Papal Infallibility Roundtable

[jmj1984]

I am saying that the Church says that it takes far more than a wrong belief or a persistent doubt, or a persistent avoidance of belief to make a heretic, or place you outside of communion.

So you cannot simply look at Mickey, for example, and suggest that his refusal to believe the teaching of the Immaculate Conception is heretical, or even heterodox.

You can growl at him for suggesting that we teach that she is the Immaculate Exception while Orthodox thinks she’s just like us…IF he would ever think such a silly thing.

But you cannot fault him in a way that your own Church would not.

In fact, it may be that upon resumption of communion the Orthodox would be asked:

1. to avoid teaching against the Immaculate Conception
2. to continue to celebrate the Feast of St. Anne on December 9th.

and ask no more than that.

Catholics are going to have to think outside more than one box once we are closer to an actual resumption of communion. I am as sure of that as I am of my own name.

I said no such thing, I was using the 'Professio Fidei’ to illustrate that there are more ex cathedra statements than some believe.

As for the immaculate conception, aside from canon law, one should look at the words of the constitution which defined it ‘**Hence, if anyone shall dare – which God forbid! – to think otherwise than as has been defined by us, let him know and understand that he is condemned by his own judgment; that he has suffered shipwreck in the faith; that he has separated from the unity of the Church; and that, furthermore, by his own action he incurs the penalties established by law if he should are to express in words or writing or by any other outward means the errors he think in his heart. **’

I will not get into the resumption of communion issue, suffice to say I do not favour that approach.

 

[Elijahmaria]

I said no such thing, I was using the 'Professio Fidei’ to illustrate that there are more ex cathedra statements than some believe.

As for the immaculate conception, aside from canon law, one should look at the words of the constitution which defined it ‘**Hence, if anyone shall dare – which God forbid! – to think otherwise than as has been defined by us, let him know and understand that he is condemned by his own judgment; that he has suffered shipwreck in the faith; that he has separated from the unity of the Church; and that, furthermore, by his own action he incurs the penalties established by law if he should are to express in words or writing or by any other outward means the errors he think in his heart. **’

I will not get into the resumption of communion issue, suffice to say I do not favour that approach.

Actually I wasn’t accusing you of anything. Just using the discussion to point to things that are possible. Using the text of the canons to point out that most people really don’t understand how lenient the Church is with believers and non-believers, the confused, the hurt, the angry and the sinner. I was trying to point out in general that it takes a great deal of negative action against the Church to be removed from communion as a heretic.

You may not favor that approach to the resumption of communion but your current pope has not ruled it out and in fact has said in many ways that the Orthodox will NOT be required to become good little Roman Catholics.

Tradition!!!

 

[jmj1984]

Actually I wasn’t accusing you of anything. Just using the discussion to point to things that are possible. Using the text of the canons to point out that most people really don’t understand how lenient the Church is with believers and non-believers, the confused, the hurt, the angry and the sinner. I was trying to point out in general that it takes a great deal of negative action against the Church to be removed from communion as a heretic.

You may not favor that approach to the resumption of communion but your current pope has not ruled it out and in fact has said in many ways that the Orthodox will NOT be required to become good little Roman Catholics.

Tradition!!!

Ok.

Well we will have to see won’t we

The topic of what will and won’t be required for the orthodox churches to be reconciled with The Catholic Church is really for another thread.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Actually I wasn’t accusing you of anything. Just using the discussion to point to things that are possible. Using the text of the canons to point out that most people really don’t understand how lenient the Church is with believers and non-believers, the confused, the hurt, the angry and the sinner. I was trying to point out in general that it takes a great deal of negative action against the Church to be removed from communion as a heretic.

You may not favor that approach to the resumption of communion but your current pope has not ruled it out and in fact has said in many ways that the Orthodox will NOT be required to become good little Roman Catholics.

Tradition!!!

lol… Good Little Roman Catholics?

 

[Elijahmaria]

Ok.

Well we will have to see won’t we

The topic of what will and won’t be required for the orthodox churches to be reconciled with The Catholic Church is really for another thread.

honorable mention…that’s all.

 

[steve_b]

If the RC church wants to rejoin the Eastern Church the papal infallibility has to go there is no choice here. That is the nail on the head. Sorry if I had to let the air out of your balloons here. It’s just not going to fly. The Orthodox Church will never accept you’re position.

You can talk until you are blue in the face but*** nobody outside your church believes you***.

Let’s be clear. The Catholic Church east and west is already united.

The Eastern Orthodox churches are not united to the Catholic Church. So as far as language such as your church vs my church stuff is irrelevant. Jesus promised to build ***HIS ***Church on the apostles with Peter as the head. THAT’s the Church with all the promises. There’s only ONE Church like that on the planet. And given time, all the others calling themselves “churches” will either blow away or reunite to the Catholic Church. It’s an article of faith expressing an absolute truth. Jesus prayed that the Church will be one under the plan HE established i.e. one with Peter. And His prayer already happened. As in “I believe in One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church.” That Church exists NOW. All the ebb and flow into and away from union with Peter, is what all those who are NOT in union with Peter will have to answer for when they die.

 

[Mickey]

And given time, all the others calling themselves “churches” will either blow away or join the Catholic Church.

You may not think so…but you and Frank have a lot in common.

 

[Cavaradossi]

Let’s be clear. The Catholic Church east and west is already united.

The Eastern Orthodox churches are not united to the Catholic Church. So as far as language such as your church vs my church stuff is irrelevant. Jesus promised to build ***HIS ***Church on the apostles with Peter as the head. THAT’s the Church with all the promises. There’s only ONE Church like that on the planet. And given time, all the others calling themselves “churches” will either blow away or reunite to the Catholic Church. It’s an article of faith expressing an absolute truth. Jesus prayed that the Church will be one under the plan HE established i.e. one with Peter. And His prayer already happened. As in “I believe in One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church.” That Church exists NOW. All the ebb and flow into and away from union with Peter, is what all those who are NOT in union with Peter will have to answer for when they die.

I’m sure that will be God’s first question after we die: were you in union with Peter? His second question will be: does the Holy Spirit proceed from the Father or the Father and the Son?

 

[steve_b]

Actually I wasn’t accusing you of anything. Just using the discussion to point to things that are possible. Using the text of the canons to point out that most people really don’t understand how lenient the Church is with believers and non-believers, the confused, the hurt, the angry and the sinner. I was trying to point out in general that it takes a great deal of negative action against the Church to be removed from communion as a heretic.

You may not favor that approach to the resumption of communion but your current pope has not ruled it out and in fact has said in many ways that the Orthodox will NOT be required to become good little Roman Catholics.

Tradition!!!

2 questions

1. 
   *]Is the pope not your pope as well…as in OUR pope?
   *]without the characterization of “good little Roman Catholics”, do you have a specific document you’re refering to? It’s always good to refer to specifics not characterizations … true?

 

[Elijahmaria]

2 questions

1. 
   *]Is the pope not your pope as well…as in OUR pope?
   *]without the characterization of “good little Roman Catholics”, do you have a specific document you’re refering to? It’s always good to refer to specifics not characterizations … true?

1. 
   There are any number of comments that he’s made.
   
   He’s suggested that if we return to a common date of Easter we should follow the Orthodox reckoning.
   
   He’s said that we can ask no more of Orthodoxy than to profess the faith as they have professed it since the first 1000 years. [This one takes a bit of explaining, of course]
   
   He has said that the model of the unia will NOT be the model for resumption of communion with Orthodoxy.
   
   Those sorts of things. When I find others or references for those, I’ll post them.

 

[Elijahmaria]

You may not think so…but you and Frank have a lot in common.

There ya go!!

 

[Anthony_V]

Let’s be clear. The Catholic Church east and west is already united.

The Eastern Orthodox churches are not united to the Catholic Church. So as far as language such as your church vs my church stuff is irrelevant. Jesus promised to build ***HIS ***Church on the apostles with Peter as the head. THAT’s the Church with all the promises. There’s only ONE Church like that on the planet. And given time, all the others calling themselves “churches” will either blow away or reunite to the Catholic Church. It’s an article of faith expressing an absolute truth. Jesus prayed that the Church will be one under the plan HE established i.e. one with Peter. And His prayer already happened. As in “I believe in One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church.” That Church exists NOW. All the ebb and flow into and away from union with Peter, is what all those who are NOT in union with Peter will have to answer for when they die.

Perhaps we ought to lend ear and nod to the fact that Orthodox have apostolic succession. They are still part of the mystical body of Christ, regardless of their lack of communion with Rome. There are many many many Orthodox saints that are acknowledged by the Roman Church! With all due respect, yes the Roman Church is the safer choice in regards to doctrine, but the sacraments are the same across the board (within the respective communion). The goal is unity, not “proving to the Orthodox that they are wrong”. Orthodoxy isn’t a heresy like protestantism. It’s a snowballing of miscommunication, political boundaries, cultural differences, philisophical connotations and denotations, etc. Be fervent about being Catholic, by all means, but try and be tact about how you say things. We’re walking on eggshells as it is, and as far as relations with them go, we should be doing all we can to help them toward salvation. I suspect they just might do the same!

 

[steve_b]

I’m sure that will be God’s first question after we die: were you in union with Peter?

Is that meant to be sarcastic?
C:

His second question will be: does the Holy Spirit proceed from the Father or the Father and the Son?

It will be as the Catholic Church teaches.

 

[Cavaradossi]

Is that meant to be sarcastic?

It will be as the Catholic Church teaches.

Honestly, unless one is just incredibly Holy, I’m positive that being in union with Peter or professing the filioque will be last on God’s list of things to ask us about on the day of judgment (if we are so inclined to believe that’s what the day of judgment will be like). He will probably ask us why we murdered so many people in our hearts with our anger, and lusted after so many people with our eyes, contrary to the admonishment of Jesus not to entertain such thoughts.

 

[jmj1984]

Honestly, unless one is just incredibly Holy, I’m positive that being in union with Peter or professing the filioque will be last on God’s list of things to ask us about on the day of judgment (if we are so inclined to believe that’s what the day of judgment will be like). He will probably ask us why we murdered so many people in our hearts with our anger, and lusted after so many people with our eyes, contrary to the admonishment of Jesus not to entertain such thoughts.

I guess I’ll have to be the one to bring up 'Exta Eclessiam Nulla Salus’

You should read both Unam Sanctam and The Council of Florence which make it very clear that belonging to the church of christ, the church with the Pope as head, is of paramount importance. Only invincible ignorance can dispense from the need to visibly belong to The Catholic Church.

 

[ConstantineTG]

I’m sure that will be God’s first question after we die: were you in union with Peter? His second question will be: does the Holy Spirit proceed from the Father or the Father and the Son?

Third question will be about the Immaculate Conception

 

[Elijahmaria]

I guess I’ll have to be the one to bring up 'Exta Eclessiam Nulla Salus’

You should read both Unam Sanctam and The Council of Florence which make it very clear that belonging to the church of christ, the church with the Pope as head, is of paramount importance. Only invincible ignorance can dispense from the need to visibly belong to The Catholic Church.

Apparently you missed Vatican II…along with a whole notebook full of encyclicals from Blessed John Paul II.

 

[Elijahmaria]

Third question will be about the Immaculate Conception

THAT I think is quite possible…

 

[jmj1984]

Apparently you missed Vatican II…along with a whole notebook full of encyclicals from Blessed John Paul II.

Sorry are you saying infallible dogma contradicts itself?

Either what the two said are reconciliable with the infallible teaching of the church or they’re wrong.

 

[dcointin]

I guess I’ll have to be the one to bring up 'Exta Eclessiam Nulla Salus’

You should read both Unam Sanctam and The Council of Florence which make it very clear that belonging to the church of christ, the church with the Pope as head, is of paramount importance. Only invincible ignorance can dispense from the need to visibly belong to The Catholic Church.

“Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.”