Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit!
You're currently viewing Catholic CyberForum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our online cyberparish, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.
Join our community!
Messages posted to this board must be polite and free of abuse, personal attacks, blasphemy, racism, threats, harrassment, and crude or sexually-explicit language.
If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Papal Infallibility; and Infallibility of the Church
Topic Started: Monday, 21. January 2008, 23:07 (2,408 Views)
Penfold
Member Avatar

Mairtin
Monday, 20. December 2010, 07:20


"The Church" is not just the Pope or the hierarchy, it is all of us. In terms of authority, of course we require leaders to make decisions where there is not unanimity or consensus and to administer the Church on a day to day basis.
Mairtin is very true and is re-enforced in much of the churches teaching even before Vat II and has been very prominent since. I have to go and sort out my house so will return to address this issue more fully later but I should just say that the only Infallible statements of the Pope alone are those which are made Ex Cathedra and apart from the definition of the Assumption there have been no other examples in recent years, and I am going back at least 500 which in church times is recent. So I am assuming that the objections people here have is to the principle that one person should have the authority to make such a decision without the consent of the people. Well that is something that gets very close to the whole concept of what is meant when we profess our faith in the "One Holy and Apostolic Faith". A worthy debate in its own right but if one accepts this principle, as we profess at least once a week then forgive me for being confused when I then encounter people who say, 'Well we agree with the Apostolic Church but we don't agree with the bit about Peter.'
As you say Mairtin infallibility does boil down to the one central fact that in the end if all else fails the Pope is not bound by the consent of the people, if he in conscience believes that he is being directed by the Holy Spirit to act contrary to the will of Man then he will do so for he is "Peter" and that safeguard is part of what being the Apostolic Church is all about but as you say there is no example of his acting in this way, the document on the Assumption had actually got the accent of the People and the bishops and I would need to read up on the precise reasons why the pope decided to make it Ex Cathedra though I suspect it was to do with his own devotion to Mary that he decided to make the proclamation personally.
I see it as an anchor and it is true that in the current climate the ship that is the church is close hauled and beeting against the wind, it would be a poor sailor who dropped anchor in these conditions but it can be that an anchor can provide a pivot that can enable a ship to turn and it may be that the very thing people complain of is the one thing that in the hands of a skilled fisherman, who knows how to handle his boat, might enable the church to survive the turns that it may have to make in the voyage on which we are embarked. If the church is to reform it will have to make some turns, I take comfort that if needed we have an anchor.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Penfold
Member Avatar

Gerard
Monday, 20. December 2010, 11:24
Just had some related thoughts.

I think when many catholics reach the point where they could write the post I have just written above - they leave the Catholic Church. I have no intention of ever doing so but as my involvement in active Christianity has increased so has my understanding of why such people do leave.

You will be aware of the rise of Pentecostal Christianity throughout the world. It grew exponentially throughout the last century and continues. There are several reasons for this success but one of them is the activation and empowerment of the hoi poloi.

Gerry

Gerry I would hope all Christians are able to question thier faith as honestly as you have done. I see no decent though my replies may be a little hide-bound. I will come back to the issue of how the laity reclaim power but my house is freezing and the man has just arrived with a new Boiler. I think you are right the laity do need ot be empowered and yet who but one in authority can do that unless the laity are to empower themselves and I would agree there is some evidence that this is the will of the Holy Spirit., but then would they be empowering themselves? :tc:
Edited by Penfold, Monday, 20. December 2010, 12:03.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
PJD

Just reading through the last few pages - just to mention for myself how excellent the dialogue. Personally I would keep out of 'infallibility' because it is not subject I have taken a particular interest in. However I would just put my bit in about two principles I found interesting i.e. culture and democracy; so thus in that area I will continue to read on with interest.

PJD
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Penfold
Member Avatar

PS, Mairtin and Gerry I agree some of the evidence for the will of the Holy Spirit wishes to empower the laity is the decline in vocations to the diocesan clergy in the west.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gerard

Wow, agreement breaking out all over :cool2:

While we are at it let me say, Penfold, that I appreciate and admire your desire to come here and talk with us in the frank way we do here.

OK

Now back to some serious debate?

Gerry
"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mairtin
Member Avatar

Penfold2
Monday, 20. December 2010, 11:37
... but I should just say that the only Infallible statements of the Pope alone are those which are made Ex Cathedra and apart from the definition of the Assumption there have been no other examples in recent years ...
From Ordinatio Sacerdotalis:
Quote:
 
... I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church's faithful.


From the CDF's responsum ad dubium, which the Holy Father approved and ordered to be published:
Quote:
 
This teaching requires definitive assent, since, founded on the written Word of God, and from the beginning constantly preserved and applied in the Tradition of the Church, it has been set forth infallibly by the ordinary and universal Magisterium (cf. Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church Lumen Gentium 25, 2).

Seems to me that that is an invocation of infallibility without any formal ex cathedra procedures, what I have previously described as "back door" infallibility.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
Penfold2
Monday, 20. December 2010, 11:45
I think you are right the laity do need ot be empowered and yet who but one in authority can do that unless the laity are to empower themselves
How do we go about that, Penfold? Suggestions would be appreciated.

Nothing is likely to change until the current crop of elderly Catholics are dead. In their day the majority left school at age 15. Some seem to confuse Papal authority to instruct in matters of faith and morals, with authority in all things. There was no shortage of tyrannical religious instruction such as, heard by me in the infant school "Catholics must always obey all priests and nuns, should never disagree with them, because they are all holy".

Some of our older Catholics who are capable of thinking seriously about authoritarianism have left the Church in middle and old age. The majority who remain are the subservient ones who cannot grasp that the priest who acts in persona Christi when offering Mass and administering sacraments, acts on behalf of himself in most situations.

Catholics need to understand that the authority of Infallibility is restricted to Faith and Morals.
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Penfold
Member Avatar

Mairtin
Monday, 20. December 2010, 13:38
Seems to me that that is an invocation of infallibility without any formal ex cathedra procedures, what I have previously described as "back door" infallibility.
It may seem that way but the back door is guarded and if at some future point the church revisited the issue of the ordination of women it may have to contend with the church and I stress the church having declared the prohibition infallible. It was not the action of JP II or any individual Pope. Scholars in the future may revisit the scriptures and reconsider tradition and then the Church will have a decision to make. Infallibility of the church is a separate issue from the infallibility of the Pope. I know some may call that splitting hairs but it is an important distinction. In a sense JP II may have wished to ordain women but he felt constrained by the will of the church as expressed through out centuries of tradition, in a way you could claim this as a victory for the church universal over the individual will of one man, albeit the Pope.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Penfold
Member Avatar

Rose of York
Monday, 20. December 2010, 17:26

Some of our older Catholics who are capable of thinking seriously about authoritarianism have left the Church in middle and old age. The majority who remain are the subservient ones who cannot grasp that the priest who acts in persona Christi when offering Mass and administering sacraments, acts on behalf of himself in most situations.

Catholics need to understand that the authority of Infallibility is restricted to Faith and Morals.
Yes and no, he stands 'In Persona Christi' when administering the sacraments and preaching the homily but in other matters he does not act on his own behalf. and I resent the implication, he acts as an agent of the church.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
Penfold2
Monday, 20. December 2010, 17:44
Yes and no, he stands 'In Persona Christi' when administering the sacraments and preaching the homily but in other matters he does not act on his own behalf. and I resent the implication, he acts as an agent of the church.
Penfold, I mean that we must always recognise the priest is a man, with faults and failings, just as we all have. Yes, even in matters like sending for a plumber to install a new boiler in the presbytery, he is acting administratively as an agent of the church. When he clears the path of snow for the old chap next door he is acting as a good neighbour and is a credit to the church. When he does wrong (lets pretend we are talking about bank robbing, bizzare, or being verbally abusive to somebody) he does not do that on behalf of the church, or in the person of Christ, or in his capacity as priest. He does it because he is a human being, a sinner. Admittedly he brings discredit on the church, because he is a priest.

I am a mother, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. When I help or hurt a neighbour my motherhood is irrelevant.
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Penfold
Member Avatar

Rose of York
Monday, 20. December 2010, 18:13
Admittedly he brings discredit on the church, because he is a priest.

I am a mother, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. When I help or hurt a neighbour my motherhood is irrelevant.
My priesthood is therefore never irrelevant and neither is your experience as a mother for if you were to act disgracefully you would bring shame to your children.

I should also point out that this thread is discussing Papal Infallibility not the nature of priesthood and certainly not my priesthood.
Edited by Penfold, Monday, 20. December 2010, 19:36.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gerard

If we stick to general terms, I think there is relevance vis a vis "culture" "authoritarianism" "clericalism" etc etc which we have been discussing in this thread and which is connected with infallibility.

Quote:
 
he acts as an agent of the church


I would like to explore that but I need to begin by asking - when a lay person lays hands on someone and prays for healing do they do so as an agent of the church?

Gerry
Edited by Gerard, Monday, 20. December 2010, 21:59.
"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
Penfold2
Monday, 20. December 2010, 19:27
I should also point out that this thread is discussing Papal Infallibility not the nature of priesthood and certainly not my priesthood.
Penfold my posts this afternoon were made in response to yours,
Penfold2
Monday, 20. December 2010, 11:45
I think you are right the laity do need ot be empowered and yet who but one in authority can do that unless the laity are to empower themselves


There is a link between the doctrine of infallibility and the culture of clericalism, leading to the view, held by some, that because the Church is infallible, we must accept whatever any priest does or says. Infallibility lies with one man, the Pope, or with the college of bishops, or with all the Church. I have not yet clarified my own view of which of those applies, and that is why I am reading this debate.

The nature, or attitudes of laity concern me. That was my point.

It never entered my head to discuss the nature of your priesthood. There is no need to take any of my comments personally.
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Penfold
Member Avatar

I do not agree that there is a link between an individual priest and the theme of this thread which is Papal Infallibility as for the empowerment of Laity that also is a separate thread for it is not prevented by the doctrine of Papal Infallibility, though I agree it is connected. The teaching of the church is that the Church is infallible but that in extremis the Pope as the head of the Church on Earth can acting upon divine inspiration declare a doctrine on faith and Morals to be Infallible. This is a safeguard against the church falling into the hands of a false prophet. Now some may say we do not need such a safeguard or that the safeguard should be provided by some sort of democratic society. Well I suppose here I must declare my hand and confess that the day the church is run by a democratic society rather than the successor to Peter is the Day I leave. For if Peter does not hold the Keys who did Christ give them to, to whom did he give the final word on earth, a committee or to a trusted servant.


I am sorry but I see no further contribution I can offer to this discussion if it is going to be dragged back into the simple squabble over My PP is useless and my Bishop does not act as I would wish. I am sorry but in faith and morals are not matters for democracy, the world tried that it was called , Sodom and Gomorrah, Caligula's Rome or anyone of 1,000,000s of hedonistic societies both past and present. You ask for scientific experiment and research, learn of what Christ came to change and what he changed was a selfish world in which the I wants and will of the ones who shouted loudest or who could buy the votes gained power and ruled in their own interest.
The BNP have been elected were next in UK democracy, there have to be safeguards and the doctrine of Papal Infallibility provides the anchor the final assurance that Our Faith is rooted in the Teaching of Christ and not the will of Man.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
Penfold2
Monday, 20. December 2010, 23:50
The teaching of the church is that the Church is infallible but that in extremis the Pope as the head of the Church on Earth can acting upon divine inspiration declare a doctrine on faith and Morals to be Infallible. This is a safeguard against the church falling into the hands of a false prophet. Now some may say we do not need such a safeguard or that the safeguard should be provided by some sort of democratic society. Well I suppose here I must declare my hand and confess that the day the church is run by a democratic society rather than the successor to Peter is the Day I leave.
Democracy is, as well all know, rule by a governing body elected by vote. Has such a system for determining the truth about matters of faith and morals been suggested?
Quote:
 
For if Peter does not hold the Keys who did Christ give them to, to whom did he give the final word on earth, a committee or to a trusted servant.
Jesus gave the keys to one man, Peter. Considering that he told all the Apostles at the Last Supper "Do this in commemoration of me" and said to all of them "Whose sins you shall forgive they are forgiven" he must have had a good reason for selecting only one of their number to hold they keys.
Quote:
 


I am sorry but I see no further contribution I can offer to this discussion if it is going to be dragged back into the simple squabble over My PP is useless and my Bishop does not act as I would wish.
I have seen no such comments on this thread.
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · General Catholic Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply