Infallible Truth?

[Tantum_ergo]

You know as well as I do that the Church has taught Catholics that there is a Limbo of the children for centuries. She is now beginning to unravel that disgusting doctrine. Being dishonest in the service of “loyalty to the institution” is not doing God’s work. it is indeed what caused the disgraceful child abuse scandal, where many bishops covered up the physical and sexual abuse of children as young as three, out of a misguided loyalty to the institution. The Church needs to acknowledge her sins and errors and not lie about them!

Going a little off topic, aren’t we?

“DISGUSTING DOCTRINE”?

The Church did not err. INDIVIDUALS erred, and not necessarily all of them with malice, either. You aren’t old enough, probably, to know that in the 1960s and 1970s and even early 1980s when MOST of this abuse happened, the AMA and the APA speciifically (experts) told not just the Church but the general public that PEDOPHILIA COULD BE CURED and that PART of the cure would involve letting the ‘cured’ people have a FRESH START with no ‘prejudice’.

IOW, it was doctors and lawyers and psychiatrists who TOLD the bishops (and everybody else in the U.S. and world) that this course of ‘coverup’ --that is, moving around and a ‘fresh start’ was part of the TREATMENT and CURE of a pedophile.

What were the bishops to do? Miraculously know that 20 years on the AMA and APA would be shown to have been WRONG? Go against the EXPERT JUDGMENT of thousands of doctors and psychiatrists? Gee, imagine the hubbub today if any bishop just ‘ignored’ a doctor, psychiatrist, etc. Because NOW, of course, the AMA etc. is Right. (And it pretends it was never wrong back then).

I’m not saying that the abuse was right. (It wasn’t). and in the very RARE cases where somebody ‘in charge’ knew that abuse was gonna happen or knew it had happened but made a stupid personal decision for god knows what reason and did not follow the protocol AT THE TIME, this is certainly wrong.

But it is also wrong to deliberately ignore that the EXPERT TEACHING at the time of the abuse supported the bishops’ actions in sending off these ‘cured’ people without letting the ‘new’ parish know. It was that EXPERT TEACHING not just in the case of the Church but EVERYWHERE. I don’t know why so few doctors or psychiatrists or journalists ignore that it was their ‘wrong’ understanding of the disease and their wrong expert advice which caused much of the trouble.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

HOW can we be certain when the Church has made mistakes on moral matters eg on the subject of usury?

WHAT mistakes? You keep throwing out buzzwords without any kind of ‘proof’!

 

[jomoco]

Going a little off topic, aren’t we?

“DISGUSTING DOCTRINE”?

The Church did not err. INDIVIDUALS erred, and not necessarily all of them with malice, either. You aren’t old enough, probably, to know that in the 1960s and 1970s and even early 1980s when MOST of this abuse happened, the AMA and the APA speciifically (experts) told not just the Church but the general public that PEDOPHILIA COULD BE CURED and that PART of the cure would involve letting the ‘cured’ people have a FRESH START with no ‘prejudice’.

IOW, it was doctors and lawyers and psychiatrists who TOLD the bishops (and everybody else in the U.S. and world) that this course of ‘coverup’ --that is, moving around and a ‘fresh start’ was part of the TREATMENT and CURE of a pedophile.

What were the bishops to do? Miraculously know that 20 years on the AMA and APA would be shown to have been WRONG? Go against the EXPERT JUDGMENT of thousands of doctors and psychiatrists? Gee, imagine the hubbub today if any bishop just ‘ignored’ a doctor, psychiatrist, etc. Because NOW, of course, the AMA etc. is Right. (And it pretends it was never wrong back then).

I’m not saying that the abuse was right. (It wasn’t). and in the very RARE cases where somebody ‘in charge’ knew that abuse was gonna happen or knew it had happened but made a stupid personal decision for god knows what reason and did not follow the protocol AT THE TIME, this is certainly wrong.

But it is also wrong to deliberately ignore that the EXPERT TEACHING at the time of the abuse supported the bishops’ actions in sending off these ‘cured’ people without letting the ‘new’ parish know. It was that EXPERT TEACHING not just in the case of the Church but EVERYWHERE. I don’t know why so few doctors or psychiatrists or journalists ignore that it was their ‘wrong’ understanding of the disease and their wrong expert advice which caused much of the trouble.

The more pertinent question is who was responsible for their ignorance of human nature to the degree it resulted in evil being done inside the church?

Where does hypocrisy end, when truth arrives?

Which is mightier, tradition, or truth?

jomoco

 

[Tantum_ergo]

What part of church teachings ignore’s and cover’s up evil perpetrated within the church, for decades?

Is this another head’s I win, tail’s you lose, example of the executive leadership clause that insulates them against reality, and accountability?

jomoco

No. But it is not as ‘simple’ as you are trying to paint it. Let’s put it this way. Suppose you are the head of a company and some of your members either come directly to you, or to human resources, or are brought in by the police, and admit to pedophilia. Suppose also that the expert doctors and psychiatrists tell you that you must treat your employees and not just fire them (most companies require this). Suppose they also tell you that the best thing is to quietly settle with the families, try to ‘hush things up’ for the sake of the victims. Suppose they treat your employees and after a time, tell you they are CURED, and that part of the cure is that they need a ‘fresh start’, so the doctors tell YOU to give these employees a good reference and send them off to another company in another state.

What do you do? These are expert doctors, psychiatrists, police officers. . .they are giving you the benefit of their expert teachings and long years of work; they are telling you to do exactly the same things they are telling every other ‘company’ in the U.S.

Are you COVERING UP by following their advice? Are you really? If you don’t know years earlier that pedophilia can’t be cured and you trust expert doctors and lawyers and psychiatrists and police and follow the SAME INSTRUCTIONS given to every other group?

Are you REALLY? Because this is what happened in the MAJORITY of the abuse cases which happened long before there was a correct understanding of pedophilia. . .

 

[Tantum_ergo]

The more pertinent question is who was responsible for their ignorance of human nature to the degree it resulted in evil being done inside the church?

Where does hypocrisy end, when truth arrives?

Which is mightier, tradition, or truth?

jomoco

IGNORANCE OF HUMAN NATURE?

You do know, don’t you, that this happens not ‘just’ in the Church? That in fact the percentage of those abusers is LESS than in any other group? What exactly are you saying? That coverup ONLY happened in the Catholic Church? You are quite wrong.

What on EARTH does a false dichotomy question of ‘tradition or truth’ have to do with this?

 

[jomoco]

No. But it is not as ‘simple’ as you are trying to paint it. Let’s put it this way. Suppose you are the head of a company and some of your members either come directly to you, or to human resources, or are brought in by the police, and admit to pedophilia. Suppose also that the expert doctors and psychiatrists tell you that you must treat your employees and not just fire them (most companies require this). Suppose they also tell you that the best thing is to quietly settle with the families, try to ‘hush things up’ for the sake of the victims. Suppose they treat your employees and after a time, tell you they are CURED, and that part of the cure is that they need a ‘fresh start’, so the doctors tell YOU to give these employees a good reference and send them off to another company in another state.

What do you do? These are expert doctors, psychiatrists, police officers. . .they are giving you the benefit of their expert teachings and long years of work; they are telling you to do exactly the same things they are telling every other ‘company’ in the U.S.

Are you COVERING UP by following their advice? Are you really? If you don’t know years earlier that pedophilia can’t be cured and you trust expert doctors and lawyers and psychiatrists and police and follow the SAME INSTRUCTIONS given to every other group?

Are you REALLY? Because this is what happened in the MAJORITY of the abuse cases which happened long before there was a correct understanding of pedophilia. . .

Seems more like an individual rudely breaking wind in their living room, then promptly kicking their loyal dog snoozing at the hearth, for their all too human indiscretion’s.

jomoco

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Seems more like an individual rudely breaking wind in their living room, then promptly kicking their loyal dog snoozing at the hearth, for their all too human indiscretion’s.

jomoco

What a delightful picture. Whatever it means.

 

[davidv]

What part of church teachings ignore’s and cover’s up evil perpetrated within the church, for decades?

Is this another head’s I win, tail’s you lose, example of the executive leadership clause that insulates them against reality, and accountability?

jomoco

How does any of this response address my point or the OP? Please provide some evidence that this more than biased mudslinging.

 

[jomoco]

How does any of this response address my point or the OP? Please provide some evidence that this more than biased mudslinging.

It address’ Secondeve’s question of how to determine the extent of the CC/Magesterium’s infallibility?

My opinion expressed, was only to the extent that such infallibilty is self-evident in the Magesterium’s actions, over decades.

An objective viewpoint is not necessarily a heresy in this world friend.

jomoco

 

[michelleds]

It address’ Secondeve’s question of how to determine the extent of the CC/Magesterium’s infallibility?

My opinion expressed, was only to the extent that such infallibilty is self-evident in the Magesterium’s actions, over decades.

An objective viewpoint is not necessarily a heresy in this world friend.

jomoco

Actually, none of your posts on this thread speak to the OP’s questions. You appear to have an axe to grind. there is a smaller percentage of sex abuse cases in the Catholic Church than in the Protestant churches; there is a far smaller percentage of sex abuse cases in ANY church than in the secular community (within families, extended families, schools, strangers, etc etc). furthermore, as already pointed out, your posts have nothing to do with infallibility.

Astray could be easily defined as the priestly sexual abuse scandal that has manifested itself as self-evident to the Christian world at large?

How infallible is that?

Who’s caught a beam in their own eyes, the Catholics, or the Christians at LARGE?

jomoco

Quote:
Originally Posted by davidv
What part of sexual abuse is in accord with Church teaching? Anwser: Not one thing. Your accusation about beams is without merit.

The sins of individual members of the Church do not invalidate the correctness of her teaching.

What part of church teachings ignore’s and cover’s up evil perpetrated within the church, for decades?

Is this another head’s I win, tail’s you lose, example of the executive leadership clause that insulates them against reality, and accountability?

jomoco
The more pertinent question is who was responsible for their ignorance of human nature to the degree it resulted in evil being done inside the church?

Where does hypocrisy end, when truth arrives?

Which is mightier, tradition, or truth?

jomoco

 

[jomoco]

Can you answer such a pertinent question as, which is mightier, tradition or truth?

Try and answer the question from the Magesterium’s perspective, if possible?

jomoco

 

[davidv]

Can you answer such a pertinent question as, which is mightier, tradition or truth?

Try and answer the question from the Magesterium’s perspective, if possible?

jomoco

Sacred Tradition is the Truth, so your question is moot.

 

[jomoco]

Sacred Tradition is the Truth, so your question is moot.

Sounds more like burnt offerings to me friend.

jomoco

 

[davidv]

Sounds more like burnt offerings to me friend.

jomoco

How so?

 

[jomoco]

How so?

The OT brims with animal sacrifice that can easily be termed tradition, and best left behind us.

Times change, sometimes even for the better, this betterment should never be sacrificed upon the altar of tradition.

jomoco

 

[davidv]

The OT brims with animal sacrifice that can easily be termed tradition, and best left behind us.

Times change, sometimes even for the better, this betterment should never be sacrificed upon the altar of tradition.

jomoco

It seems that you have misunderstood what Sacred Tradition is.

CCC:

81 "Sacred Scripture is the speech of God as it is put down in writing under the breath of the Holy Spirit."42

"And [Holy] *Tradition *transmits in its entirety the Word of God which has been entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit. It transmits it to the successors of the apostles so that, enlightened by the Spirit of truth, they may faithfully preserve, expound and spread it abroad by their preaching."43

82 As a result the Church, to whom the transmission and interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, "does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone. Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence."44

Given the quote above, would you kindly provide a more appropriate response to post #95.

 

[jomoco]

It seems that you have misunderstood what Sacred Tradition is.
Given the quote above, would you kindly provide a more appropriate response to post #95.

I’ll simply ask you how in God’s Name can any flawed men claim an infallibility that Christ Himself never enjoyed here on earth in the flesh?

How do they gain that most treasured status, without self-evident performance criteria having been met?

jomoco

 

[davidv]

I’ll simply ask you how in God’s Name can any flawed men claim an infallibility that Christ Himself never enjoyed here on earth in the flesh?

God’s name is exactly how fallible men can be guided by the Holy Spirit to not teach error in matters of faith and morals.

Also, infallibility isn’t “claimed”, it was given to the apostles, and their successors, by God in the person of Jesus.

How was Christ not infallible?

How do they gain that most treasured status, without self-evident performance criteria having been met?

jomoco

I don’t understand this question.

 

[jomoco]

God’s name is exactly how fallible men can be guided by the Holy Spirit to not teach error in matters of faith and morals.

Also, infallibility isn’t “claimed”, it was given to the apostles, and their successors, by God in the person of Jesus.

How was Christ not infallible?

I don’t understand this question.

How does the Magesterium gain any of the attributes of Jesus, without being Jesus, or even showing any self-evident proof of truly being infallible?

jomoco

 

[Tantum_ergo]

How does the Magesterium gain any of the attributes of Jesus, without being Jesus, or even showing any self-evident proof of truly being infallible?

jomoco

You dodged earlier --how is Jesus not infallible?

As for the Magesterium and teachings, tell me how any of Jesus’ teachings were not infallible. Then tell us how the Holy Spirit-who is God–is likewise not infallible. Tell us how the Church, which Christ promised to send the Holy Spirit to guide, can not be infallible in presenting the teachings of infallible beings such as Christ and the Holy Spirit.

Is the Bible inerrent, God-breathed scripture? How CAN it be when it was written by ‘fallible men?’ But I’ll be you’re a ‘BIble Christian’. . .so you trust that somehow these ‘fallible men’ got the inerrant Scripture right. . .yet you don’t trust the Church that predates that canon of Scripture by 350 years and GAVE you that canon on top of it?