His logic is right…if you never look, you’ll never see. The Orthodox Bishop +Kallistos Ware wrote that “Christianity, if true, has nothing to fear from honest inquiry”. Why do you hesitate to say the same thing about Catholicism?
What did Socrates write about questioning again…?
If it wasn’t for questioning, I would still be Protestant.
From Orthodox Bishop +Kallistos Ware to Socrates.His logic is right…if you never look, you’ll never see. The Orthodox Bishop +Kallistos Ware wrote that “Christianity, if true, has nothing to fear from honest inquiry”. Why do you hesitate to say the same thing about Catholicism?
What did Socrates write about questioning again…?
Through the process of reason and prayer I will decide what is true. I am in the process of finding out what is correct. The Catholic Church is winning right now, but we will see later on what happens.
holden, I do apologize. I thought I recalled that you were raised Catholic but left the faith for a time and have now returned. I must have mis-remembered.
That’s ok no problem. I will be back in a little bit once I find a proof for pre-1054 Ex Cathedra statements. I believe that is the last thing I currently need to defend the Papacy. At least in my mind.
holden, sorry. I don’t understand your response.That’s ok no problem. I will be back in a little bit once I find a proof for pre-1054 Ex Cathedra statements. I believe that is the last thing I currently need to defend the Papacy. At least in my mind.
Maybe I missed it. What was the ex cathedra statement? Actions aren’t ex cathedra, statements and proclamations are.I found one!
In 519 AD Pope St. Hormisdas insisted that the Eastern Churches agree with Pope St. Leo’s Tome. This is a theological work that was made by Pope St. Leo. The Eastern Church had previously denied it. However this time they agreed to it both Emperor Justin and the current Patriarch of Constantinople. Thus St. Leo defined a doctrine in his work, and St. Hormisdas enforced it. Therefore there is one example of pre 1054 Ex Cathedra statements. The Eastern Orthodox Church also agreed with it.
The fact that you have to “find one” yourself instead of referring us to a constant tradition affirming the tome as dogmatic reveals that the supposed dogmatic status of St. Leo’s confession of faith is your arbitrary and very subjective interpretation and thus of no use in this objective discussion.I found one!
Good point. Who proclaimed that Pope Leo’s tome was a dogma? Many Roman Catholic apologists still don’t see it as dogmatic. Our friend seems to be engaging in creative historical analysis here.
I know this is your leit motif… but all I can say is, it is a good thing that an annulment is not a divorce.
Nope, those two make my point well enough.
I’m certain the ancient intelligentia didn’t search for truth from wandering fishermen.
But the Catholic tribunal in the USA requires that the couple obtain a divorce before they will even consider the annulment. Doesn’t that make these Catholic tribunals complicit in the divorce process? And haven’t they watered down the requirements to obtain a marriage annulment to the extent that just about anyone can get one for the most trivial of reasons?
I agree with you.
The horrible abuse of the annulment system in the Western Church doesn’t change the fact that the doctrine of Catholicism remains that a marriage can only be proved non-existent and not ended by divorce. This doctrinal principle remains constant even if its application is clouded by abuse. And since we ought to discuss objective doctrine on this forum and not subjective abuse of application, I think we should cease bringing up the annulment abuse issue, as this proves nothing regarding the actual teaching of Catholicism (which is what matters in a discussion of what truth entails).My personal opinion is that the Catholic who is hesitating on this question has not read the complete works of St. Thomas Aquinas. My observation is that Catholicism is just as open to honest inquiry as any other religion, if not more so in some cases.His logic is right…if you never look, you’ll never see. The Orthodox Bishop +Kallistos Ware wrote that “Christianity, if true, has nothing to fear from honest inquiry”. Why do you hesitate to say the same thing about Catholicism?
What did Socrates write about questioning again…?
What a teaching actually means is seen in the practical world as the doctrine is applied in concrete cases. And the application of the Church doctrine on the indissolubility of marriage in the real world in the USA, is the following:I agree with you.
God bless,
Adam
What a teaching actually means is seen in the practical world as the teaching is given a doctrinal exposition. Abuse of the taught teaching cannot change what the teaching actually is. In fact, if abuse of doctrine that is clearly taught changes the actual teaching, the ancient Church’s teaching on simony would have changed during the latter part of the first millennium, as this teaching was discarded in the action of various Western prelates.
Ex cathedra is an idiom or expression meaning the definition of doctrine by supreme apostolic authority. In the pre-1054 days, this was done in a different way, when the popes enforced their teachings under penalty of anathema. Holden is correct; the formula of Pope Hormisdas is an example (see link), and I would submit that the Lateran Council of 649 was another.I found one!
In 519 AD Pope St. Hormisdas insisted that the Eastern Churches agree with Pope St. Leo’s Tome. This is a theological work that was made by Pope St. Leo. The Eastern Church had previously denied it. However this time they agreed to it both Emperor Justin and the current Patriarch of Constantinople. Thus St. Leo defined a doctrine in his work, and St. Hormisdas enforced it. Therefore there is one example of pre 1054 Ex Cathedra statements. The Eastern Orthodox Church also agreed with it.