We say it, so you must believe us.
Posted on 04/28/2015 6:01:54 PM PDT by Salvation
On the Infallibility of Tradition, Scripture, Magisterium
1. Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture, Sacred Magisterium are a reflection of the Most Holy Trinity.
Tradition is a reflection of the Father; Scripture is a reflection of the Son; Magisterium is a reflection of the Spirit. Scripture proceeds from Tradition, just as the Son proceeds from the Father. Magisterium proceeds primarily from Tradition and Secondarily from Scripture, just as the Spirit proceeds primarily from the Father and secondarily from the Son. Tradition, Scripture, Magisterium are three distinct aspects of One Divine Gift, just as the Trinity is three distinct Persons of One Divine Being. Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture, Sacred Magisterium are inseparable, just as the Father, Son, Spirit are inseparable. Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture, Sacred Magisterium are infallible because they are a true reflection and a true work of the Infallible Holy Trinity.
2. Sacred Tradition is “the deeds wrought by God in the history of salvation.” (Dei Verbum, n. 2).
Sacred Tradition is infallible because it is the deeds of the Infallible and Most Holy Trinity. Everything that God is and everything that God does is One Divine Eternal Infallible Act. Sacred Tradition is infallible because it is a true reflection and a true work of the Infallible Father.
If the deeds wrought by God in salvation history were merely teaching stories or myths, with little or no historical value, then Tradition would cease to be the deeds of the God and would not be infallible.
3. Sacred Scripture proceeds from Sacred Tradition.
Sacred Scripture is infallible because it proceeds from infallible Sacred Tradition. Sacred Scripture is infallible because it is a true reflection and a true work of the Infallible Son. Sacred Scripture is infallible because it is words written by God, and because it is the Word of God, and because it is One Utterance of God.
If Sacred Tradition does not exist, or if it is not the infallible deeds of God, then Sacred Scripture would lose its foundation and would not be infallible. If Sacred Scripture is fallible, then it is not the Word of God. If Sacred Scripture is full of errors, then Sacred Tradition, from which Scripture proceeds, would be full of errors. If Tradition and Scripture are full of errors, then the Teaching of the Church would be full of confusion and error. Such is not the case.
4. Sacred Magisterium proceeds primarily from Sacred Tradition and secondarily from Sacred Scripture.
The Sacred Magisterium can be exercised by the Pope alone, or by the body of Bishops led by the Pope. The Sacred Magisterium is infallible because it is a true reflection and a true work of the Infallible Spirit. The Sacred Magisterium is infallible because it teaches only from Sacred Infallible Tradition and Sacred Infallible Scripture, by the Infallible guidance of the Most Holy Spirit.
If Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture are not infallible, then neither can the Sacred Magisterium be infallible, for the Sacred Magisterium teaches only from Tradition and Scripture. The Sacred Magisterium cannot teach that Tradition or Scripture contain errors of any kind, because Tradition and Scripture are the foundation of the Sacred Magisterium.
5. The Canon of Sacred Scripture is the books of the Bible recognized by the Sacred Magisterium.
The books of the Bible include the Old Testament books: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 Samuel, 2 Samuel, 1 Kings, 2 Kings, 1 Chronicles, 2 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Tobit, Judith, Esther, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon, Wisdom, Sirach, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Baruch, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees; and the New Testament books: Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts of the Apostles, Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 Thessalonians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, Hebrews, James, 1 Peter, 2 Peter, 1 John, 2 John, 3 John, Jude, and Revelation.
Included in the Canon of Sacred Scripture are all the words of all of the above books, including the Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic texts in Daniel and Esther, and the prologues of Lamentation and of Sirach, which are found in the Latin Vulgate.
Excluded from the Canon of Scripture are any books from that same general time period but not listed above, including other so-called gospels, epistles, or apocalyptic writings. Also excluded are the apocryphal books (those that are not called Deuterocanonical), including Psalm 151, the prayer of Manasseh, and 1 Esdras. Also excluded from the Canon of Scripture is the alleged document called 'Q' or 'Q-source,' and any hypothetical reconstructions of such an alleged document. Further excluded are any and all hypothetical reconstructions which claim to recover the sayings or words of Jesus better than, or above and beyond, what is Divinely-revealed in Scripture itself.
6. There is no single definitive version or edition of the Bible.
Among the many versions and editions of the Bible, in the many different languages, no one version or edition can stand alone as the definitive version. No one version or edition can claim to hold all the truths of the Bible. No one version or edition can claim to bring an end to the usefulness or necessity of all other versions and editions. Any particular version or edition may clarify certain truths, yet obscure other truths, even within the same verse. No one wording or language brings out every level of truth found in every verse. Comparing the wording of several different versions or editions, especially in different languages, often brings the reader to a greater understanding of the truth than could ever be presented to the reader in only one version or edition or language.
7. There is no single definitive language for the Bible
No one language is definitive over every other language, yet of the various languages used in ancient times, and of those used to translate in modern times, each makes their contribution to the task of making the unfathomable depths of the many levels of Truth found within the Sacred Texts clear and accessible to the faithful.
When the Council of Trent emphasized the importance and indisputability of the Latin Vulgate Bible, the Fathers of that Council did not specify a particular edition to be preeminent above other editions, but rather they taught that the Latin Scriptural tradition, having its roots in the earliest days of the Church, is authoritative, cannot be ignored or rejected or belittled, and must never pass away from usage and veneration in the Church. But neither did they even suggest that the Hebrew or Greek or other languages be ignored or rejected or belittled.
Contrary to the belief and practice of modern scholars, neither the Hebrew nor the Greek text of the Old Testament is definitive. The Greek text of the New Testament is not definitive. Even those languages not used during Biblical times, languages into which the Bible is translated, often bring to the text a new phrasing that clarifies truths which were otherwise quite obscure in the Biblical languages. Every language into which the Bible has ever been written or translated contributes substantially to this holy expression of Truth in written form. Let no one ever say or believe that the true meaning of the Bible cannot be understood apart from the original languages of the Bible. Let no one ever claim that any word or phrase in the Bible can only be understood in its original language. Every word and phrase in the Bible is able to be translated and able to be understood in its translated form.
8. The truths of the Bible are not completely contained, nor fully expressed, in any single edition.
The truths of the Bible subsist across every version and edition put together. Since no one language, translation, version, or edition of the Bible is definitive, the Bible is every manuscript, translation, version, and edition, in every language, put together. All the editions of the Bible are one edition. All the languages of the Bible are one language. All the languages, manuscripts, printings, translations, versions, and editions of the Bible are one Text, in the sight of the One Holy God.
9. Any edition of the Bible may have errors particular to that edition.
God never allows such particular errors to enter every extant edition of the Bible, nor to become lost in a myriad of editions duplicating the same error. These errors are not errors in anything asserted by the sacred writers or by God through the sacred writers. These are the possible errors of copyists, printers, translators, and editors. Yet even these errors are never permitted by God to cause the Truths of the Sacred Word of God to become lost to the faithful. God protects the Truths of Scripture to the extent that copyists, printers, translators, editors, commentators, and readers, on the whole, cannot cause even the slightest truth of Scripture to pass away from the life of the Church on earth. Therefore, the infallibility of Sacred Scripture is a continuous work of the Holy Spirit.
The possible errors of particular editions include copyist errors, printing errors, translating errors, and editing errors. Copyist errors are frequently seen in ancient manuscripts, which include misspellings, dropped or added words or letters, repeated words, or the confusion of one word with another similar word. Printers errors include a similar array of possible mistakes. Translator errors are easily seen by comparing various translations and by finding verses where different translations have opposite or irreconcilable meanings. Editing errors are seen in misleading punctuation or capitalization, in the omission of certain parts of the text or their relegation to a footnote, and in any unwise addition, subtraction, or substantial change in the text. Translators and editors also sometimes make unwise decisions on the overall approach to translating and editing, such as trying to accommodate the text to modern concerns, altering the text to suit the ideas of modern culture and society.
10. Everything asserted by the Bible as true, is infallibly and unerringly true, without exception.
Some assertions are made deliberately and knowingly by the sacred writers, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Other assertions are made by the Holy Spirit, even beyond the understanding and intention of the inspired writers. In both cases, everything asserted as true by the inspired writers, or by the Holy Spirit through the writers, is infallibly true. These truths include truths of faith and morals, truths of science, history, geography, human nature, human society, and all other areas of knowledge and understanding. These truths include, but are not limited to, those truths written for the sake of our salvation.
11. Apparent errors in the Bible have a number of explanations, in particular: misunderstanding the text, a lack of faith, and even an ill will.
Some passages are mistakenly interpreted an overly literal manner and so seem to be false. Other passages are mistakenly interpreted according to a modern way of thinking. The ancients had a different way of describing and understanding the world. Some readers expect an unreasonable degree of precision from the text. The Bible is both true and accurate in all that it asserts as true, to whatever degree of accuracy it asserts. Some passages are thought to be in error because the order of events is different, but it is a common storytelling technique to present events in other than a chronological order. Quotes in the Bible are not presented as if they were exact word-for-word quotes, such as we write today. They are free quotations, sometimes rewording the quote and sometimes joining it with words from another passage or another speech. This is not an error, but merely a difference between the ancient and modern method of expressing quotes.
Unusual or miraculous events described in the Bible are sometimes used to support a claim that the Bible contains falsehoods. The problem here is not found in the text, but in the lack of faith in the reader concerning the miraculous intervention of God in human events. If, however, there should be any passage or verse which seems to be false and for which no reasonable explanation is presently available, the reader should still believe, with a sincere and constant faith, that the passage or verse is true and without error. For anyone who believes only what he understands possesses understanding, but not faith.
Finally, it is clear that some persons deliberately seek passages that they can distort, so as to claim that the Bible is false and unreliable. Such persons have an ill will toward the Bible because they despise its true teachings on faith and morals. They undermine the authority of the Bible in order to exalt themselves, to justify their own sins, and to teach others the same. They deliberately attack the Bible with false accusations because of the malice in their own souls.
12. The Sacred Magisterium has the ability and the authority to interpret Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture infallibly.
All theologians and Biblical scholars must submit to the authority of the Sacred Magisterium to interpret and to teach from Tradition and Scripture. Each Christian should read or listen to the Bible, learning directly from the text. But each Christian should also form his understanding of the text according to the teachings of the Magisterium.
by Ronald L. Conte Jr.
December 16, 2005
Only God is infallible. Anyone who asserts otherwise is satanic and anti-Christ.
Tradition, Scripture and Magisterium Ping!
Exactly what this article says.
Thanks.
Allen interview of Cardinal George supports report of ‘parallel magisterium’ worries
The Magisterium: A Precious Gift (Catholic Caucus)
Catholic Biblical Apologetics: The Charism of Infallibility: The Magisterium
Anti-Popes and Dangers of a Parallel Magisterium (Church under attack) [Catholic Caucus]
Pontiff Calls for Complete Fidelity to Magisterium
Modernism and the Magisterium
Catholic Word of the Day: EXTRAORDINARY MAGISTERIUM , 10-23-09
“Exemplary loyalty and devotion to the Holy Father and the magisterium”
Nostra Aetate [Catholic Magisterium Rejecting Collective Guilt of Jews]
The Magisterium: A precious gift
Correction:
God’s teaching of ONE truth is infallible. The Bible we have did not fall from the skies and robotically self assemble itself.
They were assembled by the early Church Fathers under Petrine infallibility, and that Petrine infallibility did not disappear some eleven centuries later with the Reformation after the canonical texts were validated by the Church in the Synod of Rome in AD 382.
If you think the Church wrongly included some books or accidentally left out others, and therefore doubt Petrine infallibility, you need to assemble your own books in the Bible.
The Catholic Church has ONE Credo. We don’t need 30,000 different types of Protestant scriptural interpretations from David Koresh to Billy Graham to Jeremiah Wright. The latter is what you get from the heresy of Protestantism.
As the renowned essayist Hillaire Belloc put it, unlike other heresies, Protestantism “spawned a cluster of heresies.”
We say it, so you must believe us.
Amen. And I have a mixed= Catholic and Protestant family (and some Jewish members as well)
quote==>
Ja.2.21 Was not our ancestor Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar?
James made this claim to justify his works-righteousness gospel:
Ja.2.22-24 You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did. 23 And the scripture was fulfilled that says, "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness," and he was called God's friend. 24 You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone.
But Abraham was credited as righteous (Ge.15.6, Ga.3.6) ten years before the incident with Isaac in Ge.22. There is nothing about Abraham being considered righteous because of the incident with Isaac. This incident with Isaac was about Abraham's obedience to God's specific instructions and subsequent earthly blessings bestowed on him, not his righteousness. "Now I know that you fear God...I will surely bless you and make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and the sand on the seashore." Abraham's righteousness was "fulfilled" when "he believed God" in Ge.15. Between these two events God instructed Abraham to institute circumcision as part of His covenant with Abraham (Ge.17). Why would James not site this as the "fulfillment" of Abraham's righteousness? Was it not enough works? Paul explains:
Ro.4.9-11a Is this blessedness only for the circumcised, or also for the uncircumcised? We have been saying that Abraham's faith was credited to him as righteousness. 10 Under what circumstances was it credited? Was it after he was circumcised, or before? It was not after, but before! 11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised.
Paul confirms that Abraham was credited with "righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised." Here's the timeline:
1) faith/righteousness = Ge.15
2) circumcision = Ge.17
3) Isaac incident = Ge.22
But, presuming James is correct, how does James know that the Isaac incident was enough? And how are we to know when we have done enough works so that our own righteousness is "complete" as James attributed to Abraham? Must we offer up our sons as well? What if we don't hear God say "stop!"? And just what are we to make of the statement of Ge.15.6 "Abraham believed the LORD, and he credited it to him as righteousness"? If Abraham, without sufficient works, was not "completely" credited as justified for the ensuing ten years, what did Moses think he was doing declaring that God credited Abraham as righteous just for believing?
Ja.2.24 You see that a person is [being] justified by what he does and not by faith alone.
James here illustrates that not only does he not understand justification, but he is not even consistent in what he espouses. In verse twenty one he claimed that Abraham "was considered righteous for what he did". He also claims in verse twenty two that "his faith was made complete by what he did." So Abraham had accomplished righteousness according to James. But then James in an about face claims that justification is an ongoing process - "a person is [being] justified by what he does". (Even though the "being" is excluded from most translations it is correct based on the Greek grammar.) James now claims that justification is an open-ended proposition. In other words, James insists that justification is a continually on-going process - a complete contrast with what he claimed about Abraham.
The answer to James’ original question is NO, Abraham was NOT considered righteous "for what he did." Paul confirms this in Romans:
Ro.4.1-5 What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, discovered in this matter? 2 If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works [or as James put it, "what he did"], he had something to boast about—but not before God. 3 What does Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.”
4 Now to the one who works, wages are not credited as a gift but as an obligation. 5 However, to the one who does not work but trusts God who justifies the ungodly, their faith is credited as righteousness.
If Paul had agreed with James he would have confirmed what James said. But he did not - he contradicted James in stark black and white. Paul and Moses agree, and James is the odd man out. James tried to pull a fast one, and even if this were the only evidence against the canonicity of James, it would be enough by itself.
<==/quote
As a side note, Mid-Acts Dispensationalism does not explain this blatant contradiction between James, and Moses and Paul.
This is just one of many evidences that I explore in my book that leads the conclusion that the epistle of James is not inspired of God and not canonical.
This proves that there are serious questions about the legitimacy of the Sacred Magisterium and the NT canon.
Sorry, but this is just a bunch of gobbledygook.
“Petrine infallibility”
Repeating this claim is silly. It wasn’t true the first time you posted it Steelfish.
There isn’t a single Christian that is infallible, but we serve a perfect God.
That, of course is absolutely true....however, He can, and did, guide and inspire man to make infallible statements and proclamations. He does have that power you know....and the authors of the Bible and the Catholic church have been granted that extraordinary and exclusive authority.
what you bind on Earth will be bound in Heaven....do you suppose that He would allow error to be bound on Earth????
You misread. The Bible was put together by Petrine authority after hundreds of years of sorting out various scriptural fragments. Maybe it will help if you study historical texts and traditions. If you think the Catholic Church was not infallible, then please do not refer to the Bible since maybe our Church faltered in sorting out the valid Biblical texts.
Protestantism today is a joke and a caricature. It has disintegrated into bits and pieces with every Tom, Dick, and Harry and Foursquare Church pastor purporting to teach the Word of God.This is the rubbish the Reformation spawned and why any number of eminent Protestant theologies have come around toward dumping this heresy and embraced Catholicism.
Dr. David Anders speaks for a number of them.
“By the time I finished my Ph.D., I had completely revised my understanding of the Catholic Church. I saw that her sacramental doctrine, her view of salvation, her veneration of Mary and the saints, and her claims to authority were all grounded in Scripture, in the oldest traditions, and in the plain teaching of Christ and the apostles.”
“I also realized that Protestantism was a confused mass of inconsistencies and tortured logic. Not only was Protestant doctrine untrue, it bred contention, and could not even remain unchanged.”
Of course, we are not quoting here the great Catholic theologians in the traditions of the early Church fathers (theologians) like Augustine, Aquinas, Neman, and Benedict.
The real problem with Protestantism is that it thrives in shallow waters. This is why we have crooks like Joel Osteen and Creflo Dollar because of the low -information congregations they attract, not unlike the local neighborhood Protestant churches.
Nor is the pope as an individual. What is infallible is Jesus Christ working through the church that he established. Thus the pronouncements of the pope are only infallible when he officially exercises his office on questions of faith and morals. It is the office, not the person, which is infallible. God is quite capable of preventing his church from teaching error, no? If not then we have no way to know what should be included in the Bible in the first place.
“Did God REALLY say.....?”
First, friend, I did not misread.
The Scriptures were inspired by the Holy Spirit - two thirds before the Christian assembly began on earth. God continued to inspire, preserve and collect His Sacred Words. In saying so, Christians assign infallibility where it was - on the God who soveignly worked through history and through fallible men to inspire, preserve and collect His Word. It is our faith in His attributes that gives us confidence in His Word.
Since the early collections were first assembled, they have been re examined and corrections made.
None of the inspired writers were infallible. God “moved them” as He willed, to write his word.
Protestantism has problems exactly because all men have the nature of Adam and consequently are fallible. We see the same in your gay and pedaephile priests. In the heresy of your bishops, in the lack of conversion of your “members”, who never attend. It is the nature of man.
Best.
“Nor is the pope as an individual. What is infallible is Jesus Christ working through the church that he established. Thus the pronouncements of the pope are only infallible when he officially exercises his office on questions of faith and morals. It is the office, not the person, which is infallible. “
Of course I would expect you to believe this kind of thing, since you are required to believe it. My point is that as an argument, it is ineffective unless you have prebelief in it as a truth. We find no such evidence in Scripture.
“God is quite capable of preventing his church from teaching error, no? If not then we have no way to know what should be included in the Bible in the first place.”
This is a false argument. God is capable of many things He does not do and didn’t do in history. The catholic denomination has taught error and teaches error today. Despite those things, we have confidence in His Word.
Our sovereign God is the foundation of our confidence in His Word.
**What is infallible is Jesus Christ working through the church that he established. **
Right you are.
The Word of God = Jesus Christ, right?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.