Which of you thinks the Pope is an infallible expert on Christianity?

Question

How many denominations would exist today if Catholics had been able to stomp out Protestantism the way they did every 'heresy' and schism that had come before?

Is it not Catholic policy to bring all denominations (and humanity) under the control of the 'Mother Church'?

When Catholics tell you to listen only to experts on Christianity, aren't they referring to their own Pope? Do Catholics believe there is anyone wiser in Christianity than the Pope?

Answer 1

Here are some examples that show that the Pope is NOT infallible.

• In 431 the Council of Ephesus taught the worship of Mary as the Mother of God.

• In 593 Gregory the Great declared the doctrine of purgatory, and in 1439 the Council of Florence declared it a dogma of
the church.

• In 607 Boniface III declared himself the universal bishop and took the title Pope. (Gregory, who served as bishop of Rome
before him was very much opposed to any universal bishop.)

• John XV decreed the canonization of dead saints, putting them into a special class. The Scriptures instead call all Christians saints(Rom. 1:7; I Cor. 1:2).

• In 1079 Hildebrand decreed priests and other clergymen were to be celibate. If Hildebrand is infallible in this decree, was Paul wrong when he said bishops must be husbands (I Tim. 3:2; Tit. 1:5-6)? Was Peter sinning when he traveled with his wife (I Cor.9:5)?

• In 1184 the Council of Veronica decreed the inquisition and death of heretics.

• In 1215 Innocent III. in the Lateran Council decreed Confession of sin to the priest at least once a year. The Bible
commands us to confess our sins directly to God and to one another (James 5:16; I Jn.1:8-9).

• Innocent III decreed the dogma of Transubstantiation in 1215. By this doctrine the priest pretends to perform a daily miracle by changing a wafer into the body of Christ, and then he pretends to eat Him alive in the presence of his people during Mass.
• The Council of Trent in 1546 declared that the Apocryphal Books were to be included in the Bible, although neither Jesus nor the apostles recognized them as inspired.

• On March 5, 1616 a council of Cardinalscalled by Paul V warned Galileo against holding the heretical views of Nicholas Copernicus, who said the earth moves around
the sun. If Paul V were inspired and infallible,he would know that what Galileo taught was true. Paul V was not alone in this; Urban (1633) and Alexander VII (1664) confirmed
and republished Paul V’s decree against Copernicus.

Popes against Popes

Not all Catholics have assented to theinfallibility of the pope. Adrian VI in 1523 said, "It is beyond question that he [the pope] can err even in matters touching the faith. He does this
when he teaches heresy by his own judgment or decretal. In truth, many Roman Pontiffs were heretics." In 1324 John XXII condemned as heresy both the Franciscan way of life and
Nicholas III's commendation of it. The Franciscans believed in papal infallibility and criticized John for his lavish lifestyle. To justify contradicting another pope, John produced his Bull Qui quorundam, a dogmatic assertion of doctrine made to the entire Church and thus infallible by today's rules. In it John XXII reviled the doctrine of papal infallibility as "the work of
the devil."

Sergius III agreed with Stephen VII in pronouncing all ordinations by heretical popes invalid. In *** ex Apostolatus officio, Paul VI declared "by the plenitude of papal power" that all of the acts of heretical popes were null and void. That infallible declaration leaves "apostolic succession" in ruins.

The Sixth Ecumenical council (678-87) condemned Honorius (625-38) as a heretic for believing in monthelitism, i.e., believing Jesus only had one will that was divine and not human.

Leo II (682-683), publicly condemned Honorius I for undermining the faith of the Church. For centuries each new pope taking office was required to swear by an oath that Honorius had been a heretic and that the council had acted
properly in condemning him.

Two people holding opposite opinions can't both be right. Yet popes have almost made a business of contradicting one another on key issues. Agapetus (535-536) burned the anathema which Boniface II (530-532) had solemnly issued
against Dioscorus (530). The later is shown as an antipope, but Agapetus, who sided with him, is shown as a true pope.

Adrian II (867-872) said civil marriages were valid; Pius VII (1800-1823) declared them invalid. Both men are shown as legitimate popes.

Nicholas V (1447-1455) voided all of Eugenius IV's (1431-1447) "documents, processes, decrees, and censures against the Council [of Basle]... to be regarded as having
never existed,” yet both remain on the official list of popes today.

On July 21, 1773, Clement XIV issued a decree suppressing the Jesuits, only to have it reversed by a decree restoring them, issued by Pius VII on August 7, 1814.

Eugenius IV condemned Joan of Arc (1412-31) to be burned as a witch and heretic, but she was beatified by Pius X in 1909 and canonized by Benedict XV in 1920.

Answer 2

I am not a Christian anymore, but if Christianity is the True Religion, then the Pope is infallible.

I reason this very simply. For starters, papal and concilliar infallibility don't work the way Protestants think. The word Catholic is originally a Greek phrase meaning either "all embracing," or "according to the whole." As such, something is held true only if it has been held as true by the entire church across time. The pope acts infallibly only when he repeats such a belief. Of course anyone who says the phrase "Jesus Christ is the son of God," would be acting infallibly. Moreover, not only must the pope merely be repeating that which is already believed, he must be in union with the bishops (both communicating with them and not a heretic), agreed with by the bishops, and the laity has to "receive," it--basically meaning they agree with it. Some promulgated doctrines were never "received," and hence were not infallible. All three groups must agree, the bishops, the pope and the laity and they have to be repeating what has always been believed by the popes, the bishops and the laity.

So, for starters, it doesn't mean what you think it means.

Second, the historical record is quite clear, if Christianity is true then Protestantism is a man made invented religion. Orthodoxy, the Copts and the Catholics are one Church in schism, but dogmatically there are only trivial differences between them (unless you happen to be strongly partisan). I would strongly recommend you start reading the apostolic fathers, the people who knew the apostles and were trained by them. Bart Ehrmann has done a new translation of them, making them more accessable.

Finally, it is Catholic doctrine that there are people wiser than the pope. The bishop of Rome is supposed to "feed my sheep," and only the Successor to Peter holds that responsibility, to feed all the sheep, but nowhere does Jesus say the pope is the best or the brightest. In fact, 1 Peter and 2 Peter really are not that good when compared to any of John's writings. Further, anyone who is a "saint," that is one who has fully allowed God into their life to the point of heroic transformation is by definition closer to God than the pope.

Here is a thought for you. Let us assume Christianity is true. It is archaeologically trivial to look at Catholic/Orthodox/Copt practice in the early Church and today. One of the oldest documents we have is the liturgy of James the Brother of the Lord and it is still in use in the Catholic and Orthodox Chruches as is the liturgies of Mark and Peter. We have copies of James' liturgy from around AD 60. Catholics/Orthodox/Copts are the old time religion. In doctrine, they are still proclaiming the first century proclaimation (which is why people see them as archaic).

There are currently thousands of Protestant denominations holding every possible view you can find. How can they be the standard bearers of truth when they are increasingly incoherent, each proclaiming the truth of the bible, as they see it, but not as the apostles saw it. Some require baptism, some do not, some actually also require foot washing, some do not, some permit homosexual marriages, some do not, some require you to handle poisonous snakes, some do not, some have bishops, some do not, some have presbyters, some do not, some have deacons, some do not, some permit female ministers, some do not, some are liturgical, some are not, some have communion, some do not, some proclaim marriage holy, some do not, some have confirmation, some do not, some have ordination, some do not, some perform exorcisms, some do not, some read the bible in the service, some do not, some sing in their service, some do not, some are completely silent in their service, some do not, some profess polygamy, some do not, some use 73 books in the bible, some use 66 and some have used 63 (Luther didn't believe James, Jude or Revelations were part of the bible), some profess tradition such as the Methodists and some do not, some believe in individual inspiration and some do not, some believe in speaking in tongues and some do not and the list goes on and on and on.

Do you really believe that the Churches whose beliefs are unchanged since the apostles are a worse representation of Christianity than the Baptists? I am not even Christian and I see the complete insanity of that position. The pope is a reasonable representative of apostolic Christianity in most cases. Some popes were heretics and some popes were problem children, but generally the popes are reasonable representatives of apostolic Christianity.

If Jesus Christ is Lord of Lords, Son of God, Master of the Universe, then we need all to become Catholic. Of course, if there is no god, then we all need to be atheists.

Unfortunately, atheists have no recruiting booth like Christians. The world would be a better place if we did, but as Nietsche said, we are looking for companions and not to be shepherds to sheep. You have to really want to change the world, like Lenin or Mao to care enough to do something like that. Sadly, they were the leaders of really bad ideas, hence the admonitions against shepherding.

Answer 3

I think there is something that says the pope is infallible and yet the Catholic church have many people consult and do studies into new doctrines and ideas that the pope endorses. My point it that it is not always the pope who comes up with the idea of a new thing in the Catholic church, only when it has been studied and approved by many.

I am not a Catholic by any means but I have loved the ones I have met in my time on earth. I hope this answer helps you.

Answer 4

Sorry, however the majority of you're pontificating ( what the pope is meant to do!) There could be no Bible if it weren't for the unbroken succession of the popes (Anti-Popes excepted) and the Catholic Church ( Study the Early Church) . It used to be all Catholic till the Reformation in Europe and England. The Pope is best infallible whilst he acts in conjunction with the Cardinals and Bishops in saying an issue of religion with out blunders. As a person of path he isn't infallible. Jesus made Peter the noticeable groundwork of his Church on the earth whilst he gave him the keys, and to his successors.

Answer 5

Catholic doctrine is based on the authentic teachings of Jesus Christ and the apostles, and on the continuing guidance provided to the church by their ordained successors, the bishops, in union with the pope, who are endowed by Jesus and his church with official teaching authority.

The pope has spoken infallibly only twice, throughout the entire history of Christianity ... and this is nothing theologically new ... as even the high priest Caiphus, the one who arranged to have Jesus put to death ... wielded the same power.

Some popes are wiser than others ... all have different gifts ... and all are instruments of God's will in some major way ... simply because the pope is the supreme pastor of the universal church.

Jesus personally founded, authorized, empowered, and eternally guaranteed the Catholic Church. He never did anything of the sort, for any other person or group.

Why shouldn't all be as one, as members of his only authentic church, according to Jesus' express wish, just as he and his Father are one?

Answer 6

The Church doesn't teach that the Pope is an infallible expert on Christianity. It teaches that he has the capacity to teach infallibly on faith and morals, i.e., when he uses this charism of authority, he conveys what the Holy Spirit wants us to know regarding what we should believe and how we should act. It's a gift of his office. It doesn't follow him around everywhere. The Pope is a fallible human being (like Peter) whom Christ has given authority to strengthen his brothers (Luke 22:31-32).

Yes, if the Catholic Church was successful in "stomping out" Protestantism, or rather in convincing Protestants to accept the fullness of faith in Jesus Christ that comes with the one Church He established, there would be only one denomination: "that they may be one, even as we [Jesus and the Father] are one" (John 17:11). All Christians would have access to the sacraments that Jesus established for us. All Christians would believe in the intercession of the saints, who pray in Heaven to the one mediator, Jesus, for us here on earth, and so on. There would still be speculative theology, philosophy, experimental science, etc., but all Christians would have a common background and a true unity rather than the scandalous disunity that is the hallmark of contemporary Protestantism.

It is Catholic belief that we should work for the unity of Christians "so there shall be one flock, one shepherd" (John 10:16). "Control" is not the point. The basic unity of belief, worship, and sacraments is the point.

Certainly it was bad that, for many centuries, the Church was entwined in the politics of many nations, bishops and the Pope became rich and many were more concerned with politics than with their mandate to teach the Faith. The restoration of that condition is not the goal of the Church. People in the Church at the time knew that these things were bad and resisted them, and they were canonized for their work (St. Francis, St. Catherine of Siena, and many others) by this same Church that you consider all-corrupt.

I'm certainly curious what Catholic is telling you "to listen only to experts on Christianity". In terms of his life before he became Pope, the current Pope is certainly an "expert" on Christianity in the sense of being a learned theologian, as are most Popes. That is not to say that Catholics must believe that the Pope is the greatest "expert" alive on Christianity. There are great theologians in the history of the Church that we would commonly rate as better theologians than the Popes of their lifetimes; St. Thomas Aquinas is probably the best example; St. Ambrose, St. Augustine, St. Alphonsus Liguori may be others. The Pope simply has the gift of his office that the Spirit gives him of saying what the Spirit wants to tell the Church. Think of Peter. In Acts 2, Peter is being given the gift of the Spirit to preach, in his office as head of the apostles. Peter was not the best theologian of the apostles, in all likelihood; if Jesus had wanted a good theologian he could have found plenty in Israel. Peter was simply the instrument that Jesus and the Spirit chose. In less dramatic fashion, the Pope continues, by virtue of his office, to say what the Spirit wishes to have said, as an instrument chosen by God for that purpose.

Answer 7

The Pope is far from infallible. He doesn't even represent the first christian churches, nor does he represent the true religion created by Jesus, being the Nazarenes/Gnostics.

1. The Catholic Church was without question the single largest and wealthiest economic entity of human history from 400 CE to 1800 CE (over 1400 years). It has only been since the advent of private banks and financial secrecy laws that the true wealth of the church has become "hidden in plain site".

2. The Vatican today is without question the single largest and wealthiest organization on the planet, with assets exceeding $3,000 Billion.
http://one-faith-of-god.org/final_testament/end_of_darkness/truth/truth_0030.htm

The Vatican is by far the largest holder of land titles for any organisation or government in the world with visible title to around US $316 Billion of property (churches, schools, hospitals etc) and around US $2,623 Billion of investment property hidden in an extremely complex networks of hundreds of thousands of trusts and front companies.

The current market property value of Vatican City, in the heart of Rome alone is worth between US $1 Billion and $3 Billion. This excludes the value of the priceless artworks and valuables stored within its walls.

3. The Vatican is responsible for the deaths of more people than any other organization/state in human history.

Hundreds of millions of lives have been lost because of the Popes and the church. See the Almanac of Evil.
http://one-faith-of-god.org/final_testament/end_of_darkness/evil/evil_0120.htm

4. The Vatican has known the truth that Paul of Tarsus created christianity not Jesus, but refuses to reveal the truth

The Vatican has known for almost 2000 years that it was Paul of Tarsus, not Jesus who founded christianity.
http://one-faith-of-god.org/new_testament/apocrypha/founders_christianity/founders_christianity_0010.htm

Jesus founded the Nazarenes also known as the gnostics.
http://one-faith-of-god.org/new_testament/apocrypha/nazarenes/nazarenes_0010.htm

===============
What would Jesus Do?

+ The Catholic Church has never been the legitimate body representing Jesus. It is an imposter, a fraud.

+ In spite of the overwhelming evidence of corruption, of morally bankrupt behaviour, of evil, many people continue to defend such action, to the point of attacking those who dare to raise it.

+ Until good people are prepared to take a stand against such evil, it will continue to thrive.

Answer 8

You are referring to papal infallibility which exercised differently today.

The pope speaks infallibly, that is, free from error, when he clearly states he is using his infallible authority. He must intend what he proclaims to be a matter of belief for the whole Church and it must concern faith and morals. The bishops share in this infallibility when, in union with the pope, they proclaim a dogma, either at an ecumenical council or with some other manner of teaching.

The pope's role since Vatican II has been exercised more often in communion with the other bishops in shared decision making called collegiality. The papal office has changed from that of a rigid dictator to benevolent apostle and pastor.

If you wish to study this doctrine in depth please go to this link. http://www.catholicity.com/encyclopedia/i/infallibility.html

Peace and blessings!

Answer 9

Which of you thinks the Pope is an infallible expert on Christianity?
I dont' see how since the Pope has never even read the Bible.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6b_vVNP4nM

.

Answer 10

According to the Papists, Poppa Pope is God's mouthpiece on Earth because God says so and they know this because the Pope says that God said that the Pope is true in everything he says because he said that he was. If you do not believe this they have a sturdy stake and warm bonfire ready for you..
It is the same argument that is used to prove the bible true.