R
rev_kevin
Guest
That may be but I was asked about my church and I gave the answer. I don’t see anything wrong with women preaching, being the leader of a church, having a congregation and so on.
Critics of Papal Infallibility: Can you name other examples of popes making fallible decisions apart from Honorius I?
- Status
G
gurneyhalleck1
Guest
Mardukm, with all due respect, friend, she has made it crystal clear what her concern is. You even attempted to address it. I’m not sure what you’re confused about?
She has posted section 25 of Lumen Gentium. She finds it disturbing and confusing that it says that we must submit our minds and wills completely to the Roman Pontiff EVEN WHEN he isn’t speaking ex cathedra. All we hear day in and day out in Catholic media is that non-Catholics don’t understand infallibility and submission of will to the papacy. We hear how these non-Catholics get it wrong and think that Catholics have to submit their wills to the pope even when he isn’t speaking ex cathedra. How silly. How inaccurate. Then, one reads Lumen Gentium and, low and behold, that’s exactly what it says!? Submission of mind and will at all times, basically, to the pope, ex cathedra and otherwise. I don’t blame sister Anna for finding this to be a stumbling block; I share her bewilderment and confusion over it. It is a stumbling block for me to return to Catholicism as well, that and a few other things…
She has posted section 25 of Lumen Gentium. She finds it disturbing and confusing that it says that we must submit our minds and wills completely to the Roman Pontiff EVEN WHEN he isn’t speaking ex cathedra. All we hear day in and day out in Catholic media is that non-Catholics don’t understand infallibility and submission of will to the papacy. We hear how these non-Catholics get it wrong and think that Catholics have to submit their wills to the pope even when he isn’t speaking ex cathedra. How silly. How inaccurate. Then, one reads Lumen Gentium and, low and behold, that’s exactly what it says!? Submission of mind and will at all times, basically, to the pope, ex cathedra and otherwise. I don’t blame sister Anna for finding this to be a stumbling block; I share her bewilderment and confusion over it. It is a stumbling block for me to return to Catholicism as well, that and a few other things…
D
david_ruiz
Guest
I believe pope Stephen (3-4th century) claimed baptism is not regenerational,and made a baptismal ruling based on that
D
david_ruiz
Guest
I do not see in scripture where unity is achieved thru hierarchy .It is achieved by the Spirit, the Holy Spirit (one baptism). He uniformly convicts ALL mankind of sin,righteousness and judgement to come. Heirerchy is a catch 22. It unites and divides at the same time .(no surprise to Jesus) At one time all North America was one. When the 50 states united, we were then separated from Canada and Mexico, but WE are united ! The east and west churches were once united and celebrated Easter at varying times.Rome tried to unify the date and ordered all to follow .Some did (unity) .Some did not (disunity,where once you were united and varying Easter dates did not separate ,did not matter ).The early church had ways to settle disputes ,without all the governance you have today…You and I are unified with any and all souls, around the world, AND throughout history, who have been quickened by the Spirit to believe that Jesus is our Savior. Church offices (bishops elders ) are for local congregations ,not for “church”(worldwide) governance.
D
david_ruiz
Guest
I believe you only have authority when you are right (in line with God-for he discerns ALL things).The early church got it right (bible), but I am not sure it was because she had “authority”. It is unbiblical to say because you got it right once ,you will always get it right. That is a little like once saved always saved. It is biblical to say that there will always be someone who is getting it right ,at the moment.
N
Nine_Two
Guest
Verse?
J
JDZwiers19
Guest
You know what, I have seen the few very vague and contradicting sources on this particular point and I would really like to see an in-depth defence of the opinion your espousing.
Where is the documentation from him or his delegate? Or provide the infallible source that claims Honorius did this?
J
JDZwiers19
Guest
The reality is almost anything is debatable. I have seen enough crazy debates to know this.
Pope Leo II’s own conviction of Honorius at the council that condemned him completely frees him from the charge of teaching heresy if you accept the teaching of the papal infallibility and the popes necessary approval of ecumenical councils and having the last say and all
There are other sources that support Honorius’s orthodoxy as well. You also have to take into account that he died with his dignity intact and unchallenged. It was some 40 years later that he was condemned and the only evidence they brought forward that I know of was the letters he wrote himself and those definitely do not clearly teach heresy. In fact they seem to imply orthodoxy but skirt around the issue for the sake of unity.But then, anything is debatable.
J
JDZwiers19
Guest
I would largely agree with you guys on the point of coercion but then again under torture everyone has a limit. Pope Liberius was in exile for 2 years. Who knows what they did to him. He may have even gone insane. But then again it is debatable whether he even broke or signed anything himself. I read somewhere that the documents where signed by a messenger of his who was forced. Anything he said or did outside of the definition of ex-cathedra is a moot point.
M
mardukm
Guest
Dear sister Anna,
Before continuing, I need to ask whether you understand
It seems your concern then is “I would be expected to submit to teachings that may turn out to be wrong.” Your concern is 1) how to identify the Truth, and 2) how to identify whether that Truth is necessary for salvation. Is that correct?mardukm,
I thought my concerns were obvious. Guess that was my “false assumption.”
It is difficult to understand why any Marion doctrines fall under Ex Cathedra teachings, when there are so few Ex Cathedra teachings.
LUMEN GENTIUM’s requirement of “religious submission of mind and will” to the “authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra” is just too much. I would be expected to submit to teachings that may turn out to be wrong.
I dealt with enough of this in the Baptist Church, where strict adherence to the Pastor’s Biblical interpretation was expected; and questioning brought about a whole world of trouble. Before I formally left the Baptist Church, I was banned from a Baptist website for taking up for Catholics. I insisted Catholics are Christians. I also said some Baptist ministers required far more loyalty to their teachings and interpretations than the Pope expects of Catholics. I was banned as a “Catholic troll.” I will admit that I bring some “baggage” to the table.
According to LUMEN GENTIUM non-Ex Cathedra teachings requiring “submission of mind and will” may be known:
*either from the character of the documents,
*from his frequent repetition of the same doctrine,
*from his manner of speaking.
These requirements seem far too subjective. IOW, Catholics must submit mind and will to the Pope, but the CC always has an “out”, if the non-Ex Cathedra teachings turn out to be problematic.
Before continuing, I need to ask whether you understand
- the difference between the ordinary and extraordinary Magisterium.
- that the ordinary and extraordinary Magisterium are both infallible.
M
mardukm
Guest
Dear brother Gurney,
However, it appears this is your own concern.
Did my previous response answer your own question of whether the statement from Lumen Gentium means that we are to submit to the Pope at all times?
If it did not, why not?
Blessings
It appears you had the same misinterpretation of sister Anna’s intent as well. She has already stated that what you express here is not her concern.
However, it appears this is your own concern.
Did my previous response answer your own question of whether the statement from Lumen Gentium means that we are to submit to the Pope at all times?
If it did not, why not?
Blessings
G
GKC
Guest
I have been waiting for a comment on this distinction as to the Magisterium. I am curious as to the second part, as you state it.
GKC
A
Anna_Scott
Guest
No problem, rev kevin. I just wanted to point out that not all Baptists hold the same belief.
Anna
A
Anna_Scott
Guest
Mardukm,
I think you are just splitting hairs with gurney. If I disagree with the Pope’s teaching on any matter pertaining to the Christian faith, wouldn’t I do so through “private interpretation” of Holy Scripture? If I disagree with the Pope, claiming discernment through the Holy Spirit, I would be wrong according to the CC.
Doesn’t the CC teach the Holy Spirit guides the Pope and bishops (true Magisterium,) in a way the Holy Spirit does not guide anyone else?
Bottom line: if I am Catholic, I must submit to the Pope.
Anna
A
Anna_Scott
Guest
The Extraordinary Magisterium and Ordinary Universal Magisterium are infallible.
The Ordinary (not universal) Magisterium is not infallible.
G
GKC
Guest
Per the Code of Canon Law, I think you are correct. But I also think assent to the Ordinary Magisterium is also required.
GKC
M
mardukm
Guest
Dear sister Anna,
Blessings
OK. So I was incorrect in assuming that your concern is to know how to identify the Truth. Your real problem is authority. Is that right? If so, then I assume you also have a problem with submitting to a bishop, not just the Pope? Or am I misunderstanding you again? Once, again, I request that you be frank.
Blessings
M
mardukm
Guest
Not exactly. I think you are confusing “Magisterium” with “authority” in general. The “Magisterium” specifically refers to teaching authority (specifically, the teaching authority of God).
The ordinary Magisterium is objectively infallible. We recognize it as such when it is universal.
A bishop who teaches his own opinion that is contrary to Sacred Tradition is not exercising the ordinary Magisterium.
I hope that helps.
Blessings,
Marduk
G
GKC
Guest
Could you discuss that a little, with reference to the Code of Canon Law, Book III, Canons 749-753.
GKC
G
gurneyhalleck1
Guest
Anna and I have discussed these issues at length. If you think I have arrived at a mistatement of her concerns, I’m sure she’d let me know it. I think I know full well what Anna’s concerns are as she and I are good friends, discuss these things on an almost daily basis in emails and IM’s, and we’ve gotte to know one another’s religious views/questions pretty well. Like I said, I’m not trying to speak for her and impose my own concerns on her. If I have, she’ll tell you so.
I still maintain that Lumen Gentium seems to tell us that we must obey and submit to the pope intellectually all the time, period.
I am required to submit my will and intellect to the Ordinary Magisterium. When the pope gives opinions about sexuality, for example, I have to be all ears and 100% on board with it.
I am also required to submit my will and brains to the braintrust of the Extraordinary Magisterium, for example, in, say, the Assumption of Mary declarations by the pope. Lumen Gentium 25 tells us This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra
So essentially there is NEVER a time when a pope can be wrong. When a pope is not speaking ex cathedra his opinions are binding upon my intellect and will. So he can make a statement that is bogus and I have to buy into it if this is the case.
To answer your last question, no, your post didn’t make sense. In fact, it was quite difficult to sift through late at night for this boy.
I still maintain that Lumen Gentium seems to tell us that we must obey and submit to the pope intellectually all the time, period.
I am required to submit my will and intellect to the Ordinary Magisterium. When the pope gives opinions about sexuality, for example, I have to be all ears and 100% on board with it.
I am also required to submit my will and brains to the braintrust of the Extraordinary Magisterium, for example, in, say, the Assumption of Mary declarations by the pope. Lumen Gentium 25 tells us This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra
So essentially there is NEVER a time when a pope can be wrong. When a pope is not speaking ex cathedra his opinions are binding upon my intellect and will. So he can make a statement that is bogus and I have to buy into it if this is the case.
To answer your last question, no, your post didn’t make sense. In fact, it was quite difficult to sift through late at night for this boy.
- Status