Why are there councils such as the Council of Nicea for example if the bishop of Rome can just say something and that's it?

Status
Not open for further replies.
To combat heresy and make sure the truth is being taught, not changed somehow by opinion or diluted.
 
The Pope isn’t omniscient, nor is he ensured to know all truths on faith and morals off the top of his head. He is not fed lines by God. The charism of papal infallibility only ensures that he does not teach error when certain conditions are met, for example him formally exercising his magisterial teaching authority as head of all the church (this is not the language laid out by Vatican I and Vatican II, mind).

Since the Pope doesn’t have all knowledge, but is merely prevented from speaking errors in certain circumstances, discussion among the successors to the apostles of right doctrine can certainly be very useful, and the Church can also exercise its magisterial authority from a council, as well, again given certain conditions.
 
Last edited:
Just one more thought, in addition to the above. In times of great stress on the Church and/or political division, it can sometimes be more prudent and productive to have a council. Or it might be helpful to get that sense of unity in coming together and agreeing. I don’t say that to override my previous comment, but just something to also throw into the mix.
 
Last edited:
I would think because those Bishops are “in the world” The Pope, for all his God-given wisdom, may not understand the nuance of what is going on in the day to day lives of people.

No matter what, it is good to seek the (name removed by moderator)ut of those who may know more than you. It is up to the Pope how to decide how to act on it. The council could be unanimously against an idea, but if God leads the Pope to support it, he will.
 
Last edited:
What ecumenical councils like the Council of Nicea say are norms of faith.

A bishop doesn’t have the right to contradict them. Pope Benedict once said that every month he removed a bishop from his position. But dealing with such a bishop hasn’t always been so easy. In earlier centuries there have been great battles in Catholicism involving bishops that reject the teaching of Church ecumenical councils, and it took many years to put an end to the views they espoused.

In view of such things, it really wouldn’t be accurate to say that a bishop can simply say something contradicting an ecumenical council and that’s it. In the end, such a bishop’s teaching will be deceased.
 
For a few reasons:
  1. Infallibility doesn’t meant the Pope is guaranteed to know everything off the top of his head. He can simply not provide an answer.
  2. Infallibility doesn’t mean the Pope knows the best way to express a particular truth.
  3. The Pope could proclaim something that is true but too vague and the Bishops would just quibble over its meaning. Councils ensure broad consensus of opinion on wording.
 
Last edited:
mdgspencer said:
What ecumenical councils like the Council of Nicea say are norms of faith.

A bishop doesn’t have the right to contradict them. Pope Benedict once said that every month he removed a bishop from his position. But dealing with such a bishop hasn’t always been so easy. In earlier centuries there have been great battles in Catholicism involving bishops that reject the teaching of Church ecumenical councils, and it took many years to put an end to the views they espoused.

In view of such things, it really wouldn’t be accurate to say that a bishop can simply say something contradicting an ecumenical council and that’s it. In the end, such a bishop’s teaching will be deceased.
Click to expand...
Well, up until Vatican II it was still allowable for civil authorities to choose which men became bishops in some places. So getting rid of bishops carried political clout, too.
 
The very first council is in the Bible, and St. Paul admonished St. Peter for wanting to impose Judaism onto new converts first. The final decision was St. Peter’s, the Pope. The Holy Spirit led that council.
 
Because this is how Jesus set His Church up. Read Acts 15. Peter was prime, and silenced the assembly (remember that James was Bishop of Jerusalem), but the entire council took the matter of circumcision up.
 
Even though they are the head of their household, God prefers that husbands not lord their authority over their wives but rather that they “love [their] wives, and … not be harsh with them” (Colossians 3:19), that they “live considerately with [their] wives.” (1 Peter 3:7a) Similarly, even though they are the temporal head of the Church, God prefers that his pope not lord his authority over the other bishops:
25 But Jesus called them to him and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great men exercise authority over them. 26 It shall not be so among you; but whoever would be great among you must be your servant, 27 and whoever would be first among you must be your slave; 28 even as the Son of man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” (Matthew 20:25-28)
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top