I don't know how much more of this garbage I can take!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catholic_I_am
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T.A.Stobie:
Mandi, can you honestly tell me, that everyone on this forum has never made a error of any sort througth misinterpretation of a truth? It is readily apparent that there are misinterpretations going in many many different threads.

How about that every interprets the Bible the same identical way?

We are all human and we can misinterpret almost anything.
Click to expand...
Oh my goodness the people on this thread are **NOT **“Truth”

There have been 20 General Councils of the Church. Eastern Emperors convoked the first eight General Councils of the East because from the Fall of Rome in 476 until 800 AD there was no other Roman emperor except the one reigning in Constantinople. Popes convoked the 12 General Councils of the West. In order to be legitimate, general councils must receive papal approbation of their acts, decrees and canons which treat of Catholic doctrine, ecclesiastical discipline and legislation. **This guarantees their freedom from error in matters of faith and morals.

**For a matter of general information there have also been 17 illegitimate Councils.
 
Back to the point, Many abuses have snuck into the Church, particularly in localized areas, under the saying “Spirit of Vatican II” even though they directly went against what Vatican II actually said. It this a misinterpretation of Vatican II. Yes, by humans not in the Magesterium, who made claims that were not truth.

Has the Magisterium misinterpretted Vatican II? No, it has not and cannot.
 
T.A.Stobie:
Back to the point, Many abuses have snuck into the Church, particularly in localized areas, under the saying “Spirit of Vatican II” even though they directly went against what Vatican II actually said. It this a misinterpretation of Vatican II. Yes, by humans not in the Magesterium, who made claims that were not truth.
Click to expand...
Funny … Vatican Council didn’t seem to have the same problem
 
40.png
Mandi:
Truth is an absolute it is NEVER open to misinterpretation!
Click to expand...
I’m sorry, but that has to be one of the most absurd and ridiculous statements I’ve ever read. Truth is NEVER open to misinterpretation? Ever heard of the Protestant church? JWs? Mormons?
 
40.png
Mandi:
Funny … Vatican Council didn’t seem to have the same problem
Click to expand...
I am completely missing your point.
  1. Ecumenical Councils and the Pope will be guided by the Holy Spirit to teach the truth, infallibly, with no error
  2. Everyone else in the world can read this truth, and misconstrue them or misapply them.
I really don’t see what is so earth-shattering about the concept…

Look at the Bible. We believe it to teach the truth. Yet there are tens of thousands of denominations teaching different things. Since they can’t all be right, then - at most - all but one are misconstruing *some *truth in its pages. That doesn’t make the Bible any less true, it makes people outside the magesterium fallible in their interpretation of that truth.

Some people have done absurdly horrible things while referencing them Bible.
 
gomer tree:
I am completely missing your point.
Click to expand...
My point is that a General Council has never been open to misinterpretation before - You either agree and accept teachings period or you disagree - if you disagree, you go start your own church.

To say that Vatican II is open to misinterpretation is to say that it is full of holes. This is fast becoming my favourite saying so here goes again “Truth is an absolute” there can be no holes - it is not wishy washy.

Now you might say that the bible is open to misinterpretation and this is very true as we can all see. But God gave us the tool to avoid misinterpretation He called it His Church. Now what happens when “The Church” is open to misinterpretation…impossible!
 
:confused:

Nobody is arguing that the magesterium has spoken the truth. Nobody is arguing that we all should be relying on what the Pope says and writes and teaches, along with the Councils.

Please explain to me how Liturgical abuses occur “in the spirit of Vatican II” if Vatican II is not being misinterpreted.

Please explain to me how anyone could ever leave the Church that Jesus Christ resides in body, blood, soul, and divinity.

Please explain how there can be a debate in some circles regarding women priests, contraception, and even abortion?

You are not confronting reality. You are espousing a theory which does not hold up in practice. I wish you were correct that once Rome has spoken, everyone would listen. They don’t. Some do so out of misunderstanding, some do so out of defiance. How can you possibly argue otherwise?
 
40.png
stellina:
If people are going to leave the Church because some of its leaders have sinned, then their faith must be shaky to begin with.
Click to expand...
I’m not leaving the Church. My faith is strong, but I do want those that abuse children OUT!!

Having a child out of wedlock is not comparable to destroying a child by sexually abusing them. The only thing worse than that is abortion. It’s time to clean house!!
 
My wife once worked as music director for an Episcopal parish which was having difficulties. The pastor told us that one of his parishioners told him “I just want you to know that there is nothing you can do that will make me stop coming to church.” He was less than elated by the statement, but thought on the whole it was good. 🙂
 
The only thing I want is JUSTICE. If a priest, bishop, my next door neighbor is sexually molesting a child I want them in prison period.

If a priest, bishop, or my next door neighbor sexually molested my son, they would wish that they had never been born, I swear to it! Take this issue to heart, you can only, if you have little children of your own.

And if you think I’m too harsh, what did our Master say? It would be better for them to have a giant millstone (weight of 2,000 pounds) tied around their neck and thrown into the sea than to violate one of these little ones.

Thanks
 
Beware also of CNN which you put a link to on your post. I am not saying I don’t believe the seminary case, but CNN is the same network that is publishing the Abu Ghraib prison case. In either case, we should realize that what happened is wrong and take the proper actions, but CNN likes to warp things just to point fingers and say “oh, look how corrupt the Catholic Church is…see they are not so Holy”…it aims to keep people away from what is really a holy.
 
40.png
stellina:
If people are going to leave the Church because some of its leaders have sinned, then their faith must be shaky to begin with. If you go by the rationale expressed here, then you probably think that someone like St. Augustine wasn’t fit to be a bishop because he had a child out of wedlock.

The abuse scandal is nothing to sniff at, but you would think by now that we would have learned to be more careful about swallowing reports from the secular media as pure and unbiased truth. Or perhaps I missed something and the Associated Press was just declared infallible?
Click to expand...
They may have a weak faith to begin with but the goal of the church is to lead those that are weak in faith closer to God. This scandal is like the final answer for some of those with weak faith. The church must do something about it.
 
I think this is a consequence of Vatican II. Not that they said that anything immoral was OK but they changed the mass. Now they did not make the mass what it is today but they openned it up to degrade for each individual preist. The mass is kind of like the teacher of the faith for many people. If you degrade the mass, people become more lax. Therefore the outcome is that we endup having many bad preists.

I also want to say that someone above mentioned that all the photos could have been found on one computer. This could be true, and this would be a very important thing because it could be the responsibility of one man.
 
Getting back to the point. . .it seems to me that if the Vatican made a hasty comment or judgement of the situation and misjudged or gave a comment that was erroneous, everyone would be complaining then also about what they said or how they handled the situation.

There is no doubt in my mind that the Vatican*** IS against what happened in Austria and condemns it. ***But they are the ones responsible for investigating the situation, and then coming to a conslusion as to exactly what was going on, for how long, and who is to blame. They must see the whole picture before acting aggresively. In the meantime, I know what the Church teaches on these immoral behaviors of priests, bishops, seminarians, etc. and I will wait for the thorough investigation to be completed and the proper action to take place. I can’t possibly know all that goes into an investigation like that and how it needs to be handled, I only know that I am in union with the Church and what she teaches on these matters. The punishment is due to come to those responsible.

Also, I believe the internet is Satan’s huge tool these days. Pornography has sky rocketed due to the internet because now it is brought right into peoples homes [and seminaries]. It is a major, major problem and increases the temptation to many, many more people now who would never have gotten into porn if it hadn’t been so readily available in their own homes. This is not only becoming a problem in seminaries, but in families as well.
 
As long as catholics tolerate the way the Vatican has handled these issues, they will continue to happen as they have in the past.

This is not a question of doctrine or dogma, but of administration.Popes, since at least the Latern councils have spoken and written about abuse, but have actually done little to stop the problem.

If Cardinal Law was not still a cardinal there would be a message sent that abuse is not to be tolerated, what was the message sent when Law was given that ceremonial promotion recently?

Peace
 
Please explain to me how Liturgical abuses occur “in the spirit of Vatican II” if Vatican II is not being misinterpreted.
[/quote]

I’ll just state the obvious on more time.

funny … The 20 previous General Councils did not have this problem!
 
40.png
gomer:
I wish you were correct that once Rome has spoken, everyone would listen. They don’t. Some do so out of misunderstanding, some do so out of defiance. How can you possibly argue otherwise?
Click to expand...
I don’t know why it is so widely accepted that those who disagree with The Church or “misinterpert” it, have some sort of right to do that.

I know a priest who did that once … Martin Luther!

I know an Archbishop who did that once … Cramner

I know a man who did that once… John Knox

The Church did not say - well you have “misinterperted” the Church “oh well” - They said GOOD BYE!
 
40.png
Mandi:
Truth is an absolute it is NEVER open to misinterpretation!
Click to expand...
Good. So who infallibly interprets Vatican II? Not I. Not you. Hmmmm…so it would be…
 
40.png
Mandi:
Truth is an absolute it is NEVER open to misinterpretation!
Click to expand...
It is when if you start breaking rules. The church sets rules, sometimes the people who make the rules do not follow them. It is sad but it is the rules we’re supposed to follow.

This is where interpretation of the TRUTH comes into play. Are they right in interpreting it? No, but it does happen.
 
40.png
BobCatholic:
Good. So who infallibly interprets Vatican II? Not I. Not you. Hmmmm…so it would be…
Click to expand...
Then why BobCatholic, if the above be true - are people, (priests and bishops in particular, since they are the ones running the parishes) intepreting Vactican II, why do people have to “Church shop” to find the priest that interprets Vatican II to their “liking” - whether that be a one more orthodox or one that accepts charismatics.

And the mere fact that people are looking for something of their “liking” suggests that they too have decided to take the interpretation they prefer.

So the bible is open to (mis)interpretation and “The Church” whos job is to stop misinterpretation is now also open to (mis)interpretation.

So is there a final voice in the matter? Because I don’t hear it!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top