Topic: Infallibilty Criteria
Question:
I was in a discussion with a Protestant friend of mine and we were talking about Papal infallibility especially Matt 16:18 etc. After granting me that Matt 16:18 may result in Peter being granted infallibility, and after I explained how infallibility is a negative charism and only invoked under certain circumstances (e.g. on faith and morals), he asked me where the Catholic Church gets their infallible criteria for their infallibility. That is, who decided that the charism of infallibility only arises on issues of faith and morals and how do we know that that decision for the criteria was infallible?
Answer:
There are two ways of anwering your question. First, let's take a look at the passage in question:
"And I tell you that you are Peter,and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven." (Matthew 16:18-19 NIV)
In reading the above passage, Jesus says "whatever you bind". In other words, on the face of it, Jesus is saying that WHATEVER the Church teaches, the flock are bound to believe it. Now, if that same Church restricts that infallibility to certain areas and it infallibly declares that the particular restriction is infallible, then that really solves the problem. In short, if one accepts the first premise of an ecclesial infallibility, then anything that infallible body declares as being infallible is, by its very nature, infallible. This is the definition of the First Vatican Council concerning infallibility:
...we teach and define as a divinely revealed dogma that:
when the Roman pontiff speaks EX CATHEDRA, that is, when,
i) in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians,
ii) in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority,
iii) he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole church,
he possesses, by the divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, that infallibility which the divine Redeemer willed his church to enjoy in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals. Therefore, such definitions of the Roman pontiff are of themselves, and not by the consent of the church, irreformable.
(Vatican I, On the infallible teaching authority of the Roman pontiff, 4:9)
The second point that your friend might want to consider is to appreciate the context of Jesus' statement. Jesus was a Jew speaking from the Jewish tradition. He was God and He chose His words carefully so that they would not be misunderstood among his followers. He was a rabbi too. And being a rabbi, He chose to use language that would convey his meaning *unequivocally* in RELIGIOUS AND JEWISH terms. To rip the clear and obvious context of his teaching away from the culture and tradition in which He lived is not an option. You do not assume a lawyer is speaking outside his frame of reference when he gives you his opinion on a legal matter do you?
"The power of binding and loosing was always claimed by the Pharisees. Under Queen Alexandra the Pharisees, says Josephus (War of the Jews 1:5:2), ‘became the administrators of all public affairs so as to be empowered to banish and readmit whom they pleased, as well as to loose and bind.’ The various schools had the power to ‘bind and loose’; that is, to forbid and to permit (Talmud: Ta’anit 12a). This power and authority vested in the rabbinical body of each age or in the Sanhedrin, received its ratification and final sanction from the celestial court of justice (Sifna, Emor, ix; Talmud: Makkot 23b).’ In this sense Jesus, when appointing his successors, he used the familiar formula (Matt. 16:19, 18:18). By these words he virtually invested them with the same authority as that which he found belonging to the scribes and Pharisees who ‘bind heavy burdens and lay them on men’s shoulders, but will not move them with one of their fingers’; that is, ‘loose them,’ as they have the power to do (Matthew 23:2-4)." - David H. Stern, Jewish New Testament Commentary, (Clarksville, MD: Jewish New Testament Publications, 1992), p.56-57.
In other words, we know that when Jesus used 'binding and loosing", He was basically speaking in regards to issues related to salvation i.e. faith and morals. Furthermore, in Matthew 16:18-19, Jesus gives the power to bind to Peter exclusively and later in Matthew 18:18, He does so with all of the Apostles. This is comparable to the Catholic teaching that the Pope (Peter) or the Pope (Peter) and the Bishops (Apostles) are capable of rendering a binding and infallible decision.
So even from the Scriptural text of Matthew 16 and 18, we can already see some of the criteria of infallibility being presented.
John Pacheco
The Catholic Legate
February 9, 2003