The Issue Of Infallibility

[Guest Shadyrest]

[quote name='sixpence' timestamp='1288031479' post='2182417']
Could you please provide a link and/or context for the Vat II quotes.


Thanks
[/quote]



I'm happy to supply the following, but like I told you before.....you obviously have no desire to do any research for yourself, but prefer to let others do it for you. The following link could have popped up on your screen in 5 seconds flat after putting the words I provided in Google. But I'm glad to do it so as to remind you that on Judgment Day, we will each be judged individually, and I get the strong impression you think that you'll be judged merely by having subsumed your beliefs under the Roman hierarchy, content not to check anything out, and then convincing yourself that all will be well.

Anyway, scroll to chapter 3....(18b).



[color="#2A2A2A"][font="Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif"][size="2"][url="http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html"]http://www.vatican.v...gentium_en.html[/url][/size][/font][/color]
[font="Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif"][size="3"][color="#2A2A2A"] [/color][/size][/font]

Edited October 25, 2010 by Shadyrest

[Winchester]

[quote name='Shadyrest' timestamp='1288040456' post='2182483']
Then I would suggest you go try hanging yourself and then come back and tell us if positioning your body a few feet off the ground made the attempt successful.

Anyone knows, it would be a complete failure.[/quote]
Spoiler to hide details for those who wish not to see.
[spoiler]So how many hangings have you seen?

I assure you it's possible to use one's body weight with legs relaxed and thereby hang yourself.

The proper idea of hanging is to break one's neck so that it is quick. When that doesn't work, it's death by strangulation if you're unlucky and your arteries are not compressed.
[/spoiler]


[quote]You've obviously lost this argument,[/quote]
You spoke too soon, cavalier.

[quote] so one wonders why you even blitz in with a comment of no value. I assume you just like to hear yourself talk.
[/quote]
I don't talk as I type. All I hear is clicking. I do like the sound of clicking.

[sixpence]

You seem to be harping on the idea that none of us have any idea why we do or believe anything, aside from someone (our Family, the Pope, whoever) telling us to....

why is that? I think that may be true of some members of every religion, including yours; however, it is rather insulting that you generalize in this fashion.

Your probable response (to save time): "Because the "someone" leading us to Jesus Christ is the Holy Spirit and the someone leading you is the Pope; and I know this because [b]I [/b]am led by the Holy Spirit and [b]I [/b]don't agree with the Pope"
condensed: I assume that I (Shady) and the Pope cannot Both be guided by the Holy Spirit; and since I am so AWESOME, I must be correct automatically"

my response (to save time): WHAT????

lol

well I have to go eat a bunch of sushi tonight!! TTYL!

Peace

[sixpence]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1288040919' post='2182486']

I don't talk as I type. All I hear is clicking. I do like the sound of clicking.
[/quote]

I personally prefer the sound of sharp scissors....

[Winchester]

Shady,

You get some points for making me be all serious and "I know this because." I totally look like that face from the evolution of a poster comic that was running around. I couldn't find it, but it's really funny. You would have lol'd at me getting all superior for reals. Because I did for a minute there.

[mommas_boy]

Listen, to detractors of papal infallibility -- you guys don't give Christ that much credit. So, Jesus leaves the earth with his apostles as his teachers. And wouldn't you know it, it didn't take long for disagreements about theology to crop up. Let's see, the Council of Jerusalem was in and around year 50; we know at least that Peter and Paul were alive at the time. The purpose of the Council was to settle disagreements that had cropped up since Jesus had left. Then, there were about 21 more (based on my quick cursory research). That's 21 times where there were disagreements on the matters of faith and morals that were all based on the same Scripture.

Heck, we have precisely HOW MANY protestant churches nowadays, each one preaching something different? But don't they all have the same Scripture? How is this possible? Shouldn't we all believe the same thing? I mean, we have the SAME SCRIPTURE, the source of our beliefs is the same, and therefore the beliefs themselves should all be the same, right?

Jesus understood that these disagreements were going to crop up, and he also understood that the only way to settle those coming disagreements was to have one office to keep it all together. Otherwise, the Church would fracture. And wouldn't you know it, as soon as people disregarded the one office that Jesus Christ established in Peter -- that is PRECISELY when the Church began to fracture.

I argue for the Infallibility of the Pope and his bishops in communion with him on the grounds of necessity. Christ foretold the schisms when he prayed, "May they all be one as we are one". He established the office of Pope in order to counteract fracture. And as soon as people disregarded that office is precisely when schism occurred. I argue for it from necessity, which history has demonstrated time and time again.

[Guest Shadyrest]

[quote name='sixpence' timestamp='1288039668' post='2182477']
Lol nice description! Seems a little contrived...but what can I say...
Why did I not "look this up"?

1. It was not that important to me, it was just a little something I wondered when I was 10 BEFORE I REALIZED I WAS NOT A LITERALIST

2. Are you saying that I should trust these "commentaries"??? Are they [u][i]INFALLIBLE[/i][/u]???
If not they must be garbage right?
[/quote]



You said in a previous post that I seemed to think every Catholic just believes what they do because one person told them something and that was that. Then you wondered why this was so. I already answered that question in detail, which shows you have ears, but don't hear. You had asked

[color="#595959"][font="arial, verdana, sans-serif"][size="4"]"PS~ It would be awesome if you could give a good answer... I had wondered this since I noticed it when I was about 10... "[/size][/font][/color]
[color="#595959"][font="arial, verdana, sans-serif"][size="4"]
I gave you a completely sane and rational answer, but instead of sticking with the sane explanation, you prefer to wear a straight-jacket and revert to the only other explanation I can think of; namely, that the Bible contains a contradictory account of Judas' death and the Holy Spirit is a complete failure. I'm simply astonished.[/size][/font][/color]
[font="arial, verdana, sans-serif"][size="5"][color="#595959"] [/color][/size][/font]
[color="#595959"][font="arial, verdana, sans-serif"][size="4"]You don't understand however, different ways of saying things and stressing certain aspects of a story, does [i]not [/i]mean that an account is contradictory, as any witness to a car wreck will perhaps phrase and emphasize one aspect of the incident, while another will articulate it in another fashion. Face it....you wouldn't even believe the 4 gospels if you saw that they were [i]exactly the same in every detail, yet claimed to be written by [u]different[/u] people. [/i]That being so, the fact that you still find fault, even when the accounts are in perfect symmetry based on the common sense reason I furnished, is quite insane. And being a "literalist" has nothing to do with the straight-foward accounts as they are written and are easily harmonized, as the Holy Spirit who inspired them would agree. More, since there never has been an infallible person who walked this earth, save One, commentaries are under no compulsion to be infallible, nor do they need to be.....to be correct.


[/size][/font][/color]

[Winchester]

[quote name='Shadyrest' timestamp='1288042840' post='2182497']
...I already answered that question in detail, which shows you have ears...
[/quote]
Do you hear our posts?

[Guest Shadyrest]

[quote name='mommas_boy' timestamp='1288042472' post='2182494']
Listen, to detractors of papal infallibility -- you guys don't give Christ that much credit. So, Jesus leaves the earth with his apostles as his teachers. And wouldn't you know it, it didn't take long for disagreements about theology to crop up. Let's see, the Council of Jerusalem was in and around year 50; we know at least that Peter and Paul were alive at the time. The purpose of the Council was to settle disagreements that had cropped up since Jesus had left. Then, there were about 21 more (based on my quick cursory research). That's 21 times where there were disagreements on the matters of faith and morals that were all based on the same Scripture.

Heck, we have precisely HOW MANY protestant churches nowadays, each one preaching something different? But don't they all have the same Scripture? How is this possible? Shouldn't we all believe the same thing? I mean, we have the SAME SCRIPTURE, the source of our beliefs is the same, and therefore the beliefs themselves should all be the same, right?

Jesus understood that these disagreements were going to crop up, and he also understood that the only way to settle those coming disagreements was to have one office to keep it all together. Otherwise, the Church would fracture. And wouldn't you know it, as soon as people disregarded the one office that Jesus Christ established in Peter -- that is PRECISELY when the Church began to fracture.

I argue for the Infallibility of the Pope and his bishops in communion with him on the grounds of necessity. Christ foretold the schisms when he prayed, "May they all be one as we are one". He established the office of Pope in order to counteract fracture. And as soon as people disregarded that office is precisely when schism occurred. I argue for it from necessity, which history has demonstrated time and time again.
[/quote]


I'll answer your question in detail as time permits. But since you think that the gift of infallibility was given to the Roman hierarchy, detractors such as myself have a very simple question:

[i]Kindly tell us how many times the Magisterium has spoken infallibly.[/i]
[i]
[/i]
To save you a little trouble, I have already thoroughly and exhaustively researched that question, and I've discovered that the Roman Church cannot answer it, and all Catholic apologists have different answers. That is a fact.

Having established the non-answer to the question being asked, doesn't it seem strange to you that a religious entity that claims to have a gift, but cannot tell us how many times they have used it, should have the nerve to be taken seriously? All non-catholics who have studied the issue agree. And if, per chance, you do not, then please explain why it isn't necessary to know how many times your church has spoken infallibly, but rather, it is only important that we believe she is, based on her "infallible" say-so; and also explain how this pronouncement shouldn't classify Catholicism in any way with cults like Jim Jones, who simply told his followers to drink the poisoned fruit juice---or be shot trying to run away if refusing to do so.

[Winchester]

[quote name='Shadyrest' timestamp='1288044139' post='2182501']
I'll answer your question in detail as time permits. But since you think that the gift of infallibility was given to the Roman hierarchy, detractors such as myself have a very simple question:

[i]Kindly tell us how many times the [s]Magisterium[/s] pope has spoken [s]infallibly[/s] Ex Cathedra.[/i]
[i]
[/i]
[/quote]
Fxd


[quote][s]To save you a little trouble, I have already thoroughly and exhaustively researched that question, and I've discovered that the Roman Church cannot answer it, and all Catholic apologists have different answers. That is a fact.

Having established the non-answer to the question being asked, doesn't it seem strange to you that a religious entity that claims to have a gift, but cannot tell us how many times they have used it, should have the nerve to be taken seriously? All non-catholics who have studied the issue agree. And if, per chance, you do not, then please explain why it isn't necessary to know how many times your church has spoken infallibly, but rather, it is only important that we believe she is, based on her "infallible" say-so; and also explain how this pronouncement shouldn't classify Catholicism in any way with cults like Jim Jones, who simply told his followers to drink the poisoned fruit juice---or be shot trying to run away if refusing to do so.[/s]
[/quote]
Dismissed.

You must wait for the answer, even if you think you know it (and even when it's based upon poor wording).

Also, you cannot claim to thoroughly and exhaustively have researched the answer when it's obvious you spend all your time either on the interwebs or [s]eating your weight in Snickers[/s](apologies. I had you confused with Socrates, there) wrestling bears.

Edited October 25, 2010 by Winchester

[mortify]

If you believe the Bible is inspired by God and protected infallibly, you must accept that the Church that defined what books make up the Bible and transmitted it to our own time must also be inspired and protected from error.

[MissScripture]

[quote name='Shadyrest' timestamp='1288040905' post='2182485']
I'm happy to supply the following, but like I told you before.....you obviously have no desire to do any research for yourself, but prefer to let others do it for you. The following link could have popped up on your screen in 5 seconds flat after putting the words I provided in Google. But I'm glad to do it so as to remind you that on Judgment Day, we will each be judged individually, and I get the strong impression you think that you'll be judged merely by having subsumed your beliefs under the Roman hierarchy, content not to check anything out, and then convincing yourself that all will be well.

Anyway, scroll to chapter 3....(18b).



[color="#2A2A2A"][font="Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif"][size="2"][url="http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html"]http://www.vatican.v...gentium_en.html[/url][/size][/font][/color]
[font="Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif"][size="3"][color="#2A2A2A"] [/color][/size][/font]
[/quote]
Why should SHE have to look it up when you're the one using it to make your point? She shouldn't have to do YOUR research for you!


[quote name='Shadyrest' timestamp='1288042840' post='2182497']
You said in a previous post that I seemed to think every Catholic just believes what they do because one person told them something and that was that. Then you wondered why this was so. I already answered that question in detail, which shows you have ears, but don't hear. You had asked

[color="#595959"][font="arial, verdana, sans-serif"][size="4"]"PS~ It would be awesome if you could give a good answer... I had wondered this since I noticed it when I was about 10... "[/size][/font][/color]
[color="#595959"][font="arial, verdana, sans-serif"][size="4"]
I gave you a completely sane and rational answer, but instead of sticking with the sane explanation, you prefer to wear a straight-jacket and revert to the only other explanation I can think of; namely, that the Bible contains a contradictory account of Judas' death and the Holy Spirit is a complete failure. I'm simply astonished.[/size][/font][/color]
[font="arial, verdana, sans-serif"][size="5"][color="#595959"] [/color][/size][/font]
[color="#595959"][font="arial, verdana, sans-serif"][size="4"]You don't understand however, different ways of saying things and stressing certain aspects of a story, does [i]not [/i]mean that an account is contradictory, as any witness to a car wreck will perhaps phrase and emphasize one aspect of the incident, while another will articulate it in another fashion. Face it....you wouldn't even believe the 4 gospels if you saw that they were [i]exactly the same in every detail, yet claimed to be written by [u]different[/u] people. [/i]That being so, the fact that you still find fault, even when the accounts are in perfect symmetry based on the common sense reason I furnished, is quite insane. And being a "literalist" has nothing to do with the straight-foward accounts as they are written and are easily harmonized, as the Holy Spirit who inspired them would agree. More, since there never has been an infallible person who walked this earth, save One, commentaries are under no compulsion to be infallible, nor do they need to be.....to be correct.


[/size][/font][/color]
[/quote]
But then how do we know Bible commentaries are correct? Why should we listen to one over another? There are many commentaries and they don't all match, so which ones are correct? So, if a Pope were to write the commentaries in the Bible, would we be allowed to listen to those, and just not any other words from the Pope?

Edited October 26, 2010 by MissScripture

[Guest Shadyrest]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1288044525' post='2182503']
[color="#595959"][font="arial, verdana, sans-serif"][size="2"][i]Kindly tell us how many times the Magisterium pope has spoken infallibly Ex Cathedra.[/i][/size][/font][/color]



[/quote]


I'm simply amazed at the gross ignorance of Catholic doctrine even on a Catholic web board. Winchester quotes me above and crosses out the word "magisterium" (in the original which did not duplicate here) implicating me with error, in that I should have used the word "Pope" instead. The catechism says, on the other hand, that, "[i]The task of interpreting the word of God authentically has been entrusted soley to the Magisterium of the Church, [b]that is, to the Pope and to the bishops in communion with him" [/b](#100).[/i]
[i]
[/i]
It's clear then that this poster cannot be trusted, as it's obvious he's from a secret splinter group that abhors official church teaching.
[i]
[/i]
[i]
[/i]

[kafka]

[quote name='Shadyrest' timestamp='1288061678' post='2182581']
[i]
[/i]
It's clear then that this poster cannot be trusted, as it's obvious he's from a secret splinter group that abhors official church teaching.
[i]
[/i]
[i]
[/i]
[/quote]
Yes! I always knew he was a spy!

[Guest Shadyrest]

[quote name='mortify' timestamp='1288048347' post='2182512']
If you believe the Bible is inspired by God and protected infallibly, you must accept that the Church that defined what books make up the Bible and transmitted it to our own time must also be inspired and protected from error.
[/quote]

No I do not have to believe that those who compiled the Bible were infallible. That's completely nonsensical and unbiblical. "To the Jews were committed the very "oracles of God" (Roms 3:2). But [i]were they infallible? [/i]Not in the least.

[MissScripture]

[quote name='Shadyrest' timestamp='1288062000' post='2182583']
No I do not have to believe that those who compiled the Bible were infallible. That's completely nonsensical and unbiblical. "To the Jews were committed the very "oracles of God" (Roms 3:2). But [i]were they infallible? [/i]Not in the least.
[/quote]
So, then you're saying they coud have made mistakes?

[Jaime]

[quote name='Shadyrest' timestamp='1288061678' post='2182581']
I'm simply amazed at the gross ignorance of Catholic doctrine even on a Catholic web board. Winchester quotes me above and crosses out the word "magisterium" (in the original which did not duplicate here) implicating me with error, in that I should have used the word "Pope" instead. The catechism says, on the other hand, that, "[i]The task of interpreting the word of God authentically has been entrusted soley to the Magisterium of the Church, [b]that is, to the Pope and to the bishops in communion with him" [/b](#100).[/i]
[i]
[/i]
It's clear then that this poster cannot be trusted, as it's obvious he's from a secret splinter group that abhors official church teaching.
[i]
[/i]
[i]
[/i]
[/quote]

I'm simply amazed at the irony of that statement. The pope is the only one who can speak Ex Cathedra. Don't believe me? look up the latin translation

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='Shadyrest' timestamp='1288026721' post='2182359']
For what reason do you consider the thoughts and writings of Paul and the evangelists (imperfect human beings, guided by the Holy Spirit), so different from the thoughts and writings of today's Church leaders (imperfect human beings, guided by the Holy Spirit)?

Answer: The gospel writers were infallibly guided by the Holy Spirit, and Roman Catholic Church leaders are [i]not, that's why. [/i][/quote]

Just to throw a little clarification in this, the Holy Spirit's protection of infallibility is limited to the bounds of Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition. In other words, Pope Benedict XVI is less a sinner (and no more infallible) than St. Paul or St. Peter... only in the relatively rare instances (even for St. Paul) that any of these men might make a statement that the Holy Spirit protected from error, that protection extends only to the Word and not to the man.

[quote name='Shadyrest' timestamp='1288026721' post='2182359']
So to answer your question, all non-Catholics utterly and emphatically deny that such statements came from the mind of God, which in essence says that all Christians who love Christ, but who are not in subjection to the Roman Pontiff, are headed for hell.[/quote]

On non-Catholic Christian communities...
CCC 818 "However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."

I had a tough time with understanding how the Catholic Church could say all people must be subject to the Pope for their salvation. The concept is completely foreign to an Evangelical's worldview. The key is that in order for the Catholic Church to believe that there is any possibility of salvation for Protestants and other believers in God, we must first believe that all salvation comes from Christ through His Bride, the Church. See, the marriage of Christ and Church is a literal reality. He literally gives His Body to the Church in Holy Communion: this is a true Marriage. Thus, those who consciously submit to the earthly head of Christ's Church receive much grace, but this extends to even to those who consciously reject the Pope's authority while accepting some Truths which the Pope is charged with guarding and teaching. This isn't to say that every Christian or every sincere seeker of Truth is going to Heaven, but the Catholic Church's mission in the world is to pray and sacrifice for the salvation of those who are against us. To say that one's salvation depends upon their submission to the Pope is to say that salvation depends upon their submission to God and Truth, and God's grace can work that in ways none of us knows.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Shadyrest' timestamp='1288062000' post='2182583']
No I do not have to believe that those who compiled the Bible were infallible. That's completely nonsensical and unbiblical. "To the Jews were committed the very "oracles of God" (Roms 3:2). But [i]were they infallible? [/i]Not in the least.
[/quote]

Then you deny that the Bible is the infallible written word of God?

[sixpence]

this is a fun thread :dance:goodnight all