The Church has taught error?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Genesis315
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Lets not reject formal Church teachings, ie., the writings of an ecumenical council, a papal encyclical, and the Catechism of the Catholic Church, and substitute the writings of three priests who might try to support the “party line” that the Church was never in error or never really approved of the institution of slavery.
Click to expand...
I’m not. I’m debunking you. You may not realize it yet, but your opinon is not equivalent to Catholic teaching.

Catholic teaching is authentically proposed by the magisterium, not by LittleLes. Those vested with magisterial authority are called the Teaching Church.
The Teaching Church is composed of all the Bishops, with the Roman Pontiff at their head, be they dispersed throughout the world or assembled together in Council… The teaching power in the Church is possessed by the Pope and the Bishops, and, dependent on them, by the other sacred ministers. (Catechism of St. Pius X)
Click to expand...
So, in the final analysis, I ask myself: Is Littleles a sacred minister? NO. Is she even Catholic? She denies dogmas of Catholicism so that is not likely, and even if once was Catholic, her denial of dogmas lead to de facto heresy and excommunication. So who is vested with authentic teaching authority, sacred ministers and bishops of the Catholic Church, or dissidents such as Litteles and Pharsae? Gotta go with the former and reject the counter-magisterial views of the latter. 😉

Now, given your pattern at Phatmass, I’m sure you will continue completely oblivious that you’ve not convinced a single soul excepting yourself of your dissident views. Good luck with that. :rolleyes:
 
Lets try once again, ItsJUstDave,

I am not expressing my opinion but the formal teachings of an ecumenical council (Vatican II), a papal Encyclical, Veritatis splendor, and the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

I have also referenced the older teaching on the moral licitness of slavery according to Mosaic and the natural law as explained in the on-line 1912 catholic Encyclopedia. I have also quoted the Instruction of the Holy office in 1866 with taught that slavery itself in not contrary to the divine and natural law, a restatement of the teachings you can find in the Catholic Encyclopedia.

Claiming that this change in teaching is only my “opinion” is neither accurate nor intellectually honest. Again, it’s the Catholic Church’s teaching, not mine. I’m sorry that any fear of “heresy or excommunication” prohibits your accepting of the facts of history.

I wasn’t even consulted, but I seldom am.😃

LittleLes
 
Hmmmm… let me try that …

ITSJUSTDAVE1998 is “not expressing my opinion but the formal teachings of an ecumenical council (Vatican II), a papal Encyclical, Veritatis splendor, and the Catechism of the Catholic Church.”

Geee… that was easy. :rolleyes:
 
Here’s a thought …

Instead of just telling me your views are the views of the Church, how about supplying some source, some testimony of a priest or bishop for example, that carries the Imprimatur of the Church, which explicitly states that just-title servitude, the very kind enjoined by God in Holy Scripture is immoral. I’ve given THREE post-Vatican II such sources that assert the opposite, each with an Imprimatur of a Catholic bishop.

It seems to me that you have come rather short in the “support” of your thesis.

The “its not my opinion but the Church’s” polemic is absurd, given sources I’ve already cited who state Vatican II did not condemn just-title servitude but only chattel slavery.
 
What about Pope Honorius’ being Declared a Heretic by a Council by Pope St. Leo II?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top