മാർപ്പാപ്പ അപ്രമാദിത്വമാണോ?

Catholics believe that the pope is indeed infallible, but only on matters of faith, only when four very specific conditions are met, and only because he is guided by the Holy Spirit.

The pope is a man, and like any other man, the pope is a fallen sinner. എന്നിട്ടും, as the direct successor of Saint Peter, he is guided by the Holy Spirit to avoid errors on matters of Church doctrine. To some, the pope may seem to set up a barrier for Catholics understanding Scripture, or he may even seem like a kind of spiritual tyrant, dictating to Catholics what they must believe. Understood properly, എങ്കിലും, the papacy is a tremendous gift that Jesus gave to His Church in order to keep her from straying into false interpretations of Scripture, and to help her grow into a deeper relationship with Him.

There is strong empirical evidence to support what Catholics believe about the pope. Let’s have a look

Bind and Loose

Probably the most important Scripture passage for understanding the primacy of Peter and Papal Infallibility is the മത്തായിയുടെ സുവിശേഷം 16:17-19. In this passage, as we will see, Peter receives a special teaching authority from Jesus. To set the stage, Jesus has asked the Twelve Apostles who people believe He is. They give back a series of incorrect answers. Our Lord then asks them, “Who do you say that I am?” At this point, the Apostle Simon steps forward to speak on behalf of the Twelve, giving the correct answer: “നീ ക്രിസ്തുവാണ്, the Son of the living God.” To this, Jesus responds:

17 “നീ അനുഗ്രഹിക്കപ്പെട്ടവൻ, സൈമൺ ബാർ-ജോനാ! എന്തെന്നാൽ, മാംസവും രക്തവും നിങ്ങളോട് ഇത് വെളിപ്പെടുത്തിയിട്ടില്ല, എന്നാൽ സ്വർഗ്ഗസ്ഥനായ എന്റെ പിതാവേ.

18 ഞാൻ നിങ്ങളോടു പറയുന്നു, നീ പത്രോസ് ആകുന്നു, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of hell shall not prevail against it.

19 സ്വർഗ്ഗരാജ്യത്തിന്റെ താക്കോലുകൾ ഞാൻ നിനക്ക് തരും, നീ ഭൂമിയിൽ കെട്ടുന്നതെല്ലാം സ്വർഗത്തിലും കെട്ടപ്പെട്ടിരിക്കും, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

ആദ്യം, in verse 17, the Lord blesses Peter, affirming his knowledge is a matter not of human intuition, but of divine revelation.

രണ്ടാമത്, in verse 18, He gives Simon his new name, പീറ്റർ, fulfilling His words to him from the യോഹന്നാന്റെ സുവിശേഷം 1:42. And Jesus promises to build His Church upon him.

Third, in verse 19, Jesus gives Peter the gift of the keys of the kingdom of heaven and the authority to bind and loose (in rabbinical language this meant to forbid ഒപ്പം permit), assuring him that his earthly decisions would be upheld in heaven. Here is the crux of the matter! The things which Peter teaches on earth will be upheld as truths by God in heaven. വ്യക്തമായി, because he is imperfect and a sinner, Peter must be given a special grace to prevent him from issuing commands that are contrary to the will of God. This special grace is what Catholics call Papal Infallibility. Without it, God would be in the position of having to confirm false doctrines as true—which, തീർച്ചയായും, would be an impossibility as He is Truth Itself (കാണുക ജോൺ 14:6). To put it another way, if it is possible for the earthly leader of the Church to make an erroneous teaching binding upon the faithful, then the Church lacks the divine stability that Jesus assured her when He promised the gates of hell would not prevail against her (മാറ്റ്. 16:18).1

Keys to the Kingdom of Heaven

The symbolism of the keys comes from the ancient custom by which the king appointed his royal steward overseer of the kingdom in his absence and entrusted him with the keys to its gates.

Book of the Prophet Isaiah, the Lord sternly addresses the king’s steward, Shebna, പറയുന്നത്, “I will thrust you from your office, and you will be cast down from your station. And I will place on [your successor’s] shoulder the key of the house of David; he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open” (22:19, 22; emphasis added).2

Jesus is the King of kings, “the holy one, the true one, who has the key of David, who opens and no one shall shut, who shuts and no one opens” (വെളിപ്പെടുന്ന 3:7; see also 1:18 ഒപ്പം ജോലി 12:14). ഇൻ മത്തായി 16:19, Christ the King appoints Peter to be His steward to oversee the Church, His kingdom on earth, in His absence. In so doing, the Lord does not relinquish His supreme authority, any more than the ancient monarchs relinquished theirs to their stewards.

The teaching infallibility of Peter, which one glimpses in his confession at Caesarea Philippi (മാറ്റ്. 16), is evident at the famous Council of Jerusalem, at which the Apostles meet to decide whether or not adherence to the Mosaic Law is required for salvation.

Saint Luke’s account, in the അപ്പോസ്തലന്മാരുടെ പ്രവൃത്തികൾ, shows the Holy Spirit speaking through the Church’s Magisterium (or “teaching office”)—that is, through the assembly of the Apostles (or bishops) in union with Peter (the pope)—to conclusively settle this doctrinal dispute (15:28). പ്രത്യേകം, it is Peter who settles the dispute; it is his speech which brings the debate to a close (15:7). Although Saint James, as the Bishop of Jerusalem, is given the honor of moderating the council, it is Peter who addresses the assembly on doctrine with James’ closing remarks confirming his instruction.

 

When Does Infallibility Hold?

Catholic teaching on the infallibility of the Pope is frequently misconstrued. In order for a statement to qualify as infallible, certain criteria must be met. The Pope must:

  1. Intend to speak as the Pastor of the Universal Church. വിപരീതമായി, he speaks quite often as a private theologian or an ordinary bishop, such as when he addresses pilgrims gathered in Saint Peter’s Square. In these instances, the Pope’s infallibility does not come into play.
  2. Pronounce on matters of faith and morals. Statements on any other subject (such as politics or science) do not qualify.
  3. Intend to render an irrevocable decision that will be binding upon all the faithful. The establishment of a fast, the banning of a book, or the censure of a particular group or individual, are all examples of mere disciplinary actions, which are reversible and, അതുകൊണ്ടു, not infallible.
  4. Must speak with full consent of the will. Words uttered under duress would not count. His intention to speak infallibly must be made clear, either by the Pope directly or by the circumstances surrounding the pronouncement.

While a papal statement may meet one or more of these requirements, it is necessary that all of the requirements be met in order for it to be considered infallible.

It’s Teaching, not Conduct!

It is often wrongly assumed that the Pope’s personal failings disprove his infallibility, പക്ഷേ infallibility has to do with teaching, not conduct. കൂടാതെ, Jesus’ command to obey His intermediaries (കാണുക ലൂക്കോസ് 10:16 ഒപ്പം മത്തായി 18:17) was not made contingent upon their moral integrity (കാണുക മത്തായി 23:2-3).

In the Old Testament, David remained the legitimate King of Israel despite his sins (see the Second Book of Samuel, 11:1). His son, King Solomon, had seven hundred wives and three hundred concubines, and even engaged in idolatry, yet he too remained the ordained leader of God’s chosen people for forty years (see the First Book of Kings, 11:3, 5, 7, 33, 42). മാത്രമല്ല, consider the Twelve Apostles, who were the first leaders of the New Testament Church, and were handpicked by the Lord Himself!

  • One betrayed Him for thirty pieces of silver;
  • All but one abandoned Him in His hour of greatest need;
  • Peter denied he even knew Him (കാണുക മത്തായി, 26:20, തുടങ്ങിയവർ.);
  • Even after the Resurrection, Thomas had a crisis of faith (കാണുക ജോൺ 20:24-25);
  • Peter displayed bigotry (കാണുക ഗലാത്യർ 2:11-14); ഒപ്പം
  • Paul conceded, “I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I that I do not want to do” (റോമാക്കാർ 7:15).

AND YET, the sinfulness of the Church’s leaders does not nullify their authority, nor in the case of the popes does it affect their ability to infallibly define dogma. We see in the Gospels, സത്യത്തിൽ, that the high priest, Caiaphas, retained the gift of prophecy in spite of his sinfulness (കാണുക ജോൺ 11:49-52, below “Ex Cathedra and Moses”).

The Church does not stand because of her leaders’ personal sanctity, but because of Christ’s promise to send the Holy Spirit to guide her “into all the truth” (ജോൺ 16:13).

What Are the Arguments Against Papal Infallibility?

MATTHEW 16:23
In their efforts to disprove Papal Infallibility, detractors often refer to മത്തായി 16:23 in which Jesus rebukes Peter, saying “Get behind me, സാത്താൻ! You are a hindrance to me; for you are not on the side of God, but of men.” The Lord reproached Peter in this way because the Apostle, pleading for Jesus to avoid the Passion, in effect resembled Satan who had tempted Jesus to abandon His mission (കാണുക മത്തായി 4:1, തുടങ്ങിയവർ.). The Lord’s rebuke does not injure Peter’s infallibility, എങ്കിലും, since the Apostle’s words constitute an erroneous private judgment and not a dogmatic teaching.

GALATIANS 2:11
Another passage, which some believe disproves Peter’s infallibility, is found in the second chapter of Saint Paul’s Letter to the Galatians, in which he recounts his confrontation with Peter over the latter’s refusal to sit and eat with Gentile converts (2:11). എന്നിരുന്നാലും, because Paul’s rebuke had to do with a fault “of procedure and not of doctrine,” Peter’s infallibility was never at issue (Tertullian, The Demurrer Against the Heretics 23:10).

Some misinterpret this passage as proof of Peter’s inferiority to Paul. The very fact that Paul makes such an issue of his standing up to Peter, എങ്കിലും, indicates he believed he had addressed a superior. As Saint Augustine observed, “Peter left to those that came after him an example, എന്ന്, if at any time they deviated from the right path, they should not think it beneath them to accept correction from those who were their juniors” (Letter to Jerome 82:22; see also Saint Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica 2:33:4).

BAD POPES
While the fallacy persists in some circles that the majority of popes have been great sinners, the truth is most of Peter’s successors have been men of outstanding virtue. Critics have found it advantageous, എങ്കിലും, to highlight the immorality of a few popes over the sanctity of the many.

Catholics have never denied the popes are fallen human beings in need of salvation like everyone else. What Catholics insist upon, എങ്കിലും,—and what history bears out—is that no pope has ever officially taught error on faith and morals, nor contradicted the dogmatic decision of a predecessor or council.

The doctrinal integrity of the Papacy has stood against any and all charges adversaries have raised against it. Each case, when freed from anti-Catholic distortions and taken in the proper historical and theological context, demonstrates the miraculous integrity of Catholic dogma, in spite of the all-too-human nature of the Church’s leaders.3

Ex Cathedra and Moses

When the Pope speaks infallibly, he is said to be speaking ex cathedra, which is Latin for “from the chair.” The concept of a primary seat of authority comes from the Old Testament, in which Moses sat in judgment of the people (കാണുക പുറപ്പാട് 18:13).

Moses’ authority, അതും, was perpetuated through a line of successors (കാണുക നിയമാവർത്തനം, 17:8-9; 34:9). സത്യത്തിൽ, the Seat of Moses remained active till the time of Christ, as Jesus Himself revealed, പറയുന്നത്, "ശാസ്ത്രിമാരും പരീശന്മാരും മോശയുടെ ഇരിപ്പിടത്തിൽ ഇരിക്കുന്നു; അതിനാൽ അവർ നിങ്ങളോട് പറയുന്നതെന്തും പരിശീലിക്കുകയും നിരീക്ഷിക്കുകയും ചെയ്യുക, അല്ലാതെ അവർ ചെയ്യുന്നതല്ല; എന്തെന്നാൽ അവർ പ്രസംഗിക്കുന്നു, എന്നാൽ പരിശീലിക്കരുത്" (കാണുക മത്തായി 23:1-3).

Gospel of Saint John we see a council of the chief priests and Pharisees convening under the authority of the high priest Caiaphas (11:49). At the council, Caiaphas utters the prophecy, “It is expedient for you that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation should not perish” (11:50). As John notes, Caiaphas “did not say this of his own accord, പക്ഷേ (on account of his) being high priest that year” (11:51).

അങ്ങനെ, God continued to speak through the successors of Moses (regardless of their piety or wickedness). Peter fulfilled a similar role in the New Covenant, serving as Christ’s earthly representative or vicar through whom God speaks to the people.

അതനുസരിച്ച്, many early writings on the Papacy refer to the Mosaic tradition of the singular, authoritative chair. ഉദാഹരണത്തിന്, ദി Muratorian Fragment, written in Rome around A.D. 170, states, “Quite recently in our time, … Bishop Pius, sat in the chair of the church of the city of Rome.”

അതുപോലെ, Saint Cyprian, the Bishop of Carthage, writing in 251, made reference to this seat of authority (കാണുക Letter to Antonianus 55:8), and sometime before the year 325, an anonymous poet of Gaul declared, “In this chair in which he himself had sat, പീറ്റർ, In mighty Rome, commanded Linus, the first elected, to sit down” (Pseudo-Tertullian, Poem Against the Marcionites 3:276-277).

Saint Macarius of Egypt (ഡി. ഏകദേശം. 390) wrote: “For of old Moses and Aaron, when this priesthood was theirs, suffered much; കയ്യഫാസും, when he had their chair, persecuted and condemned the Lord. … Afterwards Moses was succeeded by Peter, who had committed to his hands the new Church of Christ, and the true priesthood” (Homily 26).

Christian Unity

The charism of infallibly in defining doctrine is instrumental to the Pope’s mission to be the visible sign and source of Christian unity.

The Pope’s role of providing doctrinal unity for all believers was indicated by Jesus at the Last Supper when He said to Peter, “സൈമൺ, സൈമൺ, ഇതാ, Satan demanded to have you, that he might sift you like wheat, but I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail; and when you have turned again, strengthen your brethren” (ലൂക്കോസ് 22:31-32).

Peter was given the duty of confirming the faith of the others. To enable him to do this, Jesus promised to bestow upon him a faith that would not fail, അതാണ്, the gift of infallibility. So it is that those who remain obedient to the Petrine authority have the certainty of knowing they are united in doctrine with the whole Church and ultimately with Christ, the Head of the Church. Conversely, those who have detached themselves from this authority—such as lapsed Catholics, the Eastern Orthodox Churches, and the Protestant communities—have suffered ongoing division and strife.4

Tend My Sheep

Jesus renewed His commission of Peter as His vicarious shepherd on the shores of the Sea of Galilee in the days following the Resurrection. അവിടെ, Jesus asked him to confirm his love for Him three times, corresponding to Peter’s previous denials (കാണുക മത്തായി 26:34, തുടങ്ങിയവർ.).

After each affirmation of love, Jesus commanded him to teach and care for His sheep, പറയുന്നത്, “Feed my lambs. … Tend my sheep. … Feed my sheep” (ജോൺ 21:15, 16, 17). The Lord did not relinquish ownership of the sheep, for He continued to call them His own while entrusting them to Peter.5 In order for the Pope to fulfill the office of vicarious shepherd, to ensure Jesus’ sheep are fed the fullness of revealed truth, it is necessary for him to be safeguarded from teaching error. And so he has been for nearly two millennia; and so he shall be till the Lord’s return.

  1. It is true that the authority to bind and loose was also given to the Apostles as a group in മത്തായി 18:18, but the power of the keys was reserved for Peter alone. As the successors to the Apostles, Catholic bishops have the collective power to take dogmatically binding decisions, so long as they are gathered in an ecumenical council (a council representing the whole, universal Church) and acting in communion with the Bishop of Rome, Peter’s successor.
  2. For an in-depth study of Peter’s office in light of Isaiah 22, see Stephen K. Ray, Upon This Rock (San Francisco: ഇഗ്നേഷ്യസ് പ്രസ്സ്, 1999), പി. 265.
  3. For a thorough and responsible handling of various controversial episodes in the history of the Papacy see Warren Carroll, A History of Christendom, vols. 1-5 (Front Royal, Virginia: Christendom Press, 1985); also Patrick Madrid, Pope Fiction (San Diego: Basilica Press, 1999).
  4. The division among the Eastern Orthodox Churches tends to be cultural in nature, whereas the division among lapsed Catholics and within Protestantism typically occurs along doctrinal lines. It might also be noted that for the Eastern Churches, who have maintained a more or less imperfect union with Rome since the eleventh-century schism, division has been moderate by comparison and sound doctrine has, for the most part, been retained. For Protestantism, മറുവശത്ത്, for which complete detachment from Rome’s authority has been a basic tenet, division has been rampant, resulting in tens-of-thousands of competing denominations.
  5. See Scott Butler, Norman Dahlgren, and Rev. Mr. David Hess, യേശു, Peter and the Keys (Santa Barbara, California: Queenship Publishing Company, 1996), പി. 59; cf. മാറ്റ്. 9:36-38.

പകർപ്പവകാശം 2010 – 2023 2ഫിഷ്.കോ