Posted on 12/05/2014 10:02:26 AM PST by NKP_Vet
I also as a Catholic was confused by Campion’s post. I think Campion misspoke there/didn’t write what he meant. I think he is referring to the non-essentials of the document (such as wording for example). Although the main issue regarding faith and morals is divinely revealed and therefore free from error it does not mean that the human who wrote it chose the perfect wording to explain it.
Hopefully he can come in and shed some more light on this, but I think this is what he’s driving at.
I applaud you attempt but none will suffice. Here is a phrase from that declaration. "is possessed of that infallibility with which the Divine Redeemer willed". The word "infallibility" must by definition include perfect "wording" as in without error. It's either infallible or it's not. As a comparison, God didn't say if a prophet was mostly right he was still a prophet. He said if just one of that prophets prophesies was wrong that prophet was not from God.
I don’t think you’re understanding.
I think if you read post 53 it might make more sense?
Sorry. I see damage control.
Free from error is free from error.
To say that the issue regarding faith and morals is divinely inspired and free from error, but error creeps in when it is transcribed, means that what the people are getting is NOT free from error.
At that point, it then becomes subject to interpretation and needing to be *correctly* interpreted.
At that point, there’s simply nothing that the pope can say, even ex cathedra, which can be trusted because nobody can know if it’s error free or where the error crept in.
That was always my understanding of infallible which is why I questioned Campion, but I am willing to accept that I may have been too stringent with the term.
Having said that, I have NEVER seen anyone ever pick apart pre-Vatican II infallible pronouncements for correct wording, etc. Of course all we see is such picking apart with Vatican II documents (but that’s another story).
So perhaps my original understanding of infallible is the correct one.
I saw what you did there. 8^”)
Post # 53 makes no sense whatsoever. Go read it again yourself and you will see the statement "but infallibility merely implies exemption from liability to error. God is not the author of a merely infallible, as He is of an inspired, utterance; the former remains a merely human document." Think about it. An infallible document is "merely a human document"?
The Catholic Church proclaims that "ex Cathedra" means that it is "infallible". There is only one who is "infallible" and that is God.
That causes all kinds of problems for Catholics as the original "ex Cathedra" statements have been pretty much nullified by later statements from the Church. How can the "Church" change "infallible" statements without issuing and "ex Cathedra" statement changing the earlier pronouncement? That leaves Catholics with the obligation to believe that only those "in subjection to the pope" as saved.
And that is exactly the position Catholics find themselves in today.
I’m going to let Campion answer your comments. I’m still not interested in debating with Protestants about the Catholic Faith. I see the difference in the comments in post 53, but I’m Catholic so that distinction makes sense to me.
I don't see that as a Catholic v Protestant position or debate. If a statement is to be considered infallible one must conclude and believe that the statement is without error of any kind.
“Infallible in faith and morals” is the usual phrase (not infallible in everything), so I’m willing to be wrong in the event that I (and you) have used the word too stringently.
I don't think anyone is saying that "everything" a pope says is infallible. However, when a pope makes a statement "ex cathedra" that entire statement is to be taken as "infallible".
OK. Explain to me then how a comment can be *infallible* when the speaking of it is subject to error.
I understand, that
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.