Skip to comments.Did the Bishops at the 1st Vatican Council, who voted on Papal Infallibility, possess infallibility?
Posted on 03/31/2014 7:35:15 AM PDT by Laissez-faire capitalist
A.) When the vote was taken on July 1870, at the First Vatican Council, with 433 votes in favour (placet) and only 2 against (non placet) against defining as dogma the infallibility of the pope when speaking ex cathedra, did those Bishops possess infallibility when (or at least only when) voting? Did any of them keep this infallibility (did it remain with all of them or any of them) after they left and returned home? Did any of these Bishops possess any infallibility at anytime before the vote was cast?
B.) Was Mary's (the Mother of Jesus) mother immaculately conceived as Mary was? Was Mary's grandmother immaculately conceived, too? If so, was there near-infinite regression of these immaculate conceptions? If so, how far back did these immaculate conceptions go? If they did not go back farther than two, why were only two and not say three or four immaculate conceptions needed?
C.) When the Apostle Paul confronted Peter (when Peter was being hypocritical concerning his eating with Jews and Gentiles), did the Apostle Paul possess infallibility when stating that Gentiles did NOT have to be circumcised as a requisite for being a Christian? If so, how many other Apostles possessed infallibility in their actions that were later recorded in the Book of Acts?
D.) During the time of the Western Great Schism of 1378, if papal infallibility was in existence at that time (and only later just codified), how could any person who was not one of the two Popes infallibly know (if they did not possess any measure of infallibility) which POpe was legitimate until this was later worked out? What about that period of time? Were people left "twisting in the wind?"
From Wikipedia [your mileage may vary - link below in first post]:
"The doctrine of Papal Infallibility was not new and had been used by Pope Pius in defining as dogma, in 1854, the Immaculate Conception of Mary the Mother of Jesus.  However, the proposal to define papal infallibility itself as dogma met with resistance, not because of doubts about the substance of the proposed definition, but because some considered it inopportune to take that step at that time. 
There was stronger opposition to the draft constitution on the nature of the church, which at first did not include the question of papal infallibility,  but the majority part in the Council, whose position on this matter was much stronger,  brought it forward. It was decided to postpone discussion of everything in the draft except infallibility.  On 13 July, 1870, the section on infallibility was voted on: 451 voted simply in favor (placet), 88 against (non placet), and 62 in favor but on condition of some amendment (placet iuxta modum).  This made evident what the final outcome would be, and some 60 members of the opposition left Rome so as not to be associated with approval of the document. The final vote, with a choice only between placet and non placet, was taken on 18 July 1870, with 4333 votes in favour and only 2 against defining as a dogma the infallibility of the pope when speaking ex cathedra. 
2. Encyclopaedia Brittanica, First Vatican Council
5. Encyclopaedia Brittanica, Pius IX
What’s the point?
Obviously no human, save the Word Made Flesh, is infallible.
And what’s the second one about? The infinite regress idea is funny, but how does it fit in with the fallible infallibility theme?
I hardly think popes are infallible. They are human just like the rest of us mere mortals and therefore subject to sin and error. Look at the current pope’s most recent on economics as proof that popes are not always right.
The idea that Mary herself was conceived of an immaculate conception is simply absurd and something made up out of whole cloth. There is no documenation for this.
Even more bizarre is the claim that Mary was ALWAYS a virgin. She was married to Joseph and she and Joseph had other children including James which is mentioned in the Bible.
Churches have the right to develop their own institutions,traditions, rules, and rituals. But NO church as the right to rewrite history or to rewrite the Bible.
Read right under “Papal Infallibility”
Pope Pius, in 1854, used the doctrine of papal infallibility to define as dogma the Immaculate Conception of Mary...
It was part of the Wiki article, and so I thought I would include it as a question -— because Pope Pius (in 1854) used the doctrine of papal infallibility to define as dogma the Immaculate Conception of Mary.
I have great respect for the Roman Catholic Church; but the notion that (very) fallible humans could decide that another human (however saintly his character, however elevated his position) was infallible when speaking on all subjects or any subject strikes me as bizarre.
And the notion that any person who is wholly human - as opposed to human and divine - was conceived immaculately is truly bizarre.
For question a, see Acts 15. Infallibility is not said to inhere in persons. It is attached, rather to certain sorts of acts in certain situations. Or that’s a way of looking at it.
If you want to tussle, I’m no longer interested. But the Catechism is online, and a great many notions are usefully (if nio persuasively — which is not the goal of the Catechism) explained. So if getting a notion of what we teach is your goal, I’d start there.
Two what? Immaculate conceptions?
You need to study a little harder before trying to come up with "gotchas."
What do you think "conceived immaculately" means?
Do you believe in the Fall of Adam and Eve?
The infallibility is very limited. It is only when they are speaking, always written first, ex cathedra. laterally ‘from the chair’ as in the chair of St. Peter. They do so very rarely.
A good article from Catholic Answers may help you to understand what Papal Infallibility is and why it is so important.
So, there was never a “Eullepsis tes hagias kia theoprometoros Annas”? The Conception of Saint Anne, the ancestress of God” from the 4th century onward?
If God can do anything, can he make a rock that’s even too heavy for him to lift?
Oh....I see...when he is sitting in the chair he is infallible....the rest of the time he is full of....like the current Pope.
They didn’t even ‘possess’ the Holy Spirit.
They were utterly lost pagans creating their pontifus maximus.
Did the Apostle Paul say that sin entered the world through Adam or Eve - or both?
EXPLAINING THE IDEA OF INFALLIBILITY [Catholic Caucus]
Papal Infallibility: A Symbolic, Yet Problematic, Term
Essays for Lent: Papal Infallibility
Radio Replies Second Volume - Infallibility
Catholic Biblical Apologetics: The Charism of Infallibility: The Magisterium
Catholic Biblical Apologetics: The Charism of Truth Handling: Infallibility
Radio Replies First Volume - Infallibility
Docility (on Catholic dogma and infallibility)
Beginning Catholic: Infallibility: Keeping the Faith [Ecumenical]
Papal Infallibility [Ecumenical]
Peter & Succession (Understanding the Church Today)
Pope: may all recognize true meaning of Peters primacy
THE PRIMACY OF THE SUCCESSOR OF PETER IN THE MYSTERY OF THE CHURCH
Pope St. Leo the Great and the Petrine Primacy
The Epiphany of the Roman Primacy
THE PRIMACY OF THE SUCCESSOR OF PETER IN THE MYSTERY OF THE CHURCH [Ratzinger]
Catholic Answers, EWTN and New Advent.org are the best sources...
>> “The Pope is only infallible on questions of FAITH and MORALS” <<
Popes know nothing of Faith, nor morals, or they wouldn’t be popes.
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.