do you wish those who reject papal infallibility would leave the church?

[dairygirl4u2c]

ty

[Seven77]

I wish that Catholics that outrightly, knowingly, and willingly reject Church teaching, in general, would have the honesty to realize how insincere they are to keep calling themselves Catholic. That's all I would say to answer your question.

[dairygirl4u2c]

if someone asked me why i dont consider myself catholic, i'd probably say because i dont want to be a part of an organization that doesn't want me. i dont mind identifying as non-denominational, especially places like this, but i have much respect for catholic teaching and unity in general. with that said, it just made me realize that probably most catholics are bad catholics, so what really is the 'core constitutency'? i guess if the leader is part of the devout ones, even if it's a minority, it is still the litmus test group. 
to test my hypothesis more formally i googled it, and this is what i found. 

"The poll suggested that the papacy no longer occupies the exalted position it once did. Asked whether the pope is infallible when he teaches on matters of morality and faith, 40 percent said yes, 46 percent said no, and 14 percent said they did not know. Nearly 8 in 10 Catholics polled said they would be more likely to follow their conscience on “difficult moral questions” than to follow the pope’s teachings."

 

so i think liberal catholics have a practical point on their side... they are actually the majority, and in some ways they are the 'core' constituency.

[Seven77]

15 minutes ago, dairygirl4u2c said:

if someone asked me why i dont consider myself catholic, i'd probably say because i dont want to be a part of an organization that doesn't want me. i dont mind identifying as non-denominational, especially places like this, but i have much respect for catholic teaching and unity in general. with that said, it just made me realize that probably most catholics are bad catholics, so what really is the 'core constitutency'? i guess if the leader is part of the devout ones, even if it's a minority, it is still the litmus test group. 
to test my hypothesis more formally i googled it, and this is what i found. 

"The poll suggested that the papacy no longer occupies the exalted position it once did. Asked whether the pope is infallible when he teaches on matters of morality and faith, 40 percent said yes, 46 percent said no, and 14 percent said they did not know. Nearly 8 in 10 Catholics polled said they would be more likely to follow their conscience on “difficult moral questions” than to follow the pope’s teachings."

 

so i think liberal catholics have a practical point on their side... they are actually the majority, and in some ways they are the 'core' constituency.

19

Every Catholic is a bad Catholic (I'm not talking the denial of papal infallibility.) We are all bad at living the faith because we're a bunch of miserable sinners.

Why do you think the Church doesn't want you? That's kind of sad. You know what it says, inscribed on the base of the Statue of Liberty? Well, I think those words could be spoken about the Church.

 I think that part of the problem is that people settle for mediocrity. Some people are not even willing to try to be the best they can be. To at least try to follow Church teaching… To want to.

“The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting. It has been found difficult; and left untried.”
― G.K. Chesterton, What's Wrong with the World

[dominicansoul]

I would rather they repent and be saved rather than leave the Church

[Seven77]

40 minutes ago, dominicansoul said:

I would rather they repent and be saved rather than leave the Church

This.

[Era Might]

For all its rep, infallibility is, like, pretty much nothing...all it says is the Pope can't err when he, like, pronounces something really really high and serious. There are technically like 2 actual cases of it.

[Makarioi]

6 minutes ago, Era Might said:

For all its rep, infallibility is, like, pretty much nothing...all it says is the Pope can't err when he, like, pronounces something really really high and serious. There are technically like 2 actual cases of it.

When a Pope speaks 'ex cathedra' or from the Chair of Peter, is when he speaks infallibly.  I believe the 2 times were regarding Mary, her Immaculate Conception and her Assumption. Otherwise, he's just as human as the rest of us  

[dairygirl4u2c]

i think the two instances idea refers to when the pope teaches something formally and invokes his privilege. but the popes actually has spoken 'infallibly' tons of times in the past, as even renouned apologist Jimmy Akin has said. http://jimmyakin.com/2004/06/two_instances_o.html

the pope speaks infallibly when he 'intentionally binds the church on faith and morals'. it has to meet all those criteria. that's not an official definition but its the best practical one that i see and is very close to how it was defined at Vatican I. 

[Jack4]

On 10/11/2017 at 11:48 PM, dairygirl4u2c said:

probably most catholics are bad catholics, so what really is the 'core constitutency'? i guess if the leader is part of the devout ones, even if it's a minority, it is still the litmus test group. ....

so i think liberal catholics have a practical point on their side... they are actually the majority, and in some ways they are the 'core' constituency.

....and in some other ways, the faithful are the "core constituency", particularly if the "litmus" is the holy and life-giving Gospel. The "practicing" Catholics need not be without sin. They take the struggle against sin seriously, trusting in Divine grace. 

 

And to the original question, to all that has been said here, I would like to add that falsehood be stopped marketed as "new understanding" which is equally permissible.