It’s the other way around. Pilot asked, “what is truth?” Thus saying that every man experienced his own truth. He is saying that Lutherans are correct when they say that SS is a doctrine and that other Protestants are correct when they say that it isn’t.
I think I’ve supported by stance with plenty of evidence.
So, the Eastern Catholic priests who are Married are violating Catholic doctrine, Which means the Catholic Church itself is violating its own doctrine by allowing priests to be married in violation of Church doctrine.
There’s more than one teaching associated with this doctrinal discipline. There’s also this one:De_Maria:
So, the Eastern Catholic priests who are Married are violating Catholic doctrine, …
I’m not answering it because the question is a non sequitur. It doesn’t follow that simply because it doesn’t deny a doctrine doesn’t mean it isn’t. Were that the case, confessional documents would be volume upon volume.
There must be a basis for your claim. It certainly isn’t the dictionary definition of doctrine. It certainly isn’t the dictionary definition of hermeneutic.De_Maria:
I’m not answering it because the question is a non sequitur. It doesn’t follow that simply because it doesn’t deny a doctrine doesn’t mean it isn’t.
That doesn’t follow. You continually claim that Lutherans must follow that which is taught in those volumes. But this idea of yours, the denial that SS is a doctrine, is not taught in those volumes. Now, you are claiming that it doesn’t have to be there.
It is still subject to the authority of the Pope, though.
Not in question.
The fact that he is teaching, means that it is doctrine.
Everything in Scripture is doctrine.
Teaching Timothy. Indoctrinating Timothy.
He was teaching Timothy. That makes it doctrine.
The truth remains true whether anyone believes it or not. I’ve provided adequate support for my argument. I am asking you to provide some for your belief in addition to the claim that you believe it. Simply believing something doesn’t make it correct.
Regarding the last sentence, Lutherans believe Mother of God is doctrinal. Not so the perpetual virginity of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Here they are in the same sentence. No statement that it is not doctrine.
) Just doesn’t follow.It does seem illogical to me to try and pin down a Protestant on something like “doctrine” or “discipline.” Those are really Catholic notions related to an earthly authority; viz: The Magisterium. Since no Protestant church recognizes a Divine earthly authority, as is found in the Catholic Church, and since their only final and highest authority is Sacred Scripture (and interpreted by private judgement -whether the individual believer, or a synod of laymen writing confessions or concords centuries ago) then it is really a moot point with Protestants.
Ok. For the sake of this argument, I’ll concede that. If that is true, then where do you get the idea that it isn’t? Here, you provide evidence that the BoC teaches that Mary is ever Virgin. Yet, you deny they consider it a doctrine.
They aren’t my personal definitions. I have produced dictionaries and other objective sources.
My argument follows, as I have proved. But you’ve only opened up a bigger can of worms, with yours.(not even accepted by Catholics here), and your personal methodologies and interpretations (“it has to say it isn’t a doctrine or its a doctrine”
I guess I had to learn the hard way. You’re right. They believe in private interpretation and practice private interpretation. All the while denying that they believe or practice private interpretation.De_Maria:
It does seem illogical to me to try and pin down a Protestant on something like “doctrine” or “discipline.” Those are really Catholic notions related to an earthly authority; viz: The Magisterium. Since no Protestant church recognizes a Divine earthly authority, as is found in the Catholic Church, and since their only final and highest authority is Sacred Scripture (and interpreted by private judgement -whether the individual believer, or a synod of laymen writing confessions or concords centuries ago) then it is really a moot point with Protestants.
Even trying to pin down a Protestant with “teachings” would prove evanescent. Even when confronted with written documents, they can still be interpreted by private judgement. Without an earthly Divine Authority, there can be no sure doctrines, or teachings. Everything is based on shifting amorphous presuppositions and beliefs.
That is why we find Protestants in a continual state of “protesting.” No sooner are they accused of one inconsistency, then they protest the very opposite is true.
This problem was corrected once and for all with the coming of the Messiah. It is the Messiah, Jesus Christ, who established a Church with HIS Authority ON EARTH, with the mere mortals that He designated as His stewards. He would guide them until the end of time in all teaching and judgement. That is our Magisterium.
Of course you do.
Oh, I see. “nevertheless remained a virgin.” doesn’t mean she remained a virgin.
That still leaves us with the problem of why you claim that this teaching of the BoC, is not considered a doctrine.De_Maria:
Of course you do.
Oh, I see. “nevertheless remained a virgin.” doesn’t mean she remained a virgin.
I think we’re done
Yes. That is what Lutherans will say. Why? Because it is explicit in scripture that May is the mother of Jesus, who at the incarnation is fully God, and man, but
It isn’t a problem for me.