Swiss Catholics call for same-sex partnerships, change in teaching on Communion [CWN]

[SonOfMan]

Not really. Abortion is taught under the bigger teachings on murder.

I said “if” the Church were to stop teaching it, by your logic you say its no longer a Church teaching.

Although one could make the case that while abortion may be “killing” (which is permitted under certain circumstances), it may not be “murder.”

Furthermore, I have never been formally taught that abortion was wrong. Ive heard “people” say it, but I have not been formally taught by the Church. Does that mean its not Church teaching if no one from the Church taught me?

Truth is not dependent on how many believe it.

Right. Except thats not what you say here:

“Which does not answer my question. How can it be Church teaching if no one teaches it?”

If a pope chooses to never say a single word about abortion, that doesn’t mean that the teaching no longer exists. That teaching will always be with us, regardless if anyone speaks another word about it.

It seems you have answered your own question then. Even if it is never formally taught, it will always be with us, regardless if anyone teaches it or not.

So going back to Pope Boniface’s words, he explicitly defined the need for all human beings to submit to the Roman Pontiff. The Church no longer teaches this. It seems there was a change.

 

[Dawnia]

I said “if” the Church were to stop teaching it, by your logic you say its no longer a Church teaching.

Although one could make the case that while abortion may be “killing” (which is permitted under certain circumstances), it may not be “murder.”

Furthermore, I have never been formally taught that abortion was wrong. Ive heard “people” say it, but I have not been formally taught by the Church. Does that mean its not Church teaching if no one from the Church taught me?

Little kids games of what if are pointless.

Right. Except thats not what you say here:

“Which does not answer my question. How can it be Church teaching if no one teaches it?”

If a pope chooses to never say a single word about abortion, that doesn’t mean that the teaching no longer exists. That teaching will always be with us, regardless if anyone speaks another word about it.

It seems you have answered your own question then. Even if it is never formally taught, it will always be with us, regardless if anyone teaches it or not.

So going back to Pope Boniface’s words, he explicitly defined the need for all human beings to submit to the Roman Pontiff. The Church no longer teaches this. It seems there was a change.

The Church never taught it to begin with.

 

[Brendan_64]

Which does not answer my question. How can it be Church teaching if no one teaches it?

You don’t need someone to stand up and teach you in order for it to be a teaching. The teaching is not a teaching because an individual (be he layperson, priest or Pope) decides to tell you about it (or not), what the Church teaches is laid down in the many documents that make up the Deposit of Faith. We have a responsibility to make ourselves aware of what the teachings of the Church are, today we have access to information in a way that even just 30 years ago could only be dreamt of. Are we not expected to take personal responsibility for knowing what our Church teaches rather than wait for someone to tell us?

 

[SonOfMan]

Little kids games of what if are pointless.

It wasnt a kid game, it was a demonstration of your faulty and contradictory logic.

The Church never taught it to begin with.

Yes it did, i.e Pope Boniface’s declaration in Unam Sanctam.

 

[Tomdstone]

It wasnt a kid game, it was a demonstration of your faulty and contradictory logic.

Yes it did, i.e Pope Boniface’s declaration in Unam Sanctam.

It was not only a declaration. It was a declaration, a statement and a definition. “…we declare, state and define that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of all human beings that they submit to the Roman Pontiff.”

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

Little kids games of what if are pointless.

It seems you have answered your own question then. Even if it is never formally taught, it will always be with us, regardless if anyone teaches it or not.

The Church never taught it to begin with.

The Fourth Lateran Council disagrees as it said there was but one Church of the faithful outside none which are saved. It has been taught since the Church Fathers in fact. Now, what does it mean?

“Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus. All the categorical strength and point of this aphorism lies in its tautology. Outside the Church there is no salvation, because salvation is the Church” (G. Florovsky, “Sobornost: the Catholicity of the Church”, in The Church of God, p. 53). Does it therefore follow that anyone who is not visibly within the Church is necessarily damned? Of course not; still less does it follow that everyone who is visibly within the Church is necessarily saved. As Augustine wisely remarked: “How many sheep there are without, how many wolves within!” (Homilies on John, 45, 12) While there is no division between a “visible” and an “invisible Church”, yet there may be members of the Church who are not visibly such, but whose membership is known to God alone. If anyone is saved, he must in some sense be a member of the Church; in what sense, we cannot always say.