I am reading a conversion story and apologetical book called An Invitation Heeded published at the end of the 1800s with a view to editing it for re-publication by the Coming Home Network. In the chapter on infallibility the author makes the very good point that rather than the Catholic Church’s stance on infallibility being nonsensical, it is the churches who deny infallibility that are absurd.
The essential Protestant position is, “Our church is merely a human institution. It is not infallible.” And yet they demand allegiance of the faithful to the beliefs and moral teachings of their church. But if their church, by their own insistence, is fallible how can they demand obedience and loyalty to their teachings? There is a logical hiccup here of enormous magnitude.
“Ah!” the Protestant will object, “Our church is fallible, but the Holy Scriptures are not, and it is the Holy Scriptures in which we place our confidence–not in the traditions of men.” Of course, this begs the question because Protestants of every stripe–from radical Episcopalians with their Mother Goddess worship and homosexual marriage to mainstream Evangelicals to Jehovah’s Witnesses all claim that their beliefs and practices are derived from and at least consistent with Scripture.
In fact, while denying that their leaders are infallible, every religion must act as if they are infallible, otherwise their religion would cease to function. Whenever Bob the Baptist steps through his church door he functions on the basic assumption that his pastor does not teach error in the matter of faith and morals. (this is the definition of infallibility) Likewise, Esther the Episcopalian and Martin the Methodist and Frank the Four Square Apostolic Church of the Redeemed of the Fourth Degree-ist all assume that their pastors teach without error–otherwise their religion wouldn’t work. They have to assume infallibility in practice, even if they deny it in theory.
The fact of the matter is, all religions function on the assumption that their church leader is infallible. Catholics are just the only ones who dare to make the claim, and how can Catholics make such an audacious claim?
There are only three options: 1) they are insane and deluded 2) they are liars 3) It’s true.
Will be reading this to my kids today during their homeschooling.Thank you Father, this makes the point very clearly.I was delighted (and a bit jealous) to hear that former members of our homeschool group, the Devine family, have moved and are in your parish. They say every Mass is like Christmas!
I pick the last one – #3. it’s TRUE
I think some evangelical churches who think they are preaching the truth and that the way they run their churches and their lives is the ‘only way’ are definitely deluded.
Add to the argument that somehow an fallible Church put together an infallible Bible with an infallible table of contents…. hmmmm…. how interesting…. Sweet, fresh juice from an apparently rotten orange.
Jesus was infallible, and most people who heard him didn’t believe everything he said, doubted his authority, discounted the stuff that didn’t make sense to them, discarded what they disagreed with.Given that precedent, we should expect his infallible representative to get at least a bad a reception.
I meant: as bad a reception.
Amen! It is killing me being here at Liberty. I need freedom from these teachings!!!
Brilliant! I’m going to print this off and share it w/my oldest son who is going to be confirmed this May.
The Orthodox also believe themselves to be the infallible Church.
I always thought it was weird that Protestants deny that the Pope guided by the Holy Spirit could be infallible while each individual Christian guided by the Holy Spirit would be infallible when reading Scripture.
The Orthodox, like the Protestants, do not hold to a concept of infallibility like Catholics do. They believe more in conciliar authority–that decisions made by a group of bishops are trustworthy and guided by the Holy Spirit. But the Patriarch of Moscow and the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople often butt heads (ask the Russian Orthodox of England).I left the Orthodox church partly because I saw a lack of consensus on many issues regarding faith and morals. Orthodox often treat the Church Fathers the way Protestants use the Bible–pulling a quote from this saint and that staretz to back up their personal orthopraxis. A fist fight almost broke out in one parish here in the USA because the Greeks wanted to use palm branches on Palm Sunday, while the Russians wanted to use pussy-willows. Then you get the multitude of jurisdictions trying to “out-orthodox” each other and moving in and out of communion with each other.To conclude my rant: no, the Orthodox do not consider themselves infallible, but each brand of orthodoxy considers itself superior.
My kids will be reading this, also. Thank you, Father.
There are, of course, cases where people do think their pastor or their church is wrong. Yes, it does cause all sorts of problems but it does happen.
In Pope B16’s book on Jesus of Nazareth, he begins with a short paragraph to say that this was his own views and not infallible. I have always taken this short note as a way of showing tangibly this fact of infallibility. Being Catholic doesn’t mean never having to disagree with the Pope, but it does mean having to follow. There has to be someone who leads and a final arbitor in times of intense dispute. And so if the Pope wishes to entertain Mrs. Pelosi at the Vatican rather than excommunicate her, we must recognize that the Pope has the last word in such matters.
Christopher,That was just flat out funny!What a knotty subject… always sure to cause heated talk!I can’t say that I am 100% comfortable in this, but the point you drove home here was right on.It is often times an almost impossible discussion to be in with some folks.-g-
Radio45: I like the way you put that.Fr. Longenecker: It took me a long time after returning to the church to be able to articulate what you just said so well. I think that’s in part because our culture accepts relativism, and because we’ve all grown up with hundreds of Protestant churches and so we rarely question whether that even makes sense. Before you can understand the Catholic claim to truth, you have to get your mind around the whole concept of “truth,” which is harder than it sounds. After returning to the church I read a lot of apologetics and so discovered a lot more about Protestant and non-denominational churches than I ever knew. It helped me to understand Catholicism much better, but it also helped me to understand my non-Catholic neighbors and friends, who all do believe (to one degree or another) that they are and/or their pastor is infallible. It’s not a word that they use but they do mean it. They are right and you cannot question them because, in the end, “God put this in my heart,” or “Jesus showed me this.” Talk about an infallible source! And they just don’t care how many other people agree because they are serene in their sense of being right. In fact, some of them will even tell you that they pride themselves on studying various authors and systems and Bible studies, but not accepting any of them because “they don’t accept the word of man,” just the personal relationship they enjoy with Jesus. There’s a sort of agreement among Christians to disagree with each other as long as they accept the same “base” Christianity, and not to look too closely at even that. When you look at this line of reasoning, it doesn’t make much sense.
As an ex Evangelical Protestant I 100% agree that this is the major issue. Under Protestantism each person becomes their own infallible “pope”. Each denomination makes arbitrary statements about all sorts of issues, from worship to marriage etc.Our Lord gave us the Rock on which He built His Church. Thank goodness that we have that Rock.And no, it is not as some Protestants say, Peter’s faith that is the rock – it is Peter himself. Jesus, having deliberately changed Simon’s name to Peter (Rock), said, “You are Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church. …I give to you the keys …”For most people I believe the real problem with Papal infallability is that once they accept that the Pope is infallible they are no longer their own “popes” able to pick and choose what parts of the faith they want to believe and to do.
On the other hand, it could be argued papal infallibility represents a lack of confidence that individuals have access to the truth. Indeed, it seems to place the attainment of correct belief beyond the ability of average men. In this understanding, truth becomes something entrusted only to a noble few, and doled out to the rest. Such a viewpoint could lead to a pessimistic view of the universe, where everything is so ambiguous that people give up trying to decipher it and place their trust entirely in one man.Protestants believe only in the infallibility of truth. They readily acknowledge that human passions can cloud our perception of this truth, but they uphold that everyone can have direct access to it. Many view Catholics as pseudo-relativists or even gnostics because they claim we teach only an elite with secret knowledge can guide us. To a certain degree, their criticism is valid. After all, if only our leaders can know truth properly, how are we to know they can know truth properly? By having access to the truth ourselves? But then, where would that leave them?And indeed, in practice, most Catholics follow the Protestant notion of infallibility. I have never once heard a convert say he joined because of what the Pope said; I have, however, heard a convert say he joined after much personal investigation into the matter, after discovering the truth for himself, after finding a direct access to said truth through intellectual study…you get my point. The convert interpreted everything for himself, weighed the facts with his own brain, and came face-to-face with truth, truth which he himself discovered, found in the same way Protestants claim truth is found (individual investigation).The Eastern Orthodox believe in a sort of cooperate infallibility of all true believers, wherein true believers believe the truth, and outsiders have the tools to investigate and find this body of truth for themselves and join it. Again, like in Protestantism, individual access to the truth is asserted.I cannot overemphasize that this is a powerful shield against relativism. An objective truth must be accessible and knowable to all, if not in practice, at least in theory. Protestants and Orthodox seem to support this notion. Catholics don’t in theory, but do in practice.Just some talking points to make things a bit more interesting around here. 😉
Eo-That was well put! I think where some difficulties lie also are obviously in some heinous happenings in Church history. In the minds of many, such atrocities committed by the old Church (no matter which level made it happen) keeps them far from accepting such a thing. Also, this only adds what they THINK Infallibility means. This issue is not simple and not easily dissected. What is even worse, is that the Catholic laity often times claim views that are not even supported by the Church, and this confuses and frustrates even more.What a whopper of a subject!-g-
Protestants believe only in the infallibility of truth. This statement reveals profound misunderstanding about infallibility. Infallibility can be predicated only of a person or persons; that is, infallibility is the incapacity to err (to make an error, to choose wrongly, to decide incorrectly) when expounding doctrine under certainly carefully defined conditions. Such actions can only be undertaken by a person or person. The truth is the truth is the truth, but the truth is not a person that can choose at all, let alone choose rightly or wrongly. Thus, truth is not, and simply cannot be, infallible.On the other hand, having been a Protestant myself, I do not believe that the statement I have quoted is correct at all. A Protestant is more likely to say that he believes in the infallibility of the Bible but not of the Church. That, too, is not possible for the reasons already explained. The Bible is inerrant, not infallible, and being inerrant requires an infallible interpreter.
I’ve long maintained that infallibility of doctrine is a logical necessity of a Biblical Christian faith.
Check out this new Christian band that just released their first album. From what I heard on the samples site, they sound really good.Introducing the new Christian National Anthem: Guns & Jesus.http://ccrg.info/cas.htm