Replies

It might be good to observe that in spite of Jewish claims to infallibility,

Where, exactly, do any Jewish authorities claim infallibility of any stripe (much less the specific type which is entrusted to the Catholic Church)? Chapter and verse, please, since you're "sola Scriptura" types...

and the identical claims of infallibility by the Roman church,

It might also be good to observe that this is what logicians call a "straw man"--a bogus caricature of an opponent's argument, used for the purpose of easy demolition. Not only do I not know where any Jewish authorities claimed "infallibility", but there's an absolute disconnect between your argument and the true definition of Magisterial infallibility (which can easily be found by reading the Catechism of the Catholic Church).

the ecclesiastical branch has never been very good at maintaining pure doctrine - It has ever been the prophet who is raised up with the purpose of straightening them boys out.

Help me out, here. It sounds as if you're saying, "Jewish authorities = ecclesiastical branch [whatever that means]" and "Catholic Church = ecclesiastical branch", and you seem to be implying that--since the Jews erred in pure doctrine, and since the Catholic Church is somehow "the same", then the Catholic Church must have erred in pure doctrine. Is that truly what you're saying?

It sounds as if you're saying, "Jewish authorities = ecclesiastical branch [whatever that means]" and "Catholic Church = ecclesiastical branch", and you seem to be implying that--since the Jews erred in pure doctrine, and since the Catholic Church is somehow "the same", then the Catholic Church must have erred in pure doctrine. Is that truly what you're saying?

Maybe it's:

Seat of Moses/Pharisaical authority to bind and loose

Chair of Peter/Council/papal authority to bind and loose.

The former being a type for the latter.

BTW, I'm enjoying your posts here. Very well thought out.

Where, exactly, do any Jewish authorities claim infallibility of any stripe (much less the specific type which is entrusted to the Catholic Church)? Chapter and verse, please, since you're "sola Scriptura" types...

Well, there in fact is the problem - It isn't in the Bible for them any more than it is for y'all. You haven't read the Talmud, have you?

BUT, it isn't quite the same - Judaism assumes the infallibility of their great rabbis because of their great knowledge - more like your 'doctors' than your magisterium and pope... Maybe a bit less of a political nature for the Jews, though I guess their Sanhedrin makes up for that (It too, considers itself infallible)... But you should read the Talmud (and the Mishna). It might just astound you at the similiarities. A bunch of silly men claiming to be more than they are, in order to convince themselves that they are more than they are...

But the point is, just like some of your own, the rabbis have said that if they say the sky is green, then you'd better believe it, and in their hubris have declared that even YHWH must bow to their declarations... Infallibility per se, as who can have greater knowledge than the teachers of the knowledge? See, theirs is circular too...

And at the local level, the 'seat of Moses' was much like your 'chair of Peter' = When the chief rabbi spoke from the seat of Moses, that settled the matter. Period. I do not subscribe to the idea that there was a supreme Seat of Moses, though there may well have been, in the context of the Sanhedrin or the Temple... There is legend to that effect, but nothing substantial enough to call true - But still, the concept remains.

Thankfully, the Rabbi to which I am enjoined tore that entire system down... Too bad all y'all didn't get the memo. The power to bind and loose cannot destroy Torah, as that is the instrument defining the power at all... That is the sin of the Pharisees. Again, back to the original contract...