Replies

BlueDragon:

Not a dodge at all, it is a principle of Catholic Theology. Not that there are essentials and everything not an essential is to be rejected. Economics and Usury would be a teaching that falls under Prudential judgment that can be reformed as it is not clearly a Level 1 Defide Doctrine. Clerical Celibacy is taught by Rome as a norm in terms of Discipline, it is not Dogma/Doctrine, but I nevertheless accept the teaching of the Church that Celibacy is the “norm” for the sacramental priesthood. While I accept that teaching, it in no way is on the same level as the Holy Trinity, Divinity of Christ, etc. I think you will agree with that anlaysis, even if you reject the Catholic Church’s Celibacy discipline. Below is an article from Professor Bushman on the nature of hiearchy of Truths and another from an RCIA website

http://www.ignatiusinsight.com/features2005/dbushman_hiertruths_sept05.asp

http://rciablog.com/2010/08/the-5-foundational-truths-of-revelation/

A 3rd article from the Blog “Shameless Popery” does a real good job of detailing the difference between said hierarchy of Truths

http://catholicdefense.blogspot.com/2012/09/catholic-voting-and-order-of-truths.html

Now as to you question about Papal Infallability, I do believe it to be both consistent with Sacred Scripture [Peter was always listed 1st among the Apostles and Certain Gospel passages in Mt, LK and John support Peter being 1st among the Apostles] and Sacred Tradition as expressed by the Fathers of the CHurch and later Councils [See Nicea Canon 6 which indicates Rome has a Primacy and then states let Alexandria and Antioch have a Primacy similar to Rome, implicit is Rome has the earlier Primacy, but we need not debate that point].

Now what I think is reformable is the notion of Papal Sumpremacy to use that term and make sure that Papal Infalliability can be exercised say for example, with a reunion of Rome and the Orthodox Church. Are there ways for “Papal Infallability” to be exercised in practice that fits into the ecclesiogly of the Orthodox. I think it can, Papap Supremacy does not mean that Rome has the authority to go in and tell the Orthodox how to celebrate the Liturgy or the Sacraments. The East has a venerable Tradition of celebrating the Liturgy and Sacraments as old as Rome. So that would be an abuse of Papal Infallability.

So Papal Infallability, to me, would recognize the Church of Rome and thus the Bishop of Rome being the First Among all the Bishops thus Rome would be the only Church that could call an Ecumencial Council [consistent with Papal Infallability], Rome would be the Church that would be one that had to give its acceptance, or rejection of a Council, for it to be binding on the entire Catholic Church [which was the case in the 1st millenium, as I noted earlier as cited by J. Pelikan Volume 1 of his work] and if there were disputes between say the Russian Orthodox and Greek Orthodox Church, Rome would be the Church that would be Court of appeals, so to speak to make sure the 3 Churches maintain fraternal Communion with each other.

A Universal Primacy and Papal Infallability does not have mean Papal Supremacy in the terms that you think it means.