mortify ii Posted April 14, 2014 Author Share Posted April 14, 2014 Mortify, you were not wrong. The Pope did teach as you understood. The Church has since changed its teaching on what the nature of the Church is in recent times as Lumen Gentium (promulgated in Vatican II) states. How the Church reconciles its modern understanding with its original is a circle I've not been able to square. Some will point to doctrinal development without understanding Newman's own limits on the theory, while others try to convince themselves documents like Unam Sactum can be understood in a Lumen Gentium way. Anyway, yours is a good question. Honest Catholics will admit their Church errs sometimes in its teachings. (Church also used to teach unbaptized infants didn't go to heaven but stuck in limbo and that usery was sinful). E Eliakim, Admitting change carries significant consequences. Are you of the opinion the Chair is currently empty? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eliakim Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 Eliakim, Admitting change carries significant consequences. Are you of the opinion the Chair is currently empty? No, the Chair isn't empty. Intelligent and honest Catholics admit change occurred. The problem is not having an infallible list of infallible statements. Some Catholics ignorantly rail at Protestants for not having an infallible magisterium, but foolishly don't see the beam in their own eye here. Dogma cannot be changed, but many things aren't dogma. Catholics are called to obey the ordinary magisterium but primacy of conscience enables us to avoid embracing magisterium's occasional errors or un-Christ-like penalties attached to some Church laws. Don't be a LAACC. E Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mortify ii Posted April 14, 2014 Author Share Posted April 14, 2014 No, the Chair isn't empty. Intelligent and honest Catholics admit change occurred. The problem is not having an infallible list of infallible statements. Some Catholics ignorantly rail at Protestants for not having an infallible magisterium, but foolishly don't see the beam in their own eye here. Dogma cannot be changed, but many things aren't dogma. Catholics are called to obey the ordinary magisterium but primacy of conscience enables us to avoid embracing magisterium's occasional errors or un-Christ-like penalties attached to some Church laws. Don't be a LAACC. E I don't quite follow you, Eliakim. So you accept the current claimant to the Papal throne and that the magisterium has contradicted itself? Seems like you feel the Popes have exercised a power they don't really have, and that certain doctrines were promulgated as dogma when they really weren't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 No, the Chair isn't empty. Intelligent and honest Catholics admit change occurred. The problem is not having an infallible list of infallible statements. Some Catholics ignorantly rail at Protestants for not having an infallible magisterium, but foolishly don't see the beam in their own eye here. Dogma cannot be changed, but many things aren't dogma. Catholics are called to obey the ordinary magisterium but primacy of conscience enables us to avoid embracing magisterium's occasional errors or un-Christ-like penalties attached to some Church laws. Don't be a LAACC. E Are you trying to imply that extra ecclesiam nulla salus is not in fact infallibly taught by the Church? Interesting tactic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eliakim Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I don't quite follow you, Eliakim. So you accept the current claimant to the Papal throne and that the magisterium has contradicted itself? Seems like you feel the Popes have exercised a power they don't really have, and that certain doctrines were promulgated as dogma when they really weren't. Almost. I'd say rather the Church has at times promulgated errant teachings that it was more than willing to let be understood to be infallible by the laity, if it furthered Church power. Remember not everything the Pope or magisterium does is infallible. Are you trying to imply that extra ecclesiam nulla salus is not in fact infallibly taught by the Church? Interesting tactic. It is, but it was incorrectly taught at times. See above. E Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 Almost. I'd say rather the Church has at times promulgated errant teachings that it was more than willing to let be understood to be infallible by the laity, if it furthered Church power. Remember not everything the Pope or magisterium does is infallible. It is, but it was incorrectly taught at times. See above. E And what makes you think that modern man is so much better capable of understanding God's will? Is it the characteristically modern tendency towards personal sanctity? Record Mass attendance? The great respect and reverence for the Liturgy and its traditions? Our laity who are so understanding of Catholic teaching? Oh wait... Truly we live in an age of great holiness. :rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seven77 Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 Lutherans and Catholics are members of the Church of Christ. How is it then that a Catholic In a state of grace can receive the Eucharist in a Catholic parish and a well-meaning sincere Lutheran cannot receive the Eucharist? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eliakim Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 And what makes you think that modern man is so much better capable of understanding God's will? Is it the characteristically modern tendency towards personal sanctity? Record Mass attendance? The great respect and reverence for the Liturgy and its traditions? Our laity who are so understanding of Catholic teaching? Oh wait... Truly we live in an age of great holiness. :rolleyes: I'm just pointing out the fact that some Church teachings do change. In times past it was more holy and reverent but erred by being too strict. Never be a LAACC. E Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 I'm just pointing out the fact that some Church teachings do change. In times past it was more holy and reverent but erred by being too strict. Never be a LAACC. E Which teachings change? Why? How? Who decides these things? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eliakim Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 Which teachings change? Why? How? Who decides these things? Pls read carefully my posts above. E Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 Pls read carefully my posts above. E Yeah, it is pretty standard unnoteworthy modernism. I am not particularly impressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now