The PuritanBoard  

Go Back   The PuritanBoard > Apologetics Forum > Defending the Faith

Defending the Faith Discussion of Apologetical Issues with Unbelievers and Unorthodox groups
always ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope in you, with meekness and fear (1 Pe. 3:15)

» Online Users: 47
6 members and 41 guests
Abd_Yesua_alMasih, Simply_Nikki, SolaGratia, Theoretical, Tim
Most users ever online was 856, 07-06-2007 at 12:19 AM.
Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 09-04-2007, 12:22 PM
Scott's Avatar
Puritanboard Graduate
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,902
Thanks: 8
Thanked 30 Times in 16 Posts
Catholics / Infallible Magisterium

Does anyone have any quotes from Catholic scholars or authorities to the effect that Catholics have a fallible belief in an infallible magisterium?
__________________
Scott Roberts
Ruling Elder, Lakeside Presbyterian Church (PCA)
Southlake, Texas
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 09-04-2007, 04:00 PM
Scott's Avatar
Puritanboard Graduate
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,902
Thanks: 8
Thanked 30 Times in 16 Posts
BTW, I am coming at this from a response to the Catholic claim that the protestant position is weak because we do not have an inspired list of the books of the canon. Sproul and others have suggested that protestant have a fallible list of infallible books. Catholics pounce on that. I have this excerpt from Roman Catholics and Evangelicals: Agreements and Differences, which I think is helpful:
Quote:
The supposed need for an infallible magisterium is an epistemically insufficient basis for rising above the level of probable knowledge. Catholic scholars admit, as they must, that they do not have infallible evidence that there is an infallible teaching magisterium. They have merely what even they believe to be only probable arguments. But if this is the case, then epistemically or apologetically there is no more than a probable basis for Catholics to believe that a supposedly infallible pronouncement of their church is true.
Anyway, I am looking for some sources of Catholic scholars who admit their position.
__________________
Scott Roberts
Ruling Elder, Lakeside Presbyterian Church (PCA)
Southlake, Texas
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 09-04-2007, 06:00 PM
DTK's Avatar
DTK DTK is offline.
Puritanboard Sophomore
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Elkton, MD
Posts: 948
Thanks: 29
Thanked 137 Times in 57 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott View Post
BTW, I am coming at this from a response to the Catholic claim that the protestant position is weak because we do not have an inspired list of the books of the canon. Sproul and others have suggested that protestant have a fallible list of infallible books. Catholics pounce on that. I have this excerpt from Roman Catholics and Evangelicals: Agreements and Differences, which I think is helpful:
Quote:
The supposed need for an infallible magisterium is an epistemically insufficient basis for rising above the level of probable knowledge. Catholic scholars admit, as they must, that they do not have infallible evidence that there is an infallible teaching magisterium. They have merely what even they believe to be only probable arguments. But if this is the case, then epistemically or apologetically there is no more than a probable basis for Catholics to believe that a supposedly infallible pronouncement of their church is true.
Anyway, I am looking for some sources of Catholic scholars who admit their position.
I'm not sure that you're going to find a source that states it the way you've proposed. Their old encyclopedia does admit the following...

Catholic Encyclopedia: It is only in connexion with doctrinal authority as such that, practically speaking, this question of infallibility arises; that is to say, when we speak of the Church’s infallibility we mean, at least primarily and principally, what is sometimes called active as distinguished from passive infallibility. We mean in other words that the Church is infallible in her objective teaching regarding faith and morals, not that believers are infallible in their subjective interpretation of her teaching. This is obvious in the case of individuals, any one of whom may err in his understanding of the Church’s teaching; nor is the general or even unanimous consent of the faithful in believing a distinct and independent organ of infallibility. Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. VII, Infallibility (New York: The Encyclopedia Press, Inc., 1913), p. 790,1st-2nd column.

DTK
__________________
Sola Scriptura est norma normans non normata
David T. King, pastor
Christ Presbyterian Church (OPC)
Elkton, Maryland
Augustine (354-430): Therefore what He [i.e., Christ] has deigned to speak to us, we ought to believe that He meant us to understand. But if we do not understand He, being asked, gives understanding, who gave His Word unasked. NPNF1: Vol. VII, Tractates on John, Tractate XXII, §1.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.2.0 ©2008, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright © 2002-2008 PuritanBoard.com
Hosted by WebsiteMaven - helping ministries with web hosting advice, reviews, and design.
Westminster Abbey © Confessional Presbyterian Presses - used with permission.
Add Our Custom Button to your Google Toolbar

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64