The Pope can make errors, even in His noninfallible teachings. Never to the point of heresy though, and you will never be guilty in following him if you know no better. Neither can he gravely damage the church by any judgements of discipli ne. One might disagree though
Who is the Church?
I always believed that if the anyone in authority, be that person a Pope or Bishop, if when we are filled with the Holy Spirit, we would place our trust in God to know if what those in authority are teaching us are the works of God or not. God will reveal the truth to us.
Basically if you If you are following something that you feels wrong, place your trust in God to show you the truth… it will always feel wrong. even if everyone else in the world is telling you its okay, God will continue telling you it’s wrong.
Bride of Christ.
Well there are two problems with this;
- Devil can try tricking us too.
- Our emotions or perceptions may be misled easily.
But as Apostle Paul says, Church is pillar and foundation of Truth. Our Lord prayed for Peter’s Faith to not fail. Apostles led communities and left successors with their authority.
It may not be God who is telling you that. It may be your feeling. Private revelation is never made equal to Public Revelation in the Church. Why? Because individuals are not pillar and foundation of Truth, but Assembly (Literal meaning of “Church”) is. Because Holy Spirit is with us all but guides Church as a whole in Faith. We trust in our Lord, so why not trust the Bride He appointed to guide us?
Man named Aleister Crowley (his real name being Edward Alexander Crowley IIRC) once believed that supernatural entity told him about new religion called Thelema and new “gods” who were personal mostly. He practiced the occult, sex magic and several other things. He hated Christian God from depth of his heart. He was convinced about his beliefs. He even got some things right but ultimately failed to grasp essence of God and His love. His feelings led him there. What puts our feelings above his? He was wrong and we can be too.
Who is the Bride of Christ?
You saying God can not protect my prayers to Him? That when I pray Lod help me to follow your will and not my own, God will let me follow the devil?
Or they may lead you directly to God. Some emotions have to play a part in our relationship with God… we are not robots.
There has to be something, something deep inside you, yelling at you that you are following God and not the devil.
Something that’s telling you going to a Cathilic church is right… Listening to this Pope is tight… Reading the words of this priest is right… Saying this prayer is right… that if your Pope tells you obey the (Nazi) government, it’s okay to kill the Jews just because they’re Jews, God will forgive you. Then justifies it by saying after all they killed Jesus… you wont believe that Pope, because the Holy Spirit with-in you be telling you God’s will. God will be telling no, that’s wrong. You have to know that.
The Church. You asked who Church is.
God will let us follow our own will… whether we choose Him or Devil. To not get deceived is our duty. God will assist us but won’t do everything for us. Otherwise people wouldn’t ever get to Hell.
Of course. But emotions are just indicators, they do not really show what is good and evil. They are just emotions in the end.
That doesn’t have to happen. Wisdom and intelligence come from God and it was given to us to be used. We have responsibility. We aren’t just tools for God, are we? It is akin to not going to doctor because “God will heal me”… God gave us intelligence to discover medicine so that we may heal each other.
We can’t be too sure about our own feelings. There is nothing Church teaches contrary to that, and neither does Scripture. God helps us through things different than emotions (emotions may apply but we should discern those as I have already stated).
Your description is a great way to describe papal infallibility. It is the understanding that best flows from the Fathers… and it’s probably the only way to present papal infallibility in a way that might at least bring the Eastern Orthodox “to the table”. The Catholic Church is infallible. The Church of Rome, which holds primacy among all the Churches of God, is the visible sign of unity and communion for the whole Church, and thus it’s bishop must participate in the infallibility of the Church in a unique and special way.
saying the Church is the Bride of Christ is not saying who the Church is, who is the Bride of Christ… who are you listening too, who are you following?
Who are am I placing my faith in, that I know what they are telling me is God’s truth, who are you talking about?
Who is the Church telling me the Pope standing before me should be obeyed?
Didn’t say He would do it for us, I said He will show us, guide us… with the power of the Holy Spirit.
If it is my duty not to be deceived, then it is my duty to pray to God every day of my life to fill me with the Holy Spirit so God will help me not be deceived. If I do, then why would God allow me to be deceived?
When I pray lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil why would God allow us to be lead by the evil?
would that be a bad thing?
I know, the Holy Spirit shows you what is good and evil. Your emotions/feeling are a part of building your relationship with God… the Holy Spirit is the major part that shows you God’s will.
Meaning, when I want to stay in bed on my one day off after working 9 days straight, the Holy Spirit says girl get up and get to church, you need to thank God you have a job… following God’s will and not my own.
That’s what I said.
Yeah if you want to He will allow it. Adam was deceived despite never sining before. Apostle Peter was deceived despite being so determined.
Because there is a possibility we pray one way and act another. It is more of a reality of human mind. If you are not one of people who struggle with this I commend you, but many do.
It isn’t true and wasn’t done by God. God is absolutely good. If God is absolutely good and hasn’t done that, we can be sure it is not a good thing.
Some, not all. We need to discern. That is my point and we seem to agree at that.
Church I believe to be One True Church. We know our Lord and Saviour established Church with these attributes:
- He prayed that we are one. Church is visibly united and One.
- He prayed for Peter’s Faith to strengthen his brethren when he is converted. Church holds to Apostolic Teaching and is united through obedience to Apostles (and their successors).
- He revealed to Paul that Church is foundation and pillar of Truth. We know Holy Spirit guides the Church. Church holds True Faith inherited from Apostles.
- He sent Church to entire world and to all nations. Church is universal in character.
- He told us to commemorate Him by celebrating Eucharist. Church does that daily.
- He told us that gates of Hell shall not prevail against the Church and that He will be with us forever. He who is Holy therefore makes His Bride (as revealed to Apostle John) Holy and Immaculate.
- Only that which is Holy enters the Heaven. Church is Ark of Salvation and those in Heaven belong to Her as well. That is our ultimate goal and it pleases God. Church perfectly utilizes Sacrifice of our Lord which is sufficient by itself and adds to it our personal sacrifices, blood of Martyrs and confessions of Saints. Those mean much to God and Church is constantly sanctified through them as She is by Lord’s Sacrifice.
[quote=“twf, post:26, topic:612105, full:true”]. It is the understanding that best flows from the Fathers… and it’s probably the only way to present papal infallibility in a way that might at least bring the Eastern Orthodox “to the table”. The Catholic Church is infallible. The Church of Rome, which holds primacy among all the Churches of God, is the visible sign of unity and communion for the whole Church, and thus it’s bishop must participate in the infallibility of the Church in a unique and special way.
I would specify the Magisterium as the infallible agent, not the Church in general. It’s the teacher, using two texts, Scripture and Sacred Tradition.
Suppose the media commands that contraception is morally good. Then the media does surveys that show 99 percent of the Church (following the media) thinks contraception is morally good.
This finding does not change the natural law. Even if 99 percent of the Church’s theologians declared same sex marriage to be valid, that wouldn’t make it so.
I know for me, I’ve always seen a distinction between obedience and compliance.
The Church is safeguarded from teaching error and leading her faithful into sin, so when we are faced with an issue where a member of the clergy is teaching things that sound they like conflict with our beliefs; we have an overall body of doctrine and Traditions to refer back to.
I think there are some people who believe that because a Pope has never taught anything heretical, that their actions and statements should be given the same level of acceptance.
For example, I doubt there will ever come a day that a future Pope will formally declare that Pope JPII taught heresy. However, his kissing of the Quran doesn’t require that we comply with that action and emulate that type of belief.
To disagree with the Pope in that matter is not to be disobedient to his authority or the Church.
The Church is infallible in her faith. The Pope is infallible in his teaching. Teaching is dependent on the faith. Vatican I was specific about this, saying the Pope has … the same infallibility as the Church.
“If 99% of Catholics think contraception is morally good” makes the same mistake as “If the Pope declares contraception is morally good.” They are both hypotheticals that we believe will never happen. (many questions here I am skipping over. assume contraception is not morally good…)
If 99% of Catholics did indeed think of contraception as morally good, that is as much an argument for contraception as a papal statement is an argument against it.
St Peter had to be fratenally corrected by St Paul, and accepted the correction.
Im a traditionalist and as you may imagine I have grave doubts about many things that the present Pope has said. But he has never taught infallibly anything contrary to the deposit of faith, and I regard him as a great grace to the Church.
I don’t know what Adam prayed, nor do I know what Peter prayed… I do know that God said pray and you shall receive… pray continuously … pray with faith, pray with hope, pray with good intentions not like a hypocrite… pray with the Holy Spirit within you… So I pray God, show me to follow your will and not my own…you’re will so I will not be deceived by lies but God will allow me to be deceived because I want to be deceived?
Unless He is testing me for some reason… that makes no sense.
Of course, there is… that’s why we pray continuously to understand the Holy Spirit with-in us. Never said it was easy, nor that I do not struggle following God’s will every day… but if we can not trust God to lead us to His will with the Holy Spirit, who do we put our trust in that we are following God’s will?
Sorry, I do not understand what you are saying here.
Who, who is this person defining himself as the Church? Who specifically are you talking about… God, Jesus, the Holy Spirit, Mary, Peter, Paul, The Pope, The Bishop, the Priest… John Smith, Michal Alex Henderson… who is the Church? Who is teaching me the truth that is God? Who am I putting my faith in, that they are telling me the Pope standing before me should be obeyed and I know they are telling me the truth?
Well if you persistently pray and act like that, search and strive to discover the Truth, you will discover it. However there were people that thought they discovered Truth and thought that God led them. For example I would consider many faithful Muslims to be deceived even if they have best intentions.
Basically that what God has not done is not good.
If any person ever defines himself as the Church, he is either lying or deceived. Church is not human, hence Church can not be human person. Church is what Apostles established, and what was continuously defended from heresy. Where unbroken Apostolic line is. Church is collection of faithful who hold True Faith and submit to correct authority.
However that authority of teaching lies with collection of people- Apostles and later on, their successors (Bishops). Defining Apostles who are Judas from Apostles who aren’t is simple- Peter is with the True Apostles and they are with him. Therefore through communion with Peter and his successors in Rome, one can find True Church as testified by Early Church Fathers, many of whom were taught by Apostles.
I was taught, that only when the Pope speaks from the ExCathedra chair, Is he infallible. Other teachings are not infallible.
For the better part, I think this is true as to this forum, but given other forums on Catholic matters, maybe not quite as much, and for the internet in general, off topics specific to religious belief, not even close.
As to obedience to the Pope, I am not exactly sure what the term “obedience” encompasses in the discussion, as there is a range of what has to be accepted, when is to be accepted except for perhaps narrow issues, and what has wider latitude to agreement/disagreement.
You need to separate the (rare) Extraordinary Magisterium from the ongoing Ordinary Magisterium, in terms of Faith and Morals.
Has he taught anything at all infallibly?
Below is the original post. It is a question about the non-infallible teachings of the Pope. As most respondents have said, non-infallible teachings have to be accepted with respect for the Pope and humility. It may be possible to disagree, but his viewpoint needs to be considered at least.
I could be mistaken, but I don’t think there’s a fallible Magisterium. In fact, in order for it to be truly the Magisterium of the Church it has to be infallible:
The Magisterium of the Church has two FACETS, an eternal Magisterium, which is the collective teaching of the Church over time. This is, per definition infallible, yes.
The other facet or leg of the Magisterium is the living Magisterium or the teaching Magisterium which is when the Pope in unison with the bishops of the world uses his authority to teach. This per definition cannot be in opposition with the eternal Magisterium and in order to be a proper Magisterial proclamation, must also be infallible.
As I said I could be mistaken, this is just my understanding.