You know your “gotcha” questions are easily searchable on Google.
This Masonic false Pope pushes the Vaccine - I ain’t listening to him. Vigano is pretty much saying what we all already knew, this guy is a fraud.
Non-Catholics often confuse the pope’s gift of ‘infallibility’ with ‘impeccability’. They think the Catholic Church is claiming her Popes are sinless or that the Pope is claiming inspiration from God for every pronouncement he makes. This is not the case. In fact, infallibility is attached to his office, not his person. It is a protective gift, not a creative one introducing new revelation.
The infallibility of the pope is certainly a doctrine that has been more clearly understood over time, but is not one that was invented in 1870. It is clear in Scripture that Christ promised the protection of the Holy Spirit, saying, "I will ask the Father and he will give you another Paraclete—to be with you always; the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot accept, since it neither sees him nor recognizes him because he remains with you and will be within you . . . . the Paraclete, the Holy Spirit whom the Father will send will remind you of all that I have told you" (John 14: 16-17, 26). "When the Spirit of truth comes He will guide you to all truth . . ." (John 16:14). Peter shares the gift of infallibility (a negative gift in the sense it keeps him from teaching error on matters of faith and morals) with the other apostles and their successors, the bishops.
The "pope" (an Italian word meaning "father") and the bishops together are the magisterium of the Church, that is, the teaching authority. As Jesus said, "He who listens to you, listens to me" (Luke 10:16); "all that you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven" (Mt. 18:18). When bishops of the world meet together summoned by the papacy, they meet in ecumenical council, which if held at the Vatican is referred to as a Vatican council. They are usually called infrequently only at times of pivotal or critical moments in the life of the Church.
For example, the Council of Jerusalem about 50 A.D. discussed in Acts of the Apostles, chapter15 was a precursor of later councils. After that Council made its decision to not require Gentile Christians to be circumcised as desired by the Judaizers, it wrote to the Church that " . .it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden . . ." The first formal ecumenical council was that of Nicaea in 325 A.D., which condemned the Arian heresy and declared that Christ was consubstantial with the Father.
Papal infallibility is a doctrine of the Catholic church. If you don't recognize all popes as infallible, you disagree with Catholic doctrine.
Like Martin Luther and all protestants.
You say there were a few "bad popes", but indulgences went on for a span of almost 500 years.
Why were people able to pay for salvation in 1566 but not 1567?
Kind of funny how indulgences started 1095, Martin Luther posted his thesis in 1517, indulgences ended in 1567. Sounds like Catholic dogma yielded to pressure from protestant arguments?
I don't know how you can seriously continue being an apologist for Catholic dogma while simultaneously disagreeing with parts of it. To me, it seems I'm conversing with a mostly-Catholic protestant.
You know your “gotcha” questions are easily searchable on Google.
This Masonic false Pope pushes the Vaccine - I ain’t listening to him. Vigano is pretty much saying what we all already knew, this guy is a fraud.
Non-Catholics often confuse the pope’s gift of ‘infallibility’ with ‘impeccability’. They think the Catholic Church is claiming her Popes are sinless or that the Pope is claiming inspiration from God for every pronouncement he makes. This is not the case. In fact, infallibility is attached to his office, not his person. It is a protective gift, not a creative one introducing new revelation.
The infallibility of the pope is certainly a doctrine that has been more clearly understood over time, but is not one that was invented in 1870. It is clear in Scripture that Christ promised the protection of the Holy Spirit, saying, "I will ask the Father and he will give you another Paraclete—to be with you always; the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot accept, since it neither sees him nor recognizes him because he remains with you and will be within you . . . . the Paraclete, the Holy Spirit whom the Father will send will remind you of all that I have told you" (John 14: 16-17, 26). "When the Spirit of truth comes He will guide you to all truth . . ." (John 16:14). Peter shares the gift of infallibility (a negative gift in the sense it keeps him from teaching error on matters of faith and morals) with the other apostles and their successors, the bishops.
The "pope" (an Italian word meaning "father") and the bishops together are the magisterium of the Church, that is, the teaching authority. As Jesus said, "He who listens to you, listens to me" (Luke 10:16); "all that you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven" (Mt. 18:18). When bishops of the world meet together summoned by the papacy, they meet in ecumenical council, which if held at the Vatican is referred to as a Vatican council. They are usually called infrequently only at times of pivotal or critical moments in the life of the Church.
For example, the Council of Jerusalem about 50 A.D. discussed in Acts of the Apostles, chapter15 was a precursor of later councils. After that Council made its decision to not require Gentile Christians to be circumcised as desired by the Judaizers, it wrote to the Church that " . .it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden . . ." The first formal ecumenical council was that of Nicaea in 325 A.D., which condemned the Arian heresy and declared that Christ was consubstantial with the Father.
Papal infallibility is a doctrine of the Catholic church. If you don't recognize all popes as infallible, you disagree with Catholic doctrine.
Like Martin Luther and all protestants.
You say there were a few "bad popes", but indulgences went on for a span of almost 500 years.
Why were people able to pay for salvation in 1566 but not 1567?
Kind of funny how indulgences started 1095, Martin Luther posted his thesis in 1517, indulgences ended in 1567. Sounds like Catholic dogma yielded to pressure from protestant arguments?
I don't know how you can seriously continue being an apologist for Catholic dogma while simultaneously disagreeing with parts of it. To me, it seems I'm conversing with a mostly-Catholic protestant.