The pope is infallible only when speaking ex cathedra about faith and/or morals, which relate to the teachings of the Church.
The Protestant Reformation was not a reform of the Catholic Church, it was a splitting away of many from the Church.
All popes have issued a number of writings...are they valid or not?
The Protestant Reformation was not a reform of the Catholic Church, it was a splitting away of many from the Church.
Guess the Counter-Reformation meant nothing was wrong in Roman Catholicism.
Luther called the Catholic church to get back to their roots.
For that, they ex-communicated him.
Imagine the gall, expecting the Catholic church to get back to the Bible that Catholics claim it wrote. The nerve of the guy.
They have no one to blame but themselves for the Protestant Reformation.
And who decides when that happens?
What if Francis makes an ex cathedra statement about gay marriage or divorced people receiving communion?
You have to accept it, no?
It is because of bad Catholics such as this present Pope is why the reformation got its start.
It is fair to say that Henry VIII, the Calvinists, and the Anabaptists were intent upon splitting from the authority of the Catholic Church. Luther, however, desired to reform the church; otherwise he would not have written theses for the purpose of attempting to bring the church more in line with the truth as found in Scripture. It was only when the Roman church chose not to reform, and declared Luther to be anathema, that Luther had to choose between the Roman church and the Word, and he chose the Word.
True.
It took a while before Rome got around to doing any COUNTER reforming on it's own.
Required submission extends to far more than ex cathedra teachings, but to basically all public papal teaching.
And as you get into the different magisterial levels and their required manner of assent then you may see how subject to interpretation they can be, both what level they fall under and their meanings to varying degrees.
In the light of the different classes and assent a Prot responded on Catholic Answers:
Boy. No disrespect intended...and I mean that honestly...but my head spins trying to comprehend the various classifications of Catholic teaching and the respective degrees of certainty attached thereto. I suspect that the average Catholic doesn't trouble himself with such questions, but as to those who do (and us poor Protestants who are trying to get a grip on Catholic teaching) it sounds like an almost impossible task.
The solution for which is cultic, just obey and don't question:
Praxis [practice] is quite simple for faithful Catholics: give your religious assent of intellect and will to Catholic doctrine, whether it is infallible or not. That's what our Dogmatic Constitution on the Church demands, that's what the Code of Canon Laws demand, and that is what the Catechism itself demands. Heb 13:17 teaches us to "obey your leaders and submit to them." This submission is not contingent upon inerrancy or infallibility. - http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?p=1565864#post1565864 n, 32).
But what we see in reality is that of RCs interpreting church teaching contrary to each other and papal words or example (based on what they see past church teaching saying), and as allowing and even requiring public dissent, and thus attacking their leadership, while insisting we need to submit to the pope rather than ascertaining the veracity of what is taught by the Scriptures.