The Neverending Story (The Christian Chronicles)

Associated Press ^ | 3/24/01

[malakhi]

The Neverending Story
An ongoing debate on Scripture, Tradition, History and Interpretation.

Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue. - John Adams

Previous Thread

[SoothingDave]

Then you agree there is no salvation, even for the Invincibly Ignorant, who do not submit to the Pope?

Where did I say that? You really need to ask questions and see what I say. It will prevent future occurances. Thank you.

Do you think an "Infallible" pronouncement can be modified by a later "Infallible" pronouncement?

What do you think? This is asinine. Truth doesn't change and infallibility would not be so if it changed.

SD

[OLD REGGIE]

Old Boniface was stating dogma, or simply making a prudential judgement? The worldly consequence of the kings' refusing to submit--and that is what that pope was rerally talking about--- has sometimes been negative. You think Hitler should not have submitted, or that the German Catholics should not have listened to Pius XI rather than the Fuehrer?

Old Boniface wanted all power in his hands, nothing more, nothing less. Some of the blackest periods in the history of the world occurred when the RCC had the most power. It would be a tossup between some of the Popes and Hitler. They were cut from the same bolt of cloth.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Bible as we know it has been widely available in the Western World since the 13th Century, and our experience has pretty much put to rest the theory that it is self-interpreting.

Would you say your Bible, the Catechism is self-interpreting?

[ksen]

Then you agree there is no salvation, even for the Invincibly Ignorant, who do not submit to the Pope?

I think the argument will center on the definitions of "absolutely necessary", "all", and "submit to the Roman Pontiff."

[OLD REGGIE]

That's two potshots today. I'm sorry I am causing you to act like this.

The second "shot" was nasty and uncalled for. I apologize.
(I wasn't being nasty with shot # 1).

[SoothingDave]

You're a propaganda whore.

Frothing, they are.

SD

[SoothingDave]

I think the argument will center on the definitions of "absolutely necessary", "all", and "submit to the Roman Pontiff."

Do you read when I post to you? I already told you what the key was, and it was none of those words.

SD

[OLD REGGIE]

He does say spiritual, but the words, despite Protests to the contrary, are not synonymous. Once again I am finding myself in agreement with you.

"Spiritual" has nothing in common with "actual". It cannot be confused with "substance". Congratulations!

[SoothingDave]

Would you say your Bible, the Catechism is self-interpreting?

Somehow, the idea of asking the Church and having a response, even though we've been talking about Ratzinger all day, just escapes you.

SD

[Havoc]

Facts. Fill in the blank yourself then ignore it. That will serve the purpose of you wasting your own time while allowing you to pretend to consider anything said whilest batting it aside blindly. I'm too familiar with this game.

And if you're proven wrong, don't worry, in 500 posts you'll be claiming it never happened. I'll leave it at "You're naive" because I don't know at the moment if you're lying or not. Not knowing what you are aware of makes it tough to call you a liar.

[ksen]

Do you read when I post to you?

I'm supposed to read those?

Ok, you said something about "culpability", I'll have to go to dictionary.com and then get back to you.

[OLD REGGIE]

Furthermore we declare, state and define that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of all human beings that they submit to the Roman Pontiff."

(SD) It is infallible.

(Reg)Then you agree there is no salvation, even for the Invincibly Ignorant, who do not submit to the Pope?

(SD)Where did I say that? You really need to ask questions and see what I say. It will prevent future occurances. Thank you.

Please explain the exceptions to this "infallible" pronouncement which would provide salvation to anyone who does not submit to the Pope.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(Reg) Do you think an "Infallible" pronouncement can be modified by a later "Infallible" pronouncement?

(SD) What do you think? This is asinine. Truth doesn't change and infallibility would not be so if it changed.

OK. So you are telling us, despite what the RCC tells us today, the unchanging truth is there is no salvation for those who have not submitted to the Pope??????

[Havoc]

I wasn't being nasty either - or frothing, just to the point. That's offensive to them.

[ksen]

Ok, I'm back.

cul·pa·ble Pronunciation Key (klp-bl) adj. Deserving of blame or censure as being wrong, evil, improper, or injurious. See Synonyms at blameworthy

So it does come back to the word "all."

[Havoc]

I've marched so many catholics down that path. But as soon as they arive, they shred the evidence and forget the paradox. Multiple infallible statements changing truth to mean different things just don't compute so rather than shorting a brain cell, they just pretend it didn't happen.
Catholics have been doing it long before the Klintonistas came along.

[OLD REGGIE]

I wasn't being nasty either - or frothing, just to the point. That's offensive to them.

I knew in my heart I was being nasty. Most of the time I am "tweaking" and I never apologize for that.

[SoothingDave]

Please explain the exceptions to this "infallible" pronouncement which would provide salvation to anyone who does not submit to the Pope.

"Submission" and the command to submit carries with it the understanding that those who can not submit (to anything, that is), those who are incapable of submitting are not expected to.

That is, children, the mentally ill, the feeble, and those absolutely incapable of given submission.

The Church does not teach that a small child, or even an unborn child, which has made no attempt to "submit" to the Pontiff is thus burning in hell.

SD

[SoothingDave]

Facts. Fill in the blank yourself then ignore it. That will serve the purpose of you wasting your own time while allowing you to pretend to consider anything said whilest batting it aside blindly. I'm too familiar with this game.

Facts, Havoc, facts. If you are aware of the Church killing a heretic in the last 30 years, please present it. Otherwise shut your yapper.

SD

[ponyespresso]

Hello.

I don't really have anything to add to the discussion, I just wanted to post somthing on a thread that has 21,400+ comments. I would just feel left out if I didn't say something.

pony

p.s. If anyone is struggling with their prayer life, I have posted something that might help. A Rosary of Peace will not be for everyone, but check it out and see if it might be helpful to you.

[OLD REGGIE]

Furthermore we declare, state and define that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of all human beings that they submit to the Roman Pontiff."

"Submission" and the command to submit carries with it the understanding that those who can not submit (to anything, that is), those who are incapable of submitting are not expected to.

Ohhhh???? Did you forget "Invincibly Ignorant"? This is an infallible "modification"?

That is, children, the mentally ill, the feeble, and those absolutely incapable of given submission.

Clearly defined by the qualified use of the words "all" and "they"?

The Church does not teach that a small child, or even an unborn child, which has made no attempt to "submit" to the Pontiff is thus burning in hell.

You have made a big point concerning the precise choice of wording employed by the RCC in it's wisdom. Based on this assumption of "precise" language, we must assume "all" means nothing but "all" with no exceptions and "they" means the group defined by "all".

[Rambler]

I've marched so many catholics down that path. But as soon as they arive, they shred the evidence and forget the paradox. Multiple infallible statements changing truth to mean different things just don't compute so rather than shorting a brain cell, they just pretend it didn't happen.

Maybe your understanding of "infallible statement" differs from what those Catholics know it to be under Catholic teaching. Or do you actually have an example you can share with us?