Catholic Caucus: How the Infallibility of the Magisterium Protects Us

CatholicExchange.com ^ | 08-10-06 | Marcellino D'Ambrosio, Ph.D

[Salvation]

by Marcellino D'Ambrosio, Ph.D.

Other Articles by Marcellino D'Ambrosio, Ph.D.

How the Infallibility of the Magisterium Protects Us

08/10/06

		If there is any dogma that sticks in the craw of non-Catholics, it is the dogma of papal infallibility. “How” ask many, “can Catholics actually believe that any human being is incapable of error?”
In This Article... By Divine Assistance What If Bishops Disagree? Special Authority of the Successor of Peter

By Divine Assistance

But what about the human authors of sacred Scripture? The Gospel narratives are quite frank about the foibles of Peter, Paul, and the rest. But all Christians believe that their writings come not from them, but were inspired by the Holy Spirit. In all that they teach us about God and His plan for our salvation, they are therefore “inerrant.”

The pope and bishops of the Catholic Church are no less human than the Aapostles and evangelists. Left to themselves, they can make their share of mistakes. But in their capacity as apostolic teachers, they are not left to themselves. They receive divine assistance much like Peter received at Caesarea Philippi when he blurted out that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of God (Mt 16:16-17).

So the Church believes that when the bishops of the world, in the course of their ordinary teaching and preaching, together present a doctrine to God’s people as something revealed by God, they teach this dogma infallibly by virtue of the ordinary, universal Magisterium.

What If Bishops Disagree?

But sometimes it is hard to precisely identify what all bishops of the world agree upon in their daily teaching. So when serious doctrinal disputes arose in the early Church, councils of bishops gathered to settle things.

These special councils were called “ecumenical” from the Greek word for “household.” They dealt with matters pertaining to the whole household of the faith and represented all the bishops of the world. Hence their judgments, once confirmed by the pope, were considered binding on the whole Christian family. Some of their pronouncements had to do with discipline, and so are not binding on all generations. Some of their teaching was doctrinal, pertaining to faith and morals, but was presented in an ordinary way. But sometimes the council fathers engaged the fullness of their apostolic authority and issued solemn dogmatic definitions in which they fundamentally guaranteed that a certain truth is revealed by God. They usually make crystal clear their intent to define a dogma by strongly condemning contradictory teachings and noting that those who hold such heretical opinions have put themselves outside the Church.

From about the 9th century, we can document a widespread belief that dogmatic decrees by ecumenical councils are infallible in light of the assistance given to the council fathers by the Holy Spirit (see Acts 15:28).

Special Authority of the Successor of Peter

But what if a council could not be called in time to respond to a crisis? Would it remain up for grabs how we should interpret the Scriptures and identify the authentic apostolic Tradition?

Medieval theologians said no. They saw the special assistance given to Peter by the Spirit in Matthew 16:16. They noted the extraordinary track record of the popes of the first millennium in upholding orthodoxy even when many of the great bishops and patriarchs from around the world fell into heresy. Many concluded that the successor of Peter is assisted by the Spirit in a particular way. If he should teach ex cathedra (literally “from the chair” of Peter), engaging the fullness of his apostolic teaching authority on a matter pertaining to faith and morals, his judgment is indeed infallible. From about the 12th century this became a widespread opinion and was defined as dogma by the First Vatican Council in 1870.

Infallibility, then, is not a burden, but a necessary gift, indeed a charism of the Holy Spirit. Without it, the promise made by Christ at Caesarea Philippi could not be kept. Remember, He guaranteed that the jaws of death would not prevail against His Church. But if the Church had no sure way to locate the truth, the jaws of death would be free to gobble up many and shatter the remaining flock into a million pieces.


Dr. D'Ambrosio studied under Avery Cardinal Dulles for his Ph.D. in historical theology and taught for many years at the University of Dallas. He now directs www.crossroadsinitiative.com, which offers Catholic resources for RCIA, adult faith formation, and teens, with a special emphasis on the Year of the Eucharist, the Theology of the Body, the early Church Fathers, and the sacrament of confirmation.

(This article originally appeared in Our Sunday Visitor and is used by permission of the author.)

[Salvation]

For your information.

[Salvation]

Catholic Discussion Ping!

Please notify me via FReepmail if you would like to be added to or taken off the Catholic Discussion Ping List.

[nmh]

I'm glad that Christ protects me. I don't have confidence in fallible men or women or those in between. It is God that controls all and Christ is God.

[NYer]

It is God that controls all and Christ is God.

Correct and since God could not remain with us, He appointed a successor, Peter. Christ instructed the Church to preach everything he taught (Matt. 28:19–20) and promised the protection of the Holy Spirit to "guide you into all the truth" (John 16:13). That mandate and that promise guarantee the Church will never fall away from his teachings (Matt. 16:18, 1 Tim. 3:15), even if individual Catholics might.

[tiki]

Exactly what the article says. The Holy Spirit is that which gives the infallibility, not men. Men are just vessels God uses, just as God used Moses and the prophets and most of all Mary.

[Aggie Mama]

This is the perfect thread for the popcorn-eating emoticon.

[nmh]

"Exactly what the article says. The Holy Spirit is that which gives the infallibility, not men. Men are just vessels God uses, just as God used Moses and the prophets and most of all Mary."

No, read the article carefully.

God certainly does NOT use another sinner, Mary for anything. That is NOT Christian to pray TO her or depend on her. Nowhere in the Bible is Mary elevated to the stature you wish her to be. NOWHERE! Just another reason why Catholicism is not Christian, following Christ. Mary is NOT Christ nor is she one to follow.

[dsc]

So, you never ask anyone to pray for you?

[dsc]

Maybe I hallucinated it, but I thought there was a vatican document of some sort forbidding holding hands during the Pater Noster.

Anybody?

[nmh]

"He appointed a successor, Peter. Christ instructed the Church to preach everything he taught (Matt. 28:19–20) and promised the protection of the Holy Spirit to "guide you into all the truth" (John 16:13). That mandate and that promise guarantee the Church will never fall away from his teachings (Matt. 16:18, 1 Tim. 3:15), even if individual Catholics might."


No Christ did NOT appoint ANY successor. Yes, the Holy Spirit will guide you IF you pray to Christ.

Matthew 28:19-20

[19] Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

[20] Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

John 16:13

13] Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.


Yes, as Christians we are to preach what HE taught not this nonsense about succession or Mary etc. since it is NOT Biblical and NOT what HE taught.

"That mandate and that promise guarantee the Church will never fall away from his teachings (Matt. 16:18, 1 Tim. 3:15), even if individual Catholics might."

That "mandate"? That is simply a command for ALL who believe to do that. That is NOT directed at ANY particular church.

Matthew 16:18

[18] And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Not this AGAIN! How many times must anyone tell you how WRONG this is that Peter is some kind of a successor?

The CHURCH is built on CHRIST, NOT PETER!

Is Christ the liar here? I don't think so ... .

1 Corth. 3:11

[11] For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.


Of all disciples I always find it amusing that Peter is the one for you, as a Catholic. He was MARRIED. Peter was far from "infallible". Even Paul had to rebuke Peter in his views of the Christian life. Peter was NOT "straightforward about the truth of the Gospel"

Gal. 2:14

[14] But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?

Hardly an "infallible" person. Certainly NOT someone to "imitate" or "follow". Another reason WHY Christ is the ONLY ONE to follow and imitate.

The "church", which is the body of believers, "is built on the foundation of the apostleS and prophetS" doctrine. Did you catch that S, as in PLURAL; not SINGULAR as only in Peter?

Eph. 2:20

[20] And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;

There is NO indication anywhere, that Peter was the head of anything. If anything Paul had a more DOMINAT role and voice in the Bible. Even Paul, who is certainly more of a DOMINANT role in preaching and converting didn't refer to Peter as a "pillar" because he was NOT a pillar.

Instead Paul spoke of:

Gal. 2:9

[9] And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.


Even Peter admitted that CHRIST is the chief "cornerstone" in:

1 Peter 2:6-7

[6] Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded.

[7] Unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner,

Even Paul notes that the OTHER apostles are ALL part of the "foundation" but NOT the chief cornerstone.

Eph. 2:20

[20] And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;

As for "churches" not falling away ... LOL!!! When the "church" is NOT based on what the Bible states, it has already "fallen away" since it no longer depends on the Bible and what God clearly states. The Holy Spirit is NOT present among those who do NOT follow the teachings of Christ.

Here's where you are:

2Tim.4:3

[3] For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;

SO many times people have tried to get through to you. Verse after verse after verse has been posted to you and others. Let there be no doubt. The truth is now known to you - straight from the Bible. If you insist on believing what fallible people want you to believe because their control freaks and have a seriously disturbing overgrown ego and pride - that's up to you. Just know what you are doing in accepting this unBiblical nonsense.

I won't be responding further to this post. There is more to say about your false teachings but enough has been said where a rational person would really start reading the Bible for what it clearly states.

You really need to read the Bible fro what it says and not cherry pick verses, out of context to suit Catholicism.

[nmh]

"So, you never ask anyone to pray for you?"

First off, I never said that. Now dsc, it is unwise and less than honest to put words in the mouth of others to distract.

To answer your topic switch question, no, I suppose we've simply been blessed and others need intercession more than we do. But if I did I would NEVER want them wasting their time and praying to Mary, or any other dead fallible mortal.

I and other believers call high and direct. Praying for others is fine, however WHO you pray TO makes a BIG difference - ONLY to Christ.

It works like this fro Christians:

Christ is the MEDIATOR and the Holy Spirit is the INTERCESSOR. Christ ALONE, died for our sins; not Peter, Paul or Mary. ONLY Christ. The punishment for sin is DEATH and Christ paid that price by laying His INNOCENT life down for all. The Holy Spirit did NOT die for us. Again, ONLY Christ paid the price.

1 Timothy 2:5

[5] For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

Romans 8:26

[26] Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.

Dsc, there is still time to get it right ... you see what's going on out there ... . Prophecy is happening right before our eyes.

[FJ290]

This is the perfect thread for the popcorn-eating emoticon.

Okay, LOL! Call me ill informed, there is such a thing? What does the popcorn eating emoticon signify? That it's being entertained, like at the movies?

[FJ290]

Maybe I hallucinated it, but I thought there was a vatican document of some sort forbidding holding hands during the Pater Noster. Anybody?

Is this what you are looking for?

The Code of Canon Law (1983) does mandate: “The liturgical books approved by the competent authority are to be faithfully observed in the celebration of the sacraments; therefore, no one on personal authority may add, remove, or change anything in them” (Canon 826.1). (Note that this Canon repeated a previous mandate found in both Vatican II’s Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy (1963) and the Instruction on the Worship of the Eucharistic Mystery, No. 45 (1967), which was issued to address certain abuses arising in the liturgy after the council.) Therefore, a priest who introduces, mandates, or imposes the holding of hands during the Lord’s Prayer is violating the norms set by the Church.

Father William Saunders on Holding Hands During the Lord’s Prayer

[NYer]

Maybe I hallucinated it, but I thought there was a vatican document of some sort forbidding holding hands during the Pater Noster. Anybody?

5.2  Holding Hands during the Our Father

Holding hands during the Our Father has become commonplace, but it is an illicit addition to the Liturgy. Clarifications and Interpretations of the GIRM ["Notitiae" Vol. XI (1975) p. 226] explains:

". . .holding hands is a sign of intimacy and not reconciliation, and as such disrupts the flow of the Sacramental signs in the Mass which leads to the Sacramental sign of intimacy with Christ and our neighbor, Holy Communion." 

112. QUERY 2: In some places there is a current practice whereby those taking part in the Mass replace the giving of the sign of peace at the deacon's invitation by holding hands during the singing of the Lord's Prayer. Is this acceptable?

REPLY: The prolonged holding of hands is of itself a sign of communion rather than of peace. Further, it is a liturgical gesture introduced spontaneously but on personal initiative; it is not in the rubrics. Nor is there any clear explanation of why the sign of peace at the invitation: "Let us offer each other the sign of peace" should be supplanted in order to bring a different gesture with less meaning into another part of the Mass: the sign of peace is filled with meaning, graciousness, and Christian inspiration. Any substitution for it must be repudiated.

Is Your Mass Valid? Liturgical Abuse

[NYer]

No Christ did NOT appoint ANY successor. Yes, the Holy Spirit will guide you IF you pray to Christ.

Dear friend in Christ,

We've been down this road before but I am more than willing to traverse it with you. Jesus, knowing that He could not remain on earth forever, did not want to leave us orphans, so he established the role of a successor to carry on the faith and proclaim it to the entire world.

Matt. 10:1,40 - Jesus declares to His apostles, "he who receives you, receives Me, and he who rejects you, rejects Me and the One who sent Me." Jesus freely gives His authority to the apostles in order for them to effectively convert the world.

John 16:14-15 - what the Father has, the Son has, and the Son gives it to the apostles. The authority is not lessened or mitigated.

Acts 20:28 - the apostles are shepherds and guardians appointed by the Holy Spirit / 1 Peter 2:25 - Jesus is the Shepherd and Guardian. The apostles, by the power of the Spirit, share Christ's ministry and authority.

SO many times people have tried to get through to you. Verse after verse after verse has been posted to you and others. Let there be no doubt. The truth is now known to you - straight from the Bible.

And it is given back to you, as well, verse by verse.

[dsc]

"First off, I never said that. Now dsc, it is unwise and less than honest to put words in the mouth of others to distract."

1. Note the question mark. A question regarding the implications of a statement does not constitute putting words in someone's mouth.

2. I ask not to distract, but because this is the core of the question.

You ask others to pray for you; so do we. However, because we have not rejected the Communion of Saints, as have protestants, we also ask the Saints to pray for us.

"But if I did I would NEVER want them wasting their time and praying to Mary, or any other dead fallible mortal."

Why would you think that God wouldn't listen to the prayers of the Blessed Virgin?

"ONLY to Christ."

Not to God the Father or the Holy Spirit? You protestants unnecessarily impoverish your spiritual lives by rejecting so many of the blessings and resources that God wants to give you.

"It works like this fro Christians:"

Only Catholics are fully Christian. The rest of you just have a piece of it.

"Christ ... paid the price."

All of that is true, and none of it makes your point. It is as though you're saying, "All men are mortal, Socrates is a man, therefore Hooters is a gourmet restaurant."

Your conclusion just doesn't follow from your premises.

"but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered."

Intercession--the Saints do that, too. You can try to deny it if you like, but I've seen it too many times to take such denials seriously.

"Dsc, there is still time to get it right"

Back at'cha, separated brother. There is still time to embrace the fullness of Christianity, instead of the poor splinter protestants insist is the whole.

[tiki]

God certainly does NOT use another sinner, Mary for anything. Wow! We must have different Bibles because in mine, God worked through Moses and the prophets and even the SINNER David, whose line Jesus descended from. So from your perspective who bore Jesus?

[dsc]

Thanks, but I thought I saw something directly from the Vatican.

[Aggie Mama]

I am so HTML impaired, but here is the link.

http://digilander.libero.it/le.faccine/faccinea/mangia%20e%20beve/bira2.gif

I see it as, "Oh boy is this going to be a good thread!"

[FJ290]

I see it as, "Oh boy is this going to be a good thread!"

Thank you. I had never seen one of those before.

[Iscool]

Therefore, a priest who introduces, mandates, or imposes the holding of hands during the Lord’s Prayer is violating the norms set by the Church.

And why was this written??? Don't tell me it was common for priests to hold hands during the service...

[Iscool]

We must have different Bibles because in mine, God worked through Moses and the prophets and even the SINNER David, whose line Jesus descended from. So from your perspective who bore Jesus?

After they were dead??? Nope...Not only did no one bow and pray to Moses or David, Peter wouldn't allow anyone to bow before him...

[Iscool]

Acts 20:28 - the apostles are shepherds and guardians appointed by the Holy Spirit

This verse references this verse. Act 20:17 And from Miletus he sent to Ephesus, and called the elders of the church.

Your bible says 'ancients' as opposed to elders...It is NOT a reference to 'Apostles'...And these elders that were shepherds that were appointed by the Holy Spirit were appointed in ALL the churches...

They were under the authority of Paul, NOT Peter...The apostles did not cross over into another's jurisdiction...And Paul was not under the authority of Peter...Paul was the apostle for the gentile church...

[FJ290]

And why was this written??? Don't tell me it was common for priests to hold hands during the service...

Are you jesting? I can't tell because you didn't have a lol or smile emoticon next to your statement. If you are serious, this has nothing to do with priests holding hands during the Our Father. It has to do with the laity holding hands during the prayer and the priest encouraging it.

[Bubble Girl]

And to think I managed to blank this all out of my memory once I got out of Catholic School..

Our Lady Of Perpetual Guilt

[FJ290]

Paul was the apostle for the gentile church...

St. Peter was the first to baptize a Gentile, not St. Paul. And bear in mind this also:

"And when there had been much disputing, Peter, rising up, said to them: Men, brethren, you know, that in former days God MADE CHOICE among us, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.

Seems that God did make choice among them and He chose St. Peter originally.

[conservatative strategery]

Great post, brother. All you can do is preach the truth in love, and pray that they may be given eyes to see.

[Religion Moderator]

The Catholic Caucus is a protected church-like thread - challenges to doctrine are not allowed on such threads.

Devotional threads, prayer threads and other church-like threads are likewise protected from challenges - much like a church with its doors closed, the assembly shall not be disturbed.

Keep all challenges to the "open" town-square type threads - news, theology, etc.

[Iscool]

Seems that God did make choice among them and He chose St. Peter originally.

But Peter couldn't get it right all the time...And we all know that after that, Paul was assigned to the Gentiles while Peter was given the Jews for his ministry...

[Iscool]

My apologies to you and the Catholics...I'll pay better attention...

[dsc]

"Our Lady Of Perpetual Guilt"

Lepers lose the ability to feel pain. Therefore, scratches fester, they get in a bad way, and eventually they lose limbs.

Pain is what tells us we have a physical problem we need to address.

Guilt is the spiritual analogue.

[Salvation]

Dn't men write the Bible? I bet you believe in those men's writings? Your argument doesn't hold water.

[Salvation]

LOL!

[Salvation]

Haven't you ever asked anyone to pray for you? That's what we ask Mary to do for us. We ask her to pray for us.

[Salvation]

**You really need to read the Bible fro what it says and not cherry pick verses, out of context to suit Catholicism.**

But the Bible was written by the Jews and the early Catholics. Those celebrating the Holy Eucharist as Christ had instructed them to do "in memory of me" at the Last Supper.

You need to get those facts straight first. Who is giving you this Catholic bashing stuff, anyway?

[Salvation]

Sounds like unrealistic guilt to me. LOL!

[Bubble Girl]

Sounds like unrealistic guilt to me. LOL!

I guess. I no longer feel guilty for not going to Church. And that's a good thing!

:D

[dsc]

"I guess. I no longer feel guilty for not going to Church. And that's a good thing! "

No, that's a bad thing. Our Lord said "Do this in memory of me."

He didn't go on to say, "Or not. Whatever."

[NYer]

But Peter couldn't get it right all the time...And we all know that after that, Paul was assigned to the Gentiles while Peter was given the Jews for his ministry...

One compelling biblical fact that points clearly to Simon Peter’s primacy among the 12 Apostles and his importance and centrality to the drama of Christ’s earthly ministry, is that he is mentioned by name (e.g. Simon, Peter, Cephas, Kephas, etc.) 195 times in the course of the New Testament. The next most often-mentioned Apostle is St. John, who is mentioned a mere 29 times. After John, in descending order, the frequency of the other Apostles being mentioned by name trails off rapidly.

In Acts 10, Simon Peter receives a special revelation from God that Gentiles are to be welcomed into the Church without having to follow Jewish Kosher food restrictiions or undergo circumcision. In Acts 11, he acts in the name of the Church in welcoming the first Gentile converts to be received according to this new revelation.

But, as a Sola Scriptura christian, you already know this.

THE PRIMACY OF PETER

[nmh]

"But the Bible was written by the Jews and the early Catholics. Those celebrating the Holy Eucharist as Christ had instructed them to do "in memory of me" at the Last Supper."

It was not written by "Catholics". And no I don't engage in imaginary cannibalism. Literally eating flesh and drinking blood is taboo. It's SYMPBOLIC. You are not to literally imagine you are consuming His body.

Pointing out truth is not "bashing".

[nmh]

"Haven't you ever asked anyone to pray for you? That's what we ask Mary to do for us. We ask her to pray for us."

Mary is just another sinner. Mary is not God. Mary has NO authority. Just as I wouldn't ask my dead Grandmother in heaven to pray for me - it's pointless. Living people can pray for you - there's nothing wrong with that.

The Bible instructs you to pray to Christ, the living God, and the Holy Spirit intercedes for you. No where does it state Mary is a "co redeemer". Dead fallible sinners have NO authority to intercede for anyone. I NEVER pray to anyone but Christ and let the Holy Spirit intercede FOR me just as the Bible states. PRaying to dead, fallible mortals is off limits for me.

I and other believers call high and direct, as we should. Praying FOR others is fine, however WHO you pray TO makes a BIG difference - ONLY to Christ as stated in the Bible; not Mary, Peter, Paul or someone else the Catholic church has elevated.

It works like this for Christians:

Christ is the MEDIATOR and the Holy Spirit is the INTERCESSOR. Christ ALONE, died for our sins; not Peter, Paul or Mary. ONLY Christ. The punishment for sin is DEATH and Christ paid that price by laying His INNOCENT life down for all. The Holy Spirit did NOT die for us. Again, ONLY Christ paid the price.

1 Timothy 2:5

[5] For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

Romans 8:26

[26] Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.


Again, pointing out that the Bible DIFFERS from YOU, is NOT "bashing". One can only hope what the Bible states should supercede what fallible mortals who are at odds with the Bible have told you to believe.

[spunkets]

"since God could not remain with us, He appointed a successor, Peter. "

The keys to the kindom of heaven regard forgiveness of sin. The "rock" of Peter was his ability to recognize the Holy Spirit, who was standing right in front of Him. That was a rational judgement he made regarding and based on all that he had seen and heard. That is what his faith was based on and it's additionally his firmness that gave it the character of rock. Jesus was speaking to an audiance here. It was not private. The audience was the whole world and that's why it was written. To think it was written as proof that God gave Peter special help is illogical. They all had seen and heard the same thing.

The loosing and binding refer to whether, or not individuals forgive the sins of others. It does not refer to rulemaking powers, or any individual's judgement capacity whatsoever. It refers to His command to wash each others feet, to cleanse them of sin. It is we He did and the command was given to all at the Last Supper. It does not mean folks should be slaves, serfs, or servants to the whims of others. That's illogical and He never taught such a thing.

The Magisterium is not infallible. It is composed simply of men given the same rational powers that all men were given, as per Gen 1. They're not seers and prophets, they rational agents, just like everyone else. That's given in Gen 3. Men are to work and produce by their own hands.

"promised the protection of the Holy Spirit to "guide you into all the truth" (John 16:13)."

Again, the Word is for all men. That promise was given to everyone, not to a few.

[spunkets]

"The Catholic Caucus is a protected church-like thread - challenges to doctrine are not allowed on such threads."

Sorry, I was unaware of this new rule. I respected devotional threads. My post 42 was intended as the keys to the universe. It is however, a challenging post. Delete it if you wish.

[Salvation]

Our Blessed Mother asked her Son to perform his first miracle. Then she said to the waiters:
"Do as he tells you."

Hmmmm.

Christ's first self-manifextation -- even though he protested that it was not yet his time, he did as his Mother asked.

[Salvation]

Please re-read the Gospel accounts of the Last Supper carefully.

"This is my Body."

"This is my Blood."

[NYer]

The Magisterium is not infallible. It is composed simply of men given the same rational powers that all men were given, as per Gen 1. They're not seers and prophets, they rational agents, just like everyone else. That's given in Gen 3. Men are to work and produce by their own hands.

Christ stated that the Church, NOT Scripture should be the final authority:   "And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican." (Matthew 18:17)  Christ did NOT state to refer to or consult Scripture for disputes and correction.  He said to go to the Church as It is the final authority in Christianity.  In addition, St. Paul states that the Church, NOT Scripture is "THE pillar and ground of the truth." (1 Timothy 3:15)  Since the Church alone is mentioned as THE pillar of truth, then It alone has the right to discern the truth and interpret Scripture.   For if individuals could correctly interpret Scripture, then all interpretations would be EXACTLY THE SAME as there can only be ONE spiritual truth for the plural of the word "truth" NEVER appears in Scripture.  The Church is Christ's bride (Ephesians 5:29) and has no spot, wrinkle or blemish (Ephesians 5:27).  Christ also stated that the gates of hell will not prevail against His Church (Matthew 16:18) so how can the Church commit error?  Individual clergy may commit sins, even popes commit sins because in the Church there are both weeds and wheat (Matthew 13:30).

[NYer]

There! I'll take mine with some butter and a sprinkling of salt. Thanks.

[NYer]

It was not written by "Catholics".

The Bible as a whole was not compiled until the late 4th century and then it was compiled by a Catholic saint (St. Jerome) at the request of a Catholic pope (St. Damasus).

---

Literally eating flesh and drinking blood is taboo. It's SYMPBOLIC. You are not to literally imagine you are consuming His body.

"I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us [his] flesh to eat? Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him." - John 6:51-56

If Jesus said "Do this in remembrance of Me," why would He establish an "empty" sacrament? The Eucharist is Christ's Body and Blood. It is not a "representation" of it or anything less than His actual Body and Blood. Jesus lost many disciples when he stated that they would have to eat His Body and drink His Blood (John 6:60, 66).  Yet He did not "call back" these disciples stating "I was just speaking figuratively."  He let them leave.  Why?  If He had been speaking figuratively, He would have called them back and "explained" the doctrine, wouldn't He have?

[Iscool]

His primacy was recognized by St. Paul (who in Antioch “withstood Peter to his face” over the vexing issue of his refraining to eat with Gentiles) when he describes in Galatians 1:18 how he went to see Peter to make sure his teaching was in line with Peter’s.

The underlined sections put out by your church are 100% false...They know it and you know it...Paul rebuked Peter for false teaching...And since God knows everything, I suspect these events took place to show us not to follow ANY man...Put no faith in ANY man...

he is mentioned by name (e.g. Simon, Peter, Cephas, Kephas, etc.) 195 times in the course of the New Testament.

And the Trinity wasn't mentioned at all by name...So that proves, 'nothing'...

One compelling biblical fact that points clearly to Simon Peter’s primacy among the 12 Apostles and his importance and centrality to the drama of Christ’s earthly ministry

Christ's earthly ministry was to the Jews..."The Kingdom is at hand"...But the Kingdom never showed up...It was offered but the Jews rejected it... Joh 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

1Co 15:8 And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.

Paul saw Jesus...And how did Paul see Jesus???

1Co 15:9 For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.
1Co 15:10 But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I labored more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me.

Paul worked harder for God than the rest, including Peter, put together...

2Co 12:1 It is not expedient for me doubtless to glory. I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord.
2Co 12:2 I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such a one caught up to the third heaven.
2Co 12:3 And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) 2Co 12:5 Of such a one will I glory: yet of myself I will not glory, but in mine infirmities.
2Co 12:6 For though I would desire to glory, I shall not be a fool; for I will say the truth: but now I forbear, lest any man should think of me above that which he seeth me to be, or that he heareth of me.

It is CLEAR from these verses that Paul spent time in Heaven with God...Learning the mysteries of the church, the Rapture, the Kingdom(s), the Jews, the adoption, etc...It was ALL revealed to Paul...That's why he couldn't wait to get back there...

[Carolina]

Did you not read the Religion Moderator's note. I refer you back to post #28.

The Catholic Caucus is a protected church-like thread - challenges to doctrine are not allowed on such threads.