>> There is no Catholic claim for “infallability” of the Vatican. Never has been, nor there ever will be a claim for infallibility of the Vatican as a whole. This informal statement of position posted on Yahoo Answers is not half bad and may serve to educate you.
I read your “informal statement of position”, and find that my understanding of Vatican “infallability” (thanks for the grammatical correction there — oops) was exactly as I thought. I apparently needed no education in this matter.
>> Infallibility is not the absence of sin. Nor is it a charism that belongs only to the pope.
This was absolutely my initial understanding. This is why I spoke of Vatican infallibility, not Papal infallibility. The Pope was used only as an example. I also never spoke of general sin — I spoke specifically of fallibility in Biblical interpretation.
>> Indeed, infallibility also belongs to the body of bishops as a whole, when, in doctrinal unity with the pope, they solemnly teach a doctrine as true.
And therein lies the problem. These men are not Christ incarnate — they are capable of misinterpretation, and being wrong outright. When they cannot acknowledge the possibility of their imperfection in scriptural interpretation, I cannot take them seriously.
>> We have this from Jesus himself, who promised the apostles and their successors the bishops, the magisterium of the Church: “He who hears you hears me” (Luke 10:16), and “Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven” (Matt. 18:18).
For instance — with regard to possible scriptural misinterpretation — Luke 10:16 speaks of Christ sending out 72 individuals ahead of Him to various towns that he was going to visit. Christ said (NIV), “He who listens to you listens to me. He who rejects you rejects me.” I see no indication whatsoever of the scriptural infallibility of anyone but the 72 individuals to whom he was speaking — and I see no indication that this infallibility was perpetual (as opposed to only on this trip).
Why would the Vatican assume that this passage means that their interpretation is infallible?
>> What the Church is saying with the doctrine of infallibly is that Christ is protecting his flock by giving the Pope the ability to say the right things when making official statements about faith and morals. The Church claims that these proclamations are “infallible,” not that Church leaders are “indefectible.”
I understand this fully. Church proclamations are simply not infallible. I cannot take seriously anyone that claims that attributes their words, particularly extra-scriptural elaboration, to Christ Himself. My initial post stands.
SnakeDoc
I appreciate that you replied without slandering Catholics or the Pope, or engaged in hysterics as many others have done. BTW, where does your current FReeper handle come from?