[RECUSA]

Is the pope infallible, and where do we find this in scripture?

Where do we see the pope as absolute leader of ALL christiendom?

Wasn't the early church more episcopal until after the 7th century c.e.?

What does one do when Rome errs?

[smitty2622]

Is the pope infallible

I usually stay out of these things but this is just funny. Do people really believe this? The guy is human ya know


Peace

[Godsservent]

Where do we see the pope as absolute leader of ALL christiendom?

Here, but I think its the hat

[Ridley's Own]

Originally posted by RECUSA
Is the pope infallible, and where do we find this in scripture?

No on both counts. A possible argument could, I think, be made that true ecumenical councils are infallible, but I'm not sure.

Where do we see the pope as absolute leader of ALL christiendom?

Not until Greg the Great. Again, based on the historical deference given to teh Bishop of Rome, an argument that he is the primus inter pares would be appropriate, I think, but w/o jurisdiction over anyone outside of his see or in his capacity as primate of Italy. More akin to the Anglican understanding of the Abp. of Canterbury than anything else.

Wasn't the early church more episcopal until after the 7th century c.e.?

In my way of thinking, yes. And probably continued to be until the Great Schism.

What does one do when Rome errs?

Reform.

Godsservant,

I am curious as to what the Pope's miter has to do with anything... My bishop wears a miter, and he doesn't claim universal jurisdiction...

[joslar15]

Papal infallibility refers only to teaching matters of faith and morals with the authority he has as Vicar of Christ, he is divinely preserved from error. It has no scriptural backing. It was defined by the Vatican Council in 1870.

[Ridley's Own]

Originally posted by joslar15
Papal infallibility refers only to teaching matters of faith and morals with the authority he has as Vicar of Christ, he is divinely preserved from error. It has no scriptural backing. It was defined by the Vatican Council in 1870.

It doesn't even have the support of tradition, either. Hence the Old Catholics of Utrecht.

[RECUSA]

Could some Roman Catholics answer this, please?

[Bryan]

Originally posted by Ridley's Own
an argument that he is the primus inter pares would be appropriate

for those of us who aren't fluent in latin, could you translate this please?

Originally posted by joslar15
Papal infallibility refers only to teaching matters of faith and morals with the authority he has as Vicar of Christ, he is divinely preserved from error. It has no scriptural backing. It was defined by the Vatican Council in 1870.

Ok, I see. So you hold to a belief that has no Scriptural support and wasn't officially sanctioned until 300 years after the Reformation. And Catholics say we ignore tradition, um yeah...

Originally posted by Ridley's Own
the Old Catholics of Utrecht.

WHO??

Originally posted by RECUSA
Could some Roman Catholics answer this, please?

I am pretty sure that joslar15 is RCC.

[Ridley's Own]

Bryan,

Primus inter pares = First Among Equals. Basically, its the position enjoyed by the Archbishop of Canterbury among Anglican Bishops and the Patriarch of Constantinople among E. Orthodox Eparchs (bishops).

The Old Catholics were a group of Dutch Roman Catholics who in 1870 seperated from Rome over papal infallibility because they held it had no origin in Church tradition. If I understand their history correct, they were basically handed autonomy from the Vatican.

[Bryan]

Originally posted by Ridley's Own
Bryan,

Primus inter pares = First Among Equals. Basically, its the position enjoyed by the Archbishop of Canterbury among Anglican Bishops and the Patriarch of Constantinople among E. Orthodox Eparchs (bishops).

The Old Catholics were a group of Dutch Roman Catholics who in 1870 seperated from Rome over papal infallibility because they held it had no origin in Church tradition. If I understand their history correct, they were basically handed autonomy from the Vatican.

thanks for the explanation.