A Conversation About the Control of Political Power by the R

You know, whatever

Moderators: Almighty Benny, Blitzen, Silent-sigfig

Re: A Conversation About the Control of Political Power by t

Postby Whiteagle » Mon Jan 02, 2012 10:46 pm

OneEye589 wrote:^ 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. :studgod:

Funny, it sound more like Stubby was agreeing with me, all things considered...
User avatar
Whiteagle
Mega Blok
 
Posts: 1471
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2011 1:30 pm

Re: A Conversation About the Control of Political Power by t

Postby OneEye589 » Mon Jan 02, 2012 10:49 pm

See, now you're just trying to start an argument cause you're pissed for some reason.
User avatar
OneEye589
Pooplord
 
Posts: 4257
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 6:35 pm
Location: New York

Re: A Conversation About the Control of Political Power by t

Postby Whiteagle » Mon Jan 02, 2012 10:55 pm

OneEye589 wrote: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.
User avatar
Whiteagle
Mega Blok
 
Posts: 1471
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2011 1:30 pm

Re: A Conversation About the Control of Political Power by t

Postby stubby » Mon Jan 02, 2012 11:01 pm

Whiteagle wrote: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.
Image
User avatar
stubby
forum janitor
 
Posts: 4331
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 8:31 pm

Re: A Conversation About the Control of Political Power by t

Postby Whiteagle » Mon Jan 02, 2012 11:03 pm

stubby wrote:
Whiteagle wrote: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...
User avatar
Whiteagle
Mega Blok
 
Posts: 1471
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2011 1:30 pm

Re: A Conversation About the Control of Political Power by t

Postby OneEye589 » Mon Jan 02, 2012 11:09 pm

Whiteagle wrote:
OneEye589 wrote: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.
User avatar
OneEye589
Pooplord
 
Posts: 4257
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 6:35 pm
Location: New York

Re: A Conversation About the Control of Political Power by t

Postby OneEye589 » Mon Jan 02, 2012 11:10 pm

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.
User avatar
OneEye589
Pooplord
 
Posts: 4257
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 6:35 pm
Location: New York

Re: A Conversation About the Control of Political Power by t

Postby stubby » Mon Jan 02, 2012 11:12 pm

OneEye589 wrote:But of course, now that Stubby's here, everyone's going to agree with him because he's the most brilliant of us all. :studgod:

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").

Pope John Paul II wrote: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.
Image
User avatar
stubby
forum janitor
 
Posts: 4331
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 8:31 pm

Re: A Conversation About the Control of Political Power by t

Postby Whiteagle » Mon Jan 02, 2012 11:19 pm

stubby wrote:
OneEye589 wrote:But of course, now that Stubby's here, everyone's going to agree with him because he's the most brilliant of us all. :studgod:

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").

Pope John Paul II wrote: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...
User avatar
Whiteagle
Mega Blok
 
Posts: 1471
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2011 1:30 pm

Re: A Conversation About the Control of Political Power by t

Postby OneEye589 » Mon Jan 02, 2012 11:23 pm

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 cult a dog.
User avatar
OneEye589
Pooplord
 
Posts: 4257
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 6:35 pm
Location: New York

Re: A Conversation About the Control of Political Power by t

Postby Tzan » Mon Jan 02, 2012 11:28 pm

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!
User avatar
Tzan
Pooplord
 
Posts: 4617
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 4:41 pm
Location: Boston

Re: A Conversation About the Control of Political Power by t

Postby Zupponn » Tue Jan 03, 2012 12:23 am

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.
Image
User avatar
Zupponn
No Lego part truly dies
No Lego part truly dies
 
Posts: 5043
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 6:15 pm
Location: Wisconsin, land of the cheese

Re: A Conversation About the Control of Political Power by t

Postby Keldoclock » Tue Jan 03, 2012 1:43 am

^ That echoes some of the Dune books in a strange, roundabout manner.
Image
stubby wrote:omg noob, balrogs are maiars too, don't you know anything
User avatar
Keldoclock
Pooplord
 
Posts: 2771
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 2:19 pm
Location: New York City

Re: A Conversation About the Control of Political Power by t

Postby Natalya » Tue Jan 03, 2012 1:43 am

Ham701 wrote:
Whiteagle wrote:
THE SOYBEANS!!!


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


Image

Whiteagle wrote:
OneEye589 wrote: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."
Image
  ▲
▲ ▲

"Each night alone I dream, that I'm a rebel Roller Queen‼
I'll be a star that shines, I can make the whole world mine‼"


Image
User avatar
Natalya
You think I have a god complex? Let me tell you something. I am god.
You think I have a god complex?  Let me tell you something.  I am god.
 
Posts: 5135
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 10:57 pm
Location: Now in Ontario

Re: A Conversation About the Control of Political Power by t

Postby Arkbrik » Tue Jan 03, 2012 3:59 am

Rayhawkal Infallibility?
Remus: Harry... I'm a werewolf.
Harry: Are you fucking serious?
Remus: Well yes, but I don't see how that applies here.
User avatar
Arkbrik
Pooplord
 
Posts: 2501
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 7:18 am
Location: Sweden

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests