaring the Assumption to be infallible,” rather it is an infallible declaration about what was already true. Does this make sense?

In my indulgent habit of bad analogies:

Let’s say your mother gave birth to you, then ran away and left your father alone, and later she died in a terrible car wreck. This is the entire event as it happened in history.

Now, throughout your young life, your father only tells you bits of the truth. You aren’t ready to hear all of it. You would argue this, you would say “why yes, Dad, I am ready to know all of it,” but for reasons you can’t understand and known only to your father, he doesn’t say. He tells you that she went away, yet he never discloses her final end.

One day, you are a young man. Your father looks you in the eye and says “I want you to know the Truth, son. Your mother didn’t just leave, she died in a car wreck.” You may protest that you were never told this before, and so therefore it never happened. Your father replies that “you weren’t ready, son, and I did in fact hint at it without telling you the entire story.”

Here are some things to keep in mind: Did your perception or knowledge of every aspect of the event change the event itself? No. Did your father’s statement that “this is the truth” have any effect on the truthfullness or untruthfullness of the event? No. It is merely a statement telling you something you can know for sure: i.e, the objective reality of the event.

What infallibility means in the sense the Church uses it, is a charism of the Pope, from God, when speaking ex cathedra, that allows the Pope to be completely correct when stating something that is already true. Not as spectacular as some people would suggest. He is basically able, with the Church, to speak with the voice of God on an event that already happened. He would be the father in the analogy I just mentioned, except God is not allowing him to lie.

Except, in the Assumption of Mary, what happened to Mary is very good news, and has some wonderful theological truths for the faithful. Why did God see fit to reveal this truth to us now? The child never knows. Yet he trusts. Thank you for suffering through that

God Bless.

 

[david_friol_1]

Whoa! You need to pray for that priest.

What you need to believe is everything the Church teaches which is summarized in the Catechism.

In regards to what the Pope has said infallibly, there have been two things. The Assumption of Mary and the Immaculate Conception. That said, all Church Councils (e.g. Vatican 2) are declared infallible as well.

What’s MOST important, above all of this is a solid relationship with Christ. Seek Him first through 1. The Eucharist, 2. Reading of Sacred Scripture in light of the Catechism and 3. Daily Prayer seeking to earnestly do His will. When that is done, then “supremacy of conscience” is a good guide.

Peace,

Dennis

I would say start with the Creed we sat at mass. Learn it,live it love it:
We believe in one God,
the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all that is seen and unseen.

We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made, one in Being with the Father.
Through him all things were made.
For us men and for our salvation
he came down from heaven:
by the power of the Holy Spirit
he was born of the Virgin Mary, and became man.

For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate,
he suffered, died, and was buried.
On the third day he rose again
in fulfillment of the Scriptures;
he ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end.
We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son.
With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified.
He has spoken through the Prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead
and the life of the world to come. Amen.

 

[Michael_N_1]

Thank you for your responses. I think I understand this. You are supposed to believe everything that the Church teaches, which is nicely summarized in the Catechism. (I actually have a copy, just got it this week.) Just to clarify, I’m not Catholic – my religion line says “Interested in Catholicism” and that’s true.

theden:

In regards to what the Pope has said infallibly, there have been two things. The Assumption of Mary and the Immaculate Conception. That said, all Church Councils (e.g. Vatican 2) are declared infallible as well.

But is it true that all Councils (e.g. Vatican II) are infallible? Sometimes people (traditionalists?) say things like, Vatican II did not define anything new for the faithful to believe that was infallible.

Also, the Catechism was published in the last 20 years, right? How would you have known before then what the Church taught? (This is a minor point, obviously there were books and everything, just not “the” catechism.)
Nathan Wagar:

Get a copy of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. This gives you the barebones outline of Catholic teaching. You are obligated to hold to these teachings, or you are not Catholics.

Could you expand on this? It doesn’t seem like everyone who calls themselves Catholics holds to all these teachings. Now I’m not saying they’re right, but does it mean they’re not Catholics?

If you don’t mind me asking a really broad question, what does it mean that there are a lot of Catholics who do not hold to all the Church’s teachings? I’m struggling with this.

 

[po18guy]

Osama Bin Laden and the Green River Killer followed their consciences. They believed in the supremacy of conscience. But, what about the supremacy of truth?

This priest certainly does need prayer, as he is not teaching anyone to be faithful to what the Catholic Church teaches is God’s revealed truth. He is allowing malformed consciences to pratake of the Holy Eucharist. This is a shame. He was taught that unworthy reception of the Eucharist is eating and drinking damnation unto oneself. Saint Paul wrote of this in 1 Corinthians 11:28.

Conscience must be well-formed, according to inflexible moral principles. Each and every Catholic has had to undergo some reform of conscience during their faith life - some, like me, have undergone a lot.

 

[Nathan_Wagar]

According to Church teaching, you actually ex-communicate yourself by rejecting the magisterium. So they can say they are Catholic, they can act Catholic, but you either accept the body of Christ or you don’t. I am sure they would try to argue that yes, indeed, they are Catholic, however this would be similar to a kid running into my house and saying “yes, I am your son.” I would respond “no, my friend, you are not.” And yet he cannot be dissuaded, and indeed proceeds to tell other people he is my son. So be it, but it doesn’t change the reality. Does this make sense? The teachings of the Church are not hidden, they are proclaimed for all to know. It is fairly simple to compare the teaching to what someone is saying/doing.

 

[theden]

But is it true that all Councils (e.g. Vatican II) are infallible? Sometimes people (traditionalists?) say things like, Vatican II did not define anything new for the faithful to believe that was infallible.

Also, the Catechism was published in the last 20 years, right? How would you have known before then what the Church taught? (This is a minor point, obviously there were books and everything, just not “the” catechism.)

Could you expand on this? It doesn’t seem like everyone who calls themselves Catholics holds to all these teachings. Now I’m not saying they’re right, but does it mean they’re not Catholics?

If you don’t mind me asking a really broad question, what does it mean that there are a lot of Catholics who do not hold to all the Church’s teachings? I’m struggling with this.

Michael_N,

What’s most important as to seek God. Ask Him to guide you and then follow…

In regards to Councils, yes they are infallible. In Scripture, Christ gave the “Bind and Loose” authority twice. Once to Peter (and only Peter) and again to the Apostles. So, if Peter speaks “Ex Cathedra” then it’s infallible. If all the Bishops–with the Pope convene, then it’s also infallible.

Traditionalist Catholics (not really Catholic) reject Vatican II for some reason as I’m not sure and don’t think there’s been a valid Pope since Piux X.

Regarding the Catechism, there have been two published in the history of the Church. The one from twenty years ago and one after Trent back in the 16th century. (The Baltimore Catechism–which my parents would have studied is based off of the Trent Catechism). Before the Trent Catechism, I don’t know how Catholics learned their faith. Perhaps that’s one of the causes of the Reformation.

People who call themselves Catholic but don’t adhere to Church teaching are not truly Catholic. In order to be Catholic, you need to fully submit to the teachings and should understand them as well.

I hope this helps. I’ll pray for your discernment.

God bless,

Dennis

 

[kmuestwin]

I think this 81 page document will sum up what Catholics need to know.

Fr. Most’s basic Catechism

 

[Lancer]

**An excerpt from Catechism…re: what a Catholic is to believe…Catholic teaching **

APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTION
FIDEI DEPOSITUM
ON THE PUBLICATION OF THE
CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
PREPARED FOLLOWING THE SECOND VATICAN ECUMENICAL COUNCIL JOHN PAUL, BISHOP
SERVANT OF THE SERVANTS OF GOD
FOR EVERLASTING MEMORY

To my Venerable Brothers the cardinals, Patriarchs, Archbishops, Bishops, Priests, Deacons, and to all the People of God.

3. The Doctrinal Value of the Text
The Catechism of the Catholic Church, which I approved 25 June last and the publication of which I today order by virtue of my Apostolic Authority, 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. May it serve the renewal to which the Holy Spirit ceaselessly calls the Church of God, the Body of Christ, on her pilgrimage to the undiminished light of the Kingdom!
The approval and publication of the Catechism of the Catholic Church represent a service which the Successor of Peter wishes to offer to the Holy Catholic Church, to all the particular Churches in peace and communion with the Apostolic See: the service, that is, of supporting and confirming the faith of all the Lord Jesus’ disciples (cf. *Lk *22:32 as well as of strengthening the bonds of unity in the same apostolic faith. Therefore, I ask all the Church’s Pastors and the Christian faithful to receive this catechism in a spirit of communion and to use it assiduously in fulfilling their mission of proclaiming the faith and calling people to the Gospel life. This catechism is given to them that it may be a sure and authentic reference text for teaching catholic doctrine and particularly for preparing local catechisms. It is also offered to all the faithful who wish to deepen their knowledge of the unfathomable riches of salvation (cf. *Eph *3:8). It is meant to support ecumenical efforts that are moved by the holy desire for the unity of all Christians, showing carefully the content and wondrous harmony of the catholic faith. The Catechism of the Catholic Church, lastly, is offered to every individual who asks us to give an account of the hope that is in us (cf. 1 Pt 3:15) and who wants to know what the Catholic Church believes. …
…At the conclusion of this document presenting the Catechism of the Catholic Church, I beseech the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of the Incarnate Word and Mother of the Church, to support with her powerful intercession the catechetical work of the entire Church on every level, at this time when she is called to a new effort of evangelization. May the light of the true faith free humanity from the ignorance and slavery of sin in order to lead it to the only freedom worthy of the name (cf. *Jn *8:32): that of life in Jesus Christ under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, here below and in the Kingdom of heaven, in the fullness of the blessed vision of God face to face (cf. 1 Cor 13:12; 2 Cor 5:6-8)!
**Given 11 October 1992, the thirtieth anniversary of the opening of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, in the fourteenth year of my Pontificate. **http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/pjpsig.gif
usccb.org/catechism/text/fideidepositum.shtml
​

​

Some additional paragraphs for your consideration.

168 It is the Church that believes first, and so bears, nourishes and sustains my faith. Everywhere, it is the Church that first confesses the Lord: “Throughout the world the holy Church acclaims you”, as we sing in the hymn “Te Deum”; with her and in her, we are won over and brought to confess: “I believe”, “We believe”. It is through the Church that we receive faith and new life in Christ by Baptism. In the Rituale Romanum, the minister of Baptism asks the catechumen: “What do you ask of God’s Church?” And the answer is: “Faith.” “What does faith offer you?” "Eternal life."54

169 Salvation comes from God alone; but because we receive the life of faith through the Church, she is our mother: "We believe the Church as the mother of our new birth, and not in the Church as if she were the author of our salvation."55 Because she is our mother, she is also our teacher in the faith.

****892 ****Divine assistance is also given to the successors of the apostles, teaching in communion with the successor of Peter, and, in a particular way, to the bishop of Rome, pastor of the whole Church, when, without arriving at an infallible definition and without pronouncing in a “definitive manner,” they propose in the exercise of the ordinary Magisterium a teaching that leads to better understanding of Revelation in matters of faith and morals. To this ordinary teaching the faithful “are to adhere to it with religious assent” which, though distinct from the assent of faith, is nonetheless an extension of it.

usccb.org/catechism/index.shtml

Pax Christi

 

[gtrenewed]

Catholicism is about formation. We first must be formed in the knowledge of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. That is the institutions job - to carry the knowledge of formation.

Ultimately we must be formed to all that is held true by the church from the beginning until now. If we are not completed at any given time does not mean we are not catholic. If we are actively fighting against the church we are not, if we are just not there yet, not fully formed, there is grace to help us, many found in the sacraments.

To have the catechism in our head does not mean we are formed to it yet. Once it goes from our heads to our hearts - we are formed and living it.

As others have said - seek.

 

[Michael_N_1]

So much to respond to!

po18guy:

This priest certainly does need prayer, as he is not teaching anyone to be faithful to what the Catholic Church teaches is God’s revealed truth. He is allowing malformed consciences to pratake of the Holy Eucharist. This is a shame. He was taught that unworthy reception of the Eucharist is eating and drinking damnation unto oneself. Saint Paul wrote of this in 1 Corinthians 11:28.

OK, I don’t want to let this get out of hand, because I said that the priest “apparently” believes this. Which means that my friend told me that, which might mean that her RCIA teacher told her that. Or maybe the priest told her that. And in any case maybe someone along the line misinterpreted what the priest meant. All I can really say for sure is that someone thinks this – pray for them.
Nathan Wagar:

According to Church teaching, you actually ex-communicate yourself by rejecting the magisterium. So they can say they are Catholic, they can act Catholic, but you either accept the body of Christ or you don’t. I am sure they would try to argue that yes, indeed, they are Catholic, however this would be similar to a kid running into my house and saying “yes, I am your son.” I would respond “no, my friend, you are not.” And yet he cannot be dissuaded, and indeed proceeds to tell other people he is my son. So be it, but it doesn’t change the reality. Does this make sense? The teachings of the Church are not hidden, they are proclaimed for all to know. It is fairly simple to compare the teaching to what someone is saying/doing.

Don’t you think that people might have innocently been taught wrong, and believe something that isn’t true (like “The Church can be wrong”) rather than actually intentionally rejecting the faith? Especially since they continue to say that they are Catholics and that they believe?

theden:

What’s most important as to seek God. Ask Him to guide you and then follow…
…]
I’ll pray for your discernment.

Thank you.

theden:

Traditionalist Catholics (not really Catholic) reject Vatican II for some reason as I’m not sure and don’t think there’s been a valid Pope since Piux X.

Isn’t the argument from some non-sedevacantists more along the lines of, Vatican II was “pastoral” as opposed to defining anything about the faith?

kmuestwin:

I think this 81 page document will sum up what Catholics need to know.

Fr. Most’s basic Catechism

Thanks, maybe I’ll read that. I wasn’t really asking, “What is Catholicism about?”, though. I was more trying to figure out how you could have differences of opinion within the Church about things that are stated in the Catechism. Which I have heard some people say is not infallible. (So if the CCC isn’t, I’m guessing an unofficial one isn’t.)

Basically, I understand that Catholics are supposed to believe all this. It’s just a big quagmire of legalism when somebody wants to claim they have a (non-encouraged) “right” not to.

**An excerpt from Catechism…re: what a Catholic is to believe…Catholic teaching **
…]

So basically the Catechism says that you have to believe in the Catechism. This could be sidestepped by somebody who doesn’t want to believe in it (and still thinks they are Catholic).

Again, this is not my issue. If and when I become Catholic, it will be because I believe in what the Catholic Church teaches (which I understand is written down in the Catechism). I’m just trying to understand what’s going on out there. (To quote myself, “I had the idea that whatever the Church taught must be believed, and was infallible.”)

gtrenewed:

Catholicism is about formation. We first must be formed in the knowledge of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. That is the institutions job - to carry the knowledge of formation.

Ultimately we must be formed to all that is held true by the church from the beginning until now.

So it would be a shame if the institution is passing on help that is flawed.

gtrenewed:

If we are not completed at any given time does not mean we are not catholic. If we are actively fighting against the church we are not, if we are just not there yet, not fully formed, there is grace to help us, many found in the sacraments.

I guess you just can’t tell about other people, though.

gtrenewed:

To have the catechism in our head does not mean we are formed to it yet. Once it goes from our heads to our hearts - we are formed and living it.

As others have said - seek.

Thank you, I think you’re right. I’m working on that one.

 

[po18guy]

OK, I don’t want to let this get out of hand, because I said that the priest “apparently” believes this. Which means that my friend told me that, which might mean that her RCIA teacher told her that. Or maybe the priest told her that. And in any case maybe someone along the line misinterpreted what the priest meant. All I can really say for sure is that someone thinks this – pray for them.

The reason we jump on this is because this has been a real problem within the clergy. It is not a rare or unusual occurrence.

As to the thread title, anything taught by the normal Magisterium of the Church is binding upon all Catholics to accept as revealed truth.

Here is a great book that will immensely help someone in RCIA, or any Catholic, actually: Catholicism for Dummies. Dumb title - great book.

 

[PbloPicasso]

The reason we jump on this is because this has been a real problem within the clergy. It is not a rare or unusual occurrence.

As to the thread title, anything taught by the normal Magisterium of the Church is binding upon all Catholics to accept as revealed truth.

Here is a great book that will immensely help someone in RCIA, or any Catholic, actually: Catholicism for Dummies. Dumb title - great book.

I’d like to clarify who the Magisterium actually is in the Church. It is the collection of bishops in communion with Rome, Papacy. The Pope trumps all say-so. There is a teaching and I strongly suggest reading the Catachism on your own and possibly taking some orthodox online courses. Lucas Police has a good book out. Also Catholicism for Dummies is good. And if you listen to some of the big names in Catholic conversions you’ll find a better view of what’s going on in the Church.

Unfortunately there has been a huge negative impact from the secular world among clergy. It’s very difficult. We happen to be pretty lucky because of our Franciscan Friars. I already had a pretty strong Catholic faith prior to leaving and coming back home. I just had to get clarification on the things I thought that had changed and forced me to leave heart broken. It turns out that there really is a Church teaching and that you have to take the time to learn as best you can and pray about it.

Pray for our bishops, priests, deacons and religious brothers and sisters (nuns). Also pray for the laity in offices once held by clergy and religious.

 

[Michael_N_1]

theden:

People who call themselves Catholic but don’t adhere to Church teaching are not truly Catholic. In order to be Catholic, you need to fully submit to the teachings and should understand them as well.

po18guy:

The reason we jump on this is because this has been a real problem within the clergy. It is not a rare or unusual occurrence.

Am I being left to conclude that some of the clergy are “not truly Catholic”?

PbloPicasso:

There is a teaching and I strongly suggest reading the Catachism on your own and possibly taking some orthodox online courses. Lucas Police has a good book out. Also Catholicism for Dummies is good. And if you listen to some of the big names in Catholic conversions you’ll find a better view of what’s going on in the Church.

Who/what is Lucas Police? I can’t find that on Google. And who are “some of the big names in Catholic conversions”? Scott Hahn? I’ve read something by him.

What do you mean about “what’s going on in the Church”? Is there something “going on”? I mean, are you referring to the current state of affairs being bad, or what?

po18guy:

As to the thread title, anything taught by the normal Magisterium of the Church is binding upon all Catholics to accept as revealed truth.

Is there a good way to explain that in a convincing way to someone who doesn’t think so, who let’s say is in RCIA and is apparently being taught otherwise? (Not that I would have much standing to do so, not being Catholic myself. But I believe, to a great enough extent that I see this as a problem.)

 

[theden]

Isn’t the argument from some non-sedevacantists more along the lines of, Vatican II was “pastoral” as opposed to defining anything about the faith?

Michael,

OK, now I understand what you’re saying. Yes, Vatican II (at least my understanding of it) was mainly pastoral. There is nothing drastically new in it.

What Vatican II does is shifts some of the responsibilities to the laity from the religious (priests/nuns, etc). The goal is to evangelize the world and the clergy don’t have access to lots of it. For example, we (the laity) needs to bring Christ to the workplace.

This site is a great example of the outgrowth of Vatican II. People here witnessing their faith is something that wasn’t prevalent pre-Vatican II.

Peace,

Dennis

 

[theden]

So basically the Catechism says that you have to believe in the Catechism. This could be sidestepped by somebody who doesn’t want to believe in it (and still thinks they are Catholic).

Again, this is not my issue. If and when I become Catholic, it will be because I believe in what the Catholic Church teaches (which I understand is written down in the Catechism). I’m just trying to understand what’s going on out there. (To quote myself, “I had the idea that whatever the Church taught must be believed, and was infallible.”)

Michael,

The easiest way to summarize Church teaching is “Love the Lord Your God with all your heart, all your mind, and all your strength, and love your neighbor as yourself.”

All the Church teachings stem from that. I know it sounds like a lot but everything should be done not “because you have to…” but rather “because you love God.”

 

[po18guy]

Am I being left to conclude that some of the clergy are “not truly Catholic”?

A few do not act or teach according to the catechism. They stray, and need correction. In the worse cases, they are reported to their Bishop for investigation.

Is there a good way to explain that in a convincing way to someone who doesn’t think so, who let’s say is in RCIA and is apparently being taught otherwise? (Not that I would have much standing to do so, not being Catholic myself. But I believe, to a great enough extent that I see this as a problem.)

There is, but it will cost a few dollars. It is called Catholicism for Dummies, written by two very sharp priests. Every Catholic home should have a copy. Next to a bible, Ii think this is the best money that a Catholic, especially one in RCIA, can spend

 

[gtrenewed]

So it would be a shame if the institution is passing on help that is flawed.

I guess you just can’t tell about other people, though.

Thank you, I think you’re right. I’m working on that one.

People are flawed but logically I have to believe that if Jesus set up the institution He is protecting it with the Holy Spirit. We see this in scripture. Peter got caught up with the judaizers but the council as a whole was guided as a group by the Holy Spirit.

We are all on a journey of formation.

 

[po18guy]

People are flawed but logically I have to believe that if Jesus set up the institution He is protecting it with the Holy Spirit. We see this in scripture. Peter got caught up with the judaizers but the council as a whole was guided as a group by the Holy Spirit.

We are all on a journey of formation.

None of the Apostles was innocent, all having abandoned Christ at His arrest and torture. Only Peter sought to defend Him, but wrongly with the sword. Jesus sought testimony in His defense, rather than physical conflict. And Peter, as poorly as he behaved with the Judaozers, did not teach error, but acted in error. Paul challenged only Peter’s behavior. This is a foundation-less argument used by some non-Catholics against Peter’s primacy.

As well, it is a parallel to Jesus advising His disciples to obey the teaching of the Pharisees, who held Moses’ seat, but not to do what they did, since they were hypocrites (Exodus 18:13, Matthew 23:2-3).