ECT INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE: Common Non-Catholic Misconceptions

[oatmeal]

Already answered---and corrected---in the OP itself. Try again.

Sorry, infallible means infallible.

As was shown by my posts no man, with the exception of Jesus Christ, was infallible.

The reason Jesus Christ was absolutely trustworthy was that Jesus Christ absolutely believed God's written word and the revelation God gave him.

Jesus Christ was not distracted from God's written word by your traditions nor by your popes and bishops. nor would he have been if they had been contemporaries. They would have simply been a subset of the religious elite endeavoring to silence him for teaching God's written word and that which God revealed to him and told him to speak.

 

[Crowns&Laurels]

Straw Man Fallacy.

I think it's a good observation to be made. They didn't declare infallibility until after the fact of being the grand western church. Rome just got carried away with itself, like it did before, and the east split from them because of it.

 

[resodko]

The Catholic Church’s teaching on papal infallibility is one which is generally misunderstood by those outside the Church. In particular, Fundamentalists and other "Bible Christians" often confuse the charism [gift] of papal "infallibility" with "impeccability." They imagine Catholics believe the pope cannot sin. Others, who avoid this elementary blunder, think the pope relies on some sort of amulet or magical incantation when an infallible definition is due.

Given these common misapprehensions regarding the basic tenets of papal infallibility, it is necessary to explain exactly what infallibility is not. Infallibility is not the absence of sin. Nor is it a charism that belongs only to the pope. Indeed, infallibility also belongs to the body of bishops as a whole, when, in doctrinal unity with the pope, they solemnly teach a doctrine as true. We have this from Jesus himself, who promised the apostles and their successors the bishops, the magisterium of the Church: "He who hears you hears me" (Luke 10:16), and "Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven" (Matt. 18:18)...

Since Christ said the gates of hell would not prevail against his Church (Matt. 16:18b), this means that his Church can never pass out of existence. But if the Church ever apostasized by teaching heresy, then it would cease to exist; because it would cease to be Jesus’ Church. Thus the Church cannot teach heresy, meaning that anything it solemnly defines for the faithful to believe is true. This same reality is reflected in the Apostle Paul’s statement that the Church is "the pillar and foundation of the truth" (1 Tim. 3:15). If the Church is the foundation of religious truth in this world, then it is God’s own spokesman. As Christ told his disciples: "He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me" (Luke 10:16).

http://www.catholic.com/tracts/papal-infallibility​

you explain what "infallibility" is not

if you're not going to use a standard dictionary definition, tell us what you think "infallibility" is

 

[musterion]

you explain what "infallibilty" is not

if you're not going to use a standard dictionary definition, tell us what you think "infallibility" is

Their real definition of infallible is "whatever Rome says."

 

[0scar]

The Catholic Church’s teaching on papal infallibility is one which is generally misunderstood by those outside the Church. In particular, Fundamentalists and other "Bible Christians" often confuse the charism [gift] of papal "infallibility" with "impeccability." They imagine Catholics believe the pope cannot sin. Others, who avoid this elementary blunder, think the pope relies on some sort of amulet or magical incantation when an infallible definition is due.

Given these common misapprehensions regarding the basic tenets of papal infallibility, it is necessary to explain exactly what infallibility is not. Infallibility is not the absence of sin. Nor is it a charism that belongs only to the pope. Indeed, infallibility also belongs to the body of bishops as a whole, when, in doctrinal unity with the pope, they solemnly teach a doctrine as true. We have this from Jesus himself, who promised the apostles and their successors the bishops, the magisterium of the Church: "He who hears you hears me" (Luke 10:16), and "Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven" (Matt. 18:18)...

Since Christ said the gates of hell would not prevail against his Church (Matt. 16:18b), this means that his Church can never pass out of existence. But if the Church ever apostasized by teaching heresy, then it would cease to exist; because it would cease to be Jesus’ Church. Thus the Church cannot teach heresy, meaning that anything it solemnly defines for the faithful to believe is true. This same reality is reflected in the Apostle Paul’s statement that the Church is "the pillar and foundation of the truth" (1 Tim. 3:15). If the Church is the foundation of religious truth in this world, then it is God’s own spokesman. As Christ told his disciples: "He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me" (Luke 10:16).

http://www.catholic.com/tracts/papal-infallibility​

the Church do teach heresies and lies. one simple example is the heresy of the Hypostatic Union

 

[Cruciform]

Sorry, infallible means infallible. As was shown by my posts no man, with the exception of Jesus Christ, was infallible.

You're committing the exact error that is corrected in the OP itself. Come back when you've properly educated yourself.

 

[Cruciform]

I think it's a good observation to be made.

Already answered.

 

[resodko]

Already answered.

apparently not very well

 

[Cruciform]

you explain what "infallibility" is not. if you're not going to use a standard dictionary definition, tell us what you think "infallibility" is

CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH:

INFALLIBILITY: The gift of the Holy Spirit to the Church whereby the pastors of the Church---the pope and bishops in union with him---can definitively proclaim a doctrine of faith or morals for the belief of the faithful (Glossary).​

For more info, see the Catechism, paragraph 891.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[Cruciform]

apparently not very well

Post your proof.

 

[resodko]

c&l doesn't understand/accept it

 

[Cruciform]

Their real definition of infallible is "whatever Rome says."

Rather, it's "whatever Christ's one historic Church teaches" (cf. Mt. 28:18-20; Lk. 10:16; Ac. 16:4; 2 Thess. 3:4; 1 Tim. 3:15; 1 Jn. 4:6).

 

[Cruciform]

c&l doesn't understand/accept it

It's entirely up to him. I can explain it to him, but I can't understand/accept it for him.

 

[resodko]

I can explain it to him....

apparently not very well

 

[Cruciform]

"This message is hidden because resodko is on your ignore list."

 

[oatmeal]

Rather, it's "whatever Christ's one historic Church teaches" (cf. Mt. 28:18-20; Lk. 10:16; Ac. 16:4; 2 Thess. 3:4; 1 Tim. 3:15; 1 Jn. 4:6).

Historical or not, your denomination has long ago forsaken practicing scripture.

It does not have the fruits of righteousness.

Nor does your system produce people who have learned to generate the fruit of the spirit in their lives.

Historically, Lenin and communism and its mass murderers are the successors of the Russian czars and royalty.

History alone, if actually accurate, does not commend you to anyone seeking first the kingdom of God and His righteousness.

Matthew 6:33 and Colossians 3:1-2

Note that Matthew 6:33 states the kingdom of God and whose righteousness? My righteousness? your righteousness? no, God's righteousness.

My self righteousness and your self righteousness is not the objective nor the motive, nor the modus operandi, living God's righteousness is the key to successful living to please God.

The pope needs Jesus Christ as lord and savior as much as any man, woman or child, he is not above any let alone exempt

 

[Cruciform]

Historical or not, your denomination has long ago forsaken practicing scripture.

Once again, oats confuses his preferred interpretations of Scripture with "Scripture" itself. Big difference there.

The rest of his post is nothing more than the fallible traditions he has been taught by his chosen recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[Crowns&Laurels]

I think Roman Catholics are victims of Stockholm's Syndrome- hostages defending their capturer.

Because the Church has always, from it's very birth, chastised it's laity to believe in her alleged supremacy. And today, it's become so formal and barren that it's only convenience is in the mere idea of it.

 

[Cruciform]

I think Roman Catholics are victims of Stockholm's Syndrome- hostages defending their capturer. Because the Church has always, from it's very birth, chastised it's laity to believe in her alleged supremacy. And today, it's become so formal and barren that it's only convenience is in the mere idea of it.

Yet again, the fallible assumptions and opinions that you have derived from your chosen recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect are noted.

 

[0scar]

CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH:

INFALLIBILITY: The gift of the Holy Spirit to the Church whereby the pastors of the Church---the pope and bishops in union with him---can definitively proclaim a doctrine of faith or morals for the belief of the faithful (Glossary).​

For more info, see the Catechism, paragraph 891.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

do this exercise:
in the year "xxxx" the Church ---the pope and bishops in union with him--- proclaim a doctrine of faith on the issue "X".
conclusion:
A = Before year xxxx the Church was wrong conserning the issue "X".
B = The Church was right but now it is wrong.

Example:
the Purgatory. before the Churcu teaches that Purgatory did exist, now teach that does not exist.
the Earth is flat and center of the creation
etc.