Who among the Roman Catholics did this? The Magisterium? Ecclesiastic Councils? Aren't they ALL comprised of fallible human beings?
God Almighty has given his holy and inspired word... and He IS infallible.
Just can't quite figure out how fallible Roman Catholics infallibly determine the Canon -- or fallibly determine it as the truth has it.
Hoss
I thought it was only the Pope who did infallible things and then only on some occasions. But then you have the changes that have happened over time where the infallible statements were changed to something else. I suppose God changed His mind or something.
The Bible was written by fallible human beings. St. Paul, St. Peter, etc. were fallible.
I'm still trying to figure out the counter-argument (or, from the RCC perspective, the "fact") that supports the claim that the RCC has infallibly determined the Canon of scripture. Who among the Roman Catholics did this? The Magisterium? Ecclesiastic Councils? Aren't they ALL comprised of fallible human beings?
The assuredly infallible magisterium (which i abbreviate as AIM) , comprised of the bishops in union with the pope, or just the pope, has infallibly defined that it is infallible whenever it speaks in accordance with its infallibly defined formula (defining a matter of faith and morals to all the church), which renders its very declaration that it is infallible to be infallible, and can declare a such what she needs to support her,
“It was the charge of the Reformers that the Catholic doctrines were not primitive, and their pretension was to revert to antiquity. But the appeal to antiquity is both a treason and a heresy. It is a treason because it rejects the Divine voice of the Church at this hour, and a heresy because it denies that voice to be Divine....
I may say in strict truth that the Church has no antiquity. It rests upon its own supernatural and perpetual consciousness. Its past is present with it, for both are one to a mind which is immutable. Primitive and modern are predicates, not of truth, but of ourselves.” — Cardinal Henry Edward Manning, The Temporal Mission of the Holy Ghost: Or Reason and Revelation (New York: J.P. Kenedy & Sons, originally written 1865, reprinted with no date), pp. 227-228; (http://www.archive.org/stream/a592004400mannuoft/a592004400mannuoft_djvu.txt)
While Scriptural warrant may be claimed or presumed for such , assurance of an infallible pronouncement does not depend upon that, but upon the premise that the supreme magisterium is infallible when speaking as described, and which promise of infallibility does not necessarily extend to the reasoning and arguments behind the declarations.
Justification for the AIM is extrapolated out a a few texts and under the premise that the preservation of truth and establishment of Scripture requires the assuredly infallible magisterium of Rome (a fallacy i have posted on before such as here and here), in the light of the problem of human reasoning being fallible, and that that interpretation of Scripture cannot be private interpretation (for which 2Pt. 1:20,21 is invoked, but which interpretation itself is faulty). Having an AIM is thus said to provide assurance of doctrine and uniformity and to counteract the problem of fallible human reasoning (FHR) and the resultant confusion seen among those who look to Scripture as supreme, while cults, which also look to a supreme infallible type magisterium, show most clearly that such a centralized authority claim can greater uniformity.
However, while those who hold the supremacy of and sufficiency Scripture have an assuredly infallibility authority but do not claim an assuredly infallible interpreter, and must partly rely upon FHR, yet the Catholic himself makes a fallible human choice to trust in the AIM of Rome, and while he can claim to have an assuredly infallible interpretive authority, he cannot claim an assuredly infallible interpreter of this authority, which does need varying degrees of interpretation.
The Catholic also must engage in FHR in discerning which of the many potentially infallible pronouncements are infallible (is all of Trent infallible?), which he should know in order to provide the assent of faith such require. He must also engage in such in determining which parts of encyclicals (including the Syllabus' of Errors), and papal Bulls, and the catechism express infallible truths, and which teachings are part of the Ordinary magisterium. And what degree of dissent may be allowed in that realm (which is said to be the majority). In judging what is official church teaching he must also interpret such things as how much weight to give to the imprimatur and nhil obstat.
Also, as the AIM has defined very very few verses of Scripture, and the doctrinal teaching of Rome is far from comprehensive and often is much lacking in precision or perspicuity, thus the Catholic has great liberty to interpret Scripture as he desires in order to defend Rome, using his FHR. In all these things there is variance among Catholics including her apologists, and the things R. Catholics can disagree on is extensive, as well as what they do.
Going back to Scripture, we see truth being established by its effects and supernatural attestation and conformity with that which was previously established as truth by those means, with the Scripture becoming the standard for obedience and testing truth claims. This is not to minimize the magisterium, as Scripture affirms it, but not a perpetual, assured formulaic infallibility, or whose claim to authenticity rests upon formal decent, but one whose authority rests upon demonstrable conformity to Scripture and the manner of attestation it affirms Truth being given, in relation to its claims. Thus from of old writings were established as being Scripture without an AIM, and truth was preserved partly by God raising up men from with the official magisterium to reprove them who supposed supremacy, and thus a man clothed in camel's hair and eating insects, and One (the Lord Jesus) who came not from the tribe of Levi reproved those who sat in Moses's seat, and lowly fishermen displaced them. And God can raise up from stones believers to build His church with, which manifest the faith of the gospel and pass it on, versus the institutionalized form which preaches itself and or fosters faith in ones own goodness for salvation.