Good thing the infallible Pope is able to correct the mistakes of the former infallible Pope so Catholics can be certain of their traditions

Triablogue ^ | 7-16-2021 | Peter Pike

[bantam]

This!!!!! Thank you for this comment!

[Red6]

LOL,

Well put.

Irony is, Luther was a conservative for his time, he wanted to clean up the church and get rid of all that crap that isn’t biblical and infested the church. But today, the churches that bear his name are the most liberal of them all, example ELCA.

Probably one of the most “pure” or “orthodox” denomination of Christians around are the Eastern Orthodox and Egyptian Copts. I don’t belong to either, but I can recognize that they kept to the word and and strayed off course probability the least of any major Christian group.

What is important today is that Christians stick together, that we work together on the issues instead of ankle biting each other. At this point in time, the forces of globalization (economic driven) and socialism (secular), are a common enemy that is eradicating Christian values from society and even forcing its values upon us.

Many Christian churches are “luke warm” today, but even including them, church attendance in the US today is at its lowest point ever. Only 47% of Americans belong to a church, and only 23% attend services regularly. One can with certainty say that the Christian faith is in decline in the US, since every statistic is pointing in that direction, according to numerous surveys and some of them being fairly professional. This is a trend that has been going on for decades now, and we see the results in the laws as well as governmental policies, arts and entertainment, etc. At this point, I would claim the Christian decline in the US to be a “fact.”

There needs to be a greater effort put into organizing and mobilizing Christians in order to make their voice heard. You have 2% minorities like the homosexual community (the core of actual/true homosexuals is very small) able to make huge changes societaly because of their assertive, collective and full scope approach (legal, education, arts and entertainment, political) while Christian churches spend a lot of their time trying to steal each others congregation members, bad mouthing each other, or sitting on the side lines on the issues.

Christians in the US need to pull their head out of their ass, or they will end up like the Coptic Christians in Egypt one day.

[Manly Warrior]

That’s nice.

[Alberta's Child]

As outlandish as your scenario seems, it does raise a very interesting point that I have made frequently in recent years:

I can say with absolute certainty that it's no coincidence that all of this is happening while Pope Benedict is still alive.

Go back to those rare times in history when the Catholic Church had TWO (or even THREE) popes simultaneously -- and it sometimes took years for the Church to sort out the mess and figure out which one was the "real" one.

A close friend of mine once said: "In those days, most people had no idea who the real pope was."

To which I countered: "In those days, most people had no idea that there was even more than one pope laying claim to the Chair of Peter in the first place."

That last point is an important one. Back in those days there was no internet, no TV news, and even no daily newspapers. Most people lived in very sheltered worlds and had very little knowledge about what happened beyond those sheltered worlds.

If someone asks me today to name the pope, I can say with all honesty: "I have no idea." And I can say this with confidence because Benedict XVI is still alive, I have no knowledge of the circumstances surrounding his "resignation," and the guy sitting there claiming to be the pope is giving plenty of empirical evidence that he is a pagan idolater and a secular bureaucrat who doesn't even believe in God.

As I have said many times ... We have no idea what the history books will say when they recount the historical facts of this period.

[Last Dakotan]

I have NOT YET seen any Pope speak Ex-Cathdra in my lifetime.

Its doubtful that you will. Most all of the major Ecclesiastical doctrinal matters have been decided long, long ago.

When I see the words "infallible Pope" written I just assume its another low IQ attack on the Catholic faith with the author having very little knowledge of what he is talking about.

It's all so tiresome.

[Mom MD]

Or maybe you could forget the office of Pope and traditions of men and follow what is in the Bible. Following popes and traditions is what has landed the roman church on the pachamama worshipping apostate mess it finds itself in

[Jim from C-Town]

The doctrine of papal infallibility means that the Pope cannot err or teach error when he speaks on matters of faith and morals ex cathedra.

They almost never speak Ex Cathedra. The last example of an ex cathedra decree took place in 1950, when Pope Pius XII defined the Assumption of Mary as an article of faith.

[moonhawk]

Devout or not, not all of us Catholics are fully informed on the teachings of the Church. There’s a lot of teachings. Not all of them are critical to our Salvation.

[Campion]

Stupid article. Liturgical legislation never involves the charism of infallibility. Infallibility can only protect a _teaching_ (not a discipline) concerning faith or morals.

[Red6]

Polemics-

You have one central head:

-A man with limits in perceptions, memory, language, time, etc.

-A sinner that is also influenced by thoughts other than what is in the Bible.

And by the way, you using the definition of infallibility post 1869/70 not as it was understood pre 1869/70 by most. Even that changed over time! LOL

I think most people know that the papal infallibility “today” is only under three conditions: (1) when he’s speaking as the head of the church (2) if he’s defining “truth” or “morals” and (3) he makes this binding for all baptized R.C. Christians.

You have one central head, and he’s still just a man, with his ideas, influenced by the prevailing ideas of the times, etc. If this guy is from Argentina and a bit more politically/economically socialist and religiously open minded and liberal, well, you see what you get.

Don’t get me wrong. Catholics are brothers in Christ and fighting against the same enemy in this modern world. But don’t try to pretend that papal infallibility makes sense, or that even the position of the Pope is truly Biblical and handed down from Peter... It’s a frigging remnant of the Roman influence on the church from about 300 - 500 AD with Gregory (If I remember right) being the first around 550 AD.

[Mariner]

“It’s ignorant to assert otherwise, not to mention deeply unchristian and ugly to gloat over the troubles of a religious body that you happen to disapprove of.”

Bullshit.

Thinking people do it all the time.

I cite Muslims as a prime example.

The Catholic Church is in disarray because Catholics (what remains of them) allow it to be so.

[Campion]

That isn't what "infallibility" means. John Paul II went to confession weekly; why would someone who "could do no wrong" go to confession? What would they confess?

"Infallibility" is simply the ability to teach without teaching error. It is not being without sin, which would technically be called "impeccability".

Vatican I set out four requirements for the charism of infallibility to be in play:

1. The Pope must be speaking as Pope, not as the Bishop of Rome or as a private doctor (=merely expressing his personal opinion doesn't count)
2. He must be addressing the whole church (=a private letter doesn't count)
3. He must be teaching definitively (=a speculative teaching doesn't count)
4. He must be teaching a doctrine concerning faith or morals (=disciplinary regulations don't count)

All four conditions must be met.

[Campion]

Protestants generally hold that the Holy Spirit guides each and every one of them to the correct interpretation of Scripture.

Catholics hold that the Holy Spirit will prevent one man from binding their whole church to believe heresy.

You're trying to say that the first claim makes sense and the second one doesn't? The second one is far more restrictive.

[M Kehoe]

Pope on a rope? Who has the other end?

5.56mm

[fidelis]

but I think where the comment is showing insight is in exposing the office of the papacy as extremely flawed, and with this occupant, actually very, very evil

Then that's the arguable issue they should address, not ignorant, uninformed statements about Catholic teaching.

[Marchmain]

The Assumption is dogma.

Papal Infallibility has not been around long, not to be confused with the universal authority of the pope. Infallibility was defined at Vatican I.

[Marchmain]

He’s definitely capable of errors of judgment.

[NKP_Vet]

“ If we believe that Vatican II was a break from earlier teachings, which most traditional Catholics believe, then we haven’t had a valid pope for close to 60 years.”

Bingo.

[NKP_Vet]

“ Or maybe you could forget the office of Pope and traditions of men and follow what is in the Bible.”

You men that book that Catholics decided what would be in it?

[circlecity]

“You men that book that Catholics decided what would be in it?”

Except they didn’t. In fact the Roman Catholic Church as the full church in ecumenical counsel never made a pronouncement on the canon until the council of Trent in the 16th century. In fact the first list of the canon as we now know it was first written down by Athanasius (a Patriarch of the eastern church) in his 39th Festal letter in 367 AD. This was before the counsel of Carthage, a regional counsel of the local Roman Catholic Churches which accepted Athanasius’ list in 397.