A Conversation About the Control of Political Power by the R

[Whiteagle]

^ What he said, as we've been saying the whole time.

But of course, now that Stubby's here, everyone's going to agree with him because he's the most brilliant of us all.

Funny, it sound more like Stubby was agreeing with me, all things considered...

[OneEye589]

See, now you're just trying to start an argument cause you're pissed for some reason.

[Whiteagle]

See, now you're just trying to start an argument cause you're pissed for some reason.

No, generally what Stubby said agrees with the point I was trying to make.
You were the ones saying that Catholicism is defined by literal interpretation of the Bible, and how I wasn't a "Catholic" due to the liberal nature of my Church community.

[stubby]

You were the ones saying that Catholicism is defined by literal interpretation of the Bible, and how I wasn't a "Catholic" due to the liberal nature of my Church community.

No - that's fundamentalist Protestantism, or "Bibliolatry." Catholicism is defined by literal interpretation of infallible Church dogma. If you don't follow it, you're apostate, there's no gray area. So... you're still pretty much completely wrong.

[Whiteagle]

You were the ones saying that Catholicism is defined by literal interpretation of the Bible, and how I wasn't a "Catholic" due to the liberal nature of my Church community.

No - that's fundamentalist Protestantism, or "Bibliolatry." Catholicism is defined by literal interpretation of infallible Church dogma. If you don't follow it, you're apostate, there's no gray area. So... you're still pretty much completely wrong.

Well I don't think I have any quaims on Church dogma...

[OneEye589]

See, now you're just trying to start an argument cause you're pissed for some reason.

No, generally what Stubby said agrees with the point I was trying to make.
You were the ones saying that Catholicism is defined by literal interpretation of the Bible, and how I wasn't a "Catholic" due to the liberal nature of my Church community.

No, I said you weren't Catholic. You're totally "Catholic" with quotes.

As stubby said, and we've said, there's no grey area. You're either Catholic or not Catholic. It's a strict set of ideas that you don't follow, which isn't a bad thing at all. This is also what we've been saying.

[OneEye589]

I've decided from all of this that I am Catholic. I just don't believe in God and all that stuff. Still totally Catholic though, guys, just a REALLY liberal one.

See, now that was a joke.

[stubby]

But of course, now that Stubby's here, everyone's going to agree with him because he's the most brilliant of us all.

That's probably not saying a lot, unless resident genius Benny shows up.

Anyway let's put this to rest. Speaking of papal infallibility, one of the rare recent cases in which it was invoked was on this very issue. Pope John Pual invoked papal infallibility on the matter of female priests in 1994, and in 1995 the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith backed it up just for good measure (the Pope is considered infallible only under special circumstances, but the Church ecumenical council is automatically always infallible, so this is a special kind of DOUBLE infallible called "set forth infallibly by [both] the ordinary and universal magisterium").

Although the teaching that priestly ordination is to be reserved to men alone has been preserved by the constant and universal tradition of the Church and firmly taught by the magisterium in its more recent documents, at the present time in some places it is nonetheless considered still open to debate, or the Church’s judgment that women are not to be admitted to ordination is considered to have a merely disciplinary force. Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church’s divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Luke 22:32) I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful (OrdinatioSacerdotalis 4).

So that's it. Anyone who believes in female ordination places themselves outside the Catholic belief. There is no weasel room on this issue. Your former priest might debate the pros and cons, but if he actually believes in female ordination then he is apostate, end of story.

[Whiteagle]

But of course, now that Stubby's here, everyone's going to agree with him because he's the most brilliant of us all.

That's probably not saying a lot, unless resident genius Benny shows up.

Anyway let's put this to rest. Speaking of papal infallibility, one of the rare recent cases in which it was invoked was on this very issue. Pope John Pual invoked papal infallibility on the matter of female priests in 1994, and in 1995 the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith backed it up just for good measure (the Pope is considered infallible only under special circumstances, but the Church ecumenical council is automatically always infallible, so this is a special kind of DOUBLE infallible called "set forth infallibly by [both] the ordinary and universal magisterium").

Although the teaching that priestly ordination is to be reserved to men alone has been preserved by the constant and universal tradition of the Church and firmly taught by the magisterium in its more recent documents, at the present time in some places it is nonetheless considered still open to debate, or the Church’s judgment that women are not to be admitted to ordination is considered to have a merely disciplinary force. Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church’s divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Luke 22:32) I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful (OrdinatioSacerdotalis 4).

So that's it. Anyone who believes in female ordination places themselves outside the Catholic belief. There is no weasel room on this issue. Your former priest might debate the pros and cons, but if he actually believes in female ordination then he is apostate, end of story.

And again, like I said before, he might have just advocated it, or he could have been pushing for Priest to able to marry and Female Deacons.
I'll admit that I'm a bit fuzzy on the specifics, seeing as he died several years ago, but I do know that the motivation for whichever was the crippling lack of Priest in the Catholic church.

Seriously, our parish had to merge with the next one over after he passed...

[OneEye589]

That's not the main thing anyway. It's that if the Roman Catholic Church says you need to think one way to be Roman Catholic, then you have to think that way to be Roman Catholic.

No one here cares which way you stand in your beliefs, go for it. However, it's kind of ignorant of you to keep calling a cat a dog.

[Tzan]

I think its hilarious that bit of infallibility will sink the entire church, because it will eventually run out of priests.

Set hand flamers to stun... for the Emperor!

[Zupponn]

It's really interesting how similar Catholicism and a good deal of Protestant groups are. I mean, for me the only difference between the Catholics and the Lutherans is that the Catholics have a pope.

Also, the Catholic church may be set in its ways, but sometimes that's what some people really need. There's a reason that the suicide rate of Catholics is lower than that of Protestants. That rock solid foundation can keep people going when their life is crumbling around them.

[Keldoclock]

^ That echoes some of the Dune books in a strange, roundabout manner.

[Natalya]

THE SOYBEANS!!!

Hardly an important crop compared to corn, which is in most foods.

See, now you're just trying to start an argument cause you're pissed for some reason.

No, generally what Stubby said agrees with the point I was trying to make.
You were the ones saying that Catholicism is defined by literal interpretation of the Bible, and how I wasn't a "Catholic" due to the liberal nature of my Church community.

Rule X of the BrikWars forum should be something like "eventually two n00bs fighting over something retarded will end up agreeing with Rayhawk, then each in turn will invoke Rayhawk's name in defense of their (usually) equally retarded arguments."

[Arkbrik]

Rayhawkal Infallibility?