Challenge To Phatmass

[Guest JeffCR07]

Thank you very much socialscout. Dairygirl, I appologize for not being more clear on the matter of infallible statements by the Holy Father. I am assuming that you would want to use all infallible statements from Popes, rather than simply extraordinary decrees.

Again, just to reiterate the fundamentals of the challenge, please find two contradictory infallible statements. If you have a question as to whether or not a decree is infallible, there's no harm in asking us, we'd be glad to help out!

- Your Brother In Christ, Jeff

[phatcatholic]

here's two lists i found. neither of them claim to be exhaustive:

1. Pope Leo I: Lectix Dilectionis Tuae
2. Pope Agatho: Omnium Bonorum Spes (DZ288)
3. Pope Boniface VIII: Unam Sanctam (DZ468-469)
4. Pope Benedict XII: Benedictus Deus (DZ530)
5. Pope Leo X Exsurge Domine (DZ 741-781)
6. Pope Innocent X Cum Occasione (DZ 1092-1096)
7. Pope Innocent XI Coelestis Pater (DZ 1221-1288)
8. Pope Clement XI Unigenitus (DZ 1351-1451)
9. Pope Pius VI Auctorem Fidei (DZ 1501-1599)
10. Pope Pius IX Ineffabilis Deus (DZ 1641) Quanta Cura (DZ 1688-1699)
11. Pope Leo XIII Apostolicae Curae (DZ1963-1966) Testem Benevolentiae (DZ1967-1976)
12. Pope Pius X Lamentabili (DZ 2239-2250) Pascendi (DZ 2253-2333)
13. Pope Pius XI Casti Conubii, Quadragesimo Anno
14. Pope Pius XII Munificentissiums Deus (DZ2331-2333)

Reverend Charles Augustine, in his A Commentary on the Code of Canon Law lists the following decrees, found in Denziger's Enchiridion Svmbolorum, which come under the provision of Canon 2317:
1. Errors of Wycliff and Hus, censured in Inter cunctas, by Martin V. (DZ581-625; 657-689)
2. Errors of Luther, which are not heretical, condemned in Exsurge Domine, by Leo X. (DZ741-781)
3. The proposition condemned by Clement VIII, stating that confession and absolution can be made by letter or message. (DZ1088-1089)
4. The 45 propositions condemned by the Holy Office in decrees dated September 24, 1665 and March 18, 1666. (DZ1101-1146)
5. The 65 propositions condemned by the Holy Office on March 4, 1679. (DZ1151-1216)
6. The 68 propositions of Michael de Molinos, condemned in Coelestis Pater, by Innocent XI. (Quietism.) (DZ1221-1288)
7. The 32 propositions condemned by Alexander VIII on August 24 and December 7, 1690. (Jansenism.) (DZ1289-1321)
8. The 101 propositions of Quesnel, condemned in the Bull Unigenitus and Pastoralis Officii by Clement XI. (Jansenism.) (DZ1351-1451)
9. Five proposition condemned in Destestabilem, by Bene-dict XIV. (DZ1491-1495)
10. Eighty-five propositions condemned in Auctorem Fi-dei~, by Pius VI. (These are the propositions of the Jansenist Synod of Pistoia, which have raised their ugly head at Vatican II and among traditionalists.) (DZ1501-1599)
11. Finally, the errors of modernists, which are not formally heretical.
12. The censures contained in Lamentabili and Pius X's Syllabus of Errors are also included, if the specific proposition is to be censured.


([b]note:[/b] in case you're wondering, Canon 2317 states that "Persons who stubbornly teach or defend, either publicly or privately, a doctrine which has been condemned by the Aposto-lic See or by an Ecumenical Council not, however, as formally heretical, shall be barred from the ministry of preaching the Word of God and of hearing sacramental confessions, and from every other office of teaching, without prejudice to other penalties which the sentence of condemnation of the doctrine may perhaps have decreed... .")

pax christi,
phatcatholic

[Anna]

dairygirl,

What exactly [i]is[/i] your challenge to phatmass (as the title of this thread)?

And if you don't mind my asking, what is your purpose and intent here?

Do you honestly want to understand our Faith better, or are you asking us to point you in some direction where you can supposedly find a flaw in our Church's teachings?

Careful: many anti-Catholic Scripture sholars, including protestant clergymen, have tread this same path, and wound up converting to the One, True Faith.

What, exactly are you seeking?
In attempting to prove yourself right, you very well may prove yourself wrong. What [i]then[/i]?

Pax Christi. <><

[Anna]

Uhhhhhh.....hello?

[Guest JeffCR07]

lol, don't get too impatient Anna, I mean come on, what are you supposed to say to a post like that?

"Know what, you're right, I [i]am[/i] trying to prove myself wrong!"

honestly, I dunno how I would respond

[Anna]

Well, Jeff, it's pretty easy for any of us here to find ourselves wrong on any number of things. We're human, and to err is human!

But what it seems like we're being asked here is to do all the research for dairygirl, who desperately seems to want to prove The One True Church wrong. So, we take the bait, do the research, and then she will be more likely to find that precious needle in the haystack.

Just one problem with that: [i]there is no needle [/i]in our haystack. None. Zip, zilch, nada.

You provide dairygirl with links, and there's no thank you or promise to read them. Rather, she tells you to expand or narrow the list of links, tells you not to document dump, etc...Just what does she want from us?

If she wants to prove the Church wrong, she can go ahead and spin her own wheels.

I'm not going to waste my time trying to prove that what Is True, isn't.

Some Scripture scholars have made that their life mission. What has become of them? Either they've been humbled and embraced the Faith, or they've become more obstinant in their pride and rejected It.

There is no middle ground.
We've made our choice, and we'll defend against attacks and heresies.
But seems to me we're being asked to assist in finding the Church wrong, and sorry, that is impossible.
So, if I understand dairygirl's challenge, she's asking the impossible. (Or am I totally misreading her challenge? She never answered me.)

Now, if she wants us to prove some protestant philosophy flawed, no problem! Since they're the doctrines of men.

Pax Christi. <><

[dairygirl4u2c]

The challenge is in the first post. To find the counsils, check. To find the ex cathedra statements, sort of check. We've found the two definite ones, but there are others that could be if I understand correct. And to find consensuses.

You seem pretty certain all non Catholics religions can be proven false. I suppose if you want a challenge, I'd say prove the mormons and jahova's witnesses wrong. If there are different brands of them, as there are with christianity, I can pick one and you can prove it wrong.

I suppose if you want another challenge, it'd be to have a general post on what writings from the Popes and early church we don't have. Such as the writings of Pope Stephen during Cyprian of Carthage's day or Honorius's controversial writings. Writings of popes from back when the counsils were popular well like the first seven would be good. But then they wouldn't count if I could even find them because they weren't used to teach the church as a whole. (probably because no one thought of the pope as final with a F)

And just so you know. I am going to be looking into these popes. Gregory the great, the first Leo the great, Stephan the I, and Victor I. These are all critical points. Also eventually Innocent, and the other "bad" ones, and then the pope s that lived during Constantine's power. You don't have to find these though. (and we know Stephan's are gone)

And there were three (or seven, maybe you could help me find that out) churches in the beginning, Pauline, Petrine, and Jewish Christians. Where are the writings to those? You'd say only Petrine lasted, but still, where, and what did they say?


Most of this is to give you an idea of what I'm looking into. So if you want a challenge you can pick any of that and help me out too.

Edited August 11, 2004 by dairygirl4u2c

[Aloysius]

[b]Mormons:[/b]

[url="http://www.catholicapologetics.net/mormons.htm"]Mormons[/url]
[url="http://www.geocities.com/swickersc/mormon.html"]The Book of Mormom's Testament to Another Christ[/url]
[url="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10570c.htm"]Mormons[/url]
[url="http://transporter.com/apologia/lds_rcc/Christian_Looks.html"]A Christian Look at Mormonism[/url]
[url="http://www.catholicapologetics.info/mormons.htm"]A Catholic Refutation of Mormon Doctrine[/url]
[url="http://www.catholicapologetics.info/morm.htm"]Difficult Questions for Mormons To Answer[/url]
[url="http://www.catholic.com/library/Distinctive_Beliefs_of_Mormon.asp"]Distinctive Beliefs of the Mormon Church[/url]
[url="http://www.catholic.com/library/Mormon_Stumpers.asp"]Mormon Stumpers[/url]
[url="http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/debate6.htm"]Dialogue with a Mormon[/url]
[url="http://www.catholicapologetics.net/Mormonism_and_it’s_Mythology.htm"]The Mythology of Mormonism[/url]
[url="http://www.catholicculture.org/docs/doc_view.cfm?recnum=4753"]The Appeal of Mormonism[/url]
[url="http://www.catholicculture.org/docs/doc_view.cfm?recnum=2972"]Is Mormonism Christian?[/url]
[url="http://catholiceducation.org/articles/apologetics/ap0104.html"]From Utah with Love[/url]
[url="http://catholiceducation.org/articles/apologetics/ap0112.html"]Drawing the Lines: A Closer look at the LDS Church[/url]
[url="http://www.catholic.com/library/Gods_of_the_Mormon_Church.asp"]The Gods of the Mormons[/url]
[url="http://ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ430.HTM"]Dialogue with a Mormon Apologist[/url]
[url="http://www.catholicculture.org/docs/doc_view.cfm?recnum=1330"]The Mormon Christ[/url]
[url="http://www.catholic.com/library/Mormonism_Baptism_for_the_Dead.asp"]Mormonism's Baptism for the Dead[/url]
[url="http://www.ewtn.com/library/Theology/MORMBAP1.HTM"]Questioning the Validity of Mormon Baptism[/url]
[url="http://www.cin.org/archives/apolo/200001/0414.html"]1 Cor 15:29 And Baptism of the Dead[/url]
[url="http://transporter.com/apologia/lds_rcc/index.html"]Who Holds the Keys? Rome vs. Salt Lake City[/url]
[url="http://cuf.org/nonmemb/mormon.pdf"]Mormonism and the Great Apostacy Theory[/url]
[url="http://www.ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/MORMON2.HTM"]In Search of the "Great Apostacy"[/url]
[url="http://www.catholicapologetics.info/amorms.htm"]The "Double Think" of Mormonism[/url]

[url="http://www.catholic.com/library/Problems_with_the_Book_of_Mormon.asp"]Problems with the Book of Mormon[/url]
[url="http://www.catholicapologetics.net/BOM_disclaimer.htm"]Why does the Book of Mormon Contain a Disclaimer of Inspiration?[/url]
[url="http://www.catholicapologetics.net/BOM_KJV_PREFACE.htm"]Book of Mormon quotes the preface of the 1611 KJV Bible[/url]
[url="http://www.catholicapologetics.net/mormons_and_The_KJV.htm"]Mormons and the King James Version[/url]
[url="http://www.catholicapologetics.net/mormon_book_of.htm"]Problems with the Book of Mormon[/url]
[url="http://phorum.phatmass.com/index.php?showtopic=1032hl="]Book of Mormon Apologetic Footnotes[/url]

[Aloysius]

[color=blue]There was in the begining only ONE Church, the Church of Jesus Christ which trusted Peter as the Authority and James as the Patriarch. Paul went out evangelizing, as did Peter. Peter and Paul both ended up in Rome, where Peter chose Linus as his successor right before being crucified upsidedown (he requested such because he didn't feel worthy to die in the same way as the Lord) and Paul was beheaded. Now, there was different ideas in the Early Church, the Jewish Sect wanted everyone to be circumsised and still follow the old law, the Pauline Sect said the gentiled were not bound by that law. THAT'S WHY THE HAD: THE COUNCIL OF JERUSALEM. They made the decision there that the gentiles did not have to follow the Old Covenant Law, and guess what? The Jewish Sect accepted that as authoritative. The Pauline Sect accepted that as authoritative. And thus, you can see, we can't rightfully call them "sects" for they were not seperate from each other, but connected at the head which was Jesus Christ speaking through His Holy Apostles. You will not find much writings from the first centuries of Christianity because WE WERE BEING PERSECUTED! But when the people finally weren't persecuted anymore, they came out into the open and wrote many Catholic Things and ran the Church as the Catholic Church today runs. Why? because that's how they did it when they were underground as well, they held steadfast to tradition as the Scriptures taught them. Whether u like it or not, Rome was the biggest most influential bishop. The reason people gave for this was that the Bishop of Rome was successor to Saint Peter! He was authoritative in teaching, everyone accepted his teaching, and Rome would tell people to listen to stuff God had said through them. She's always been ONE, She's always been CATHOLIC, She's always DEFEATED HERESY, She's always remained TRUE. No way around it toots [/color][color=red]Pax Iesus Christum[/color]

[Aloysius]

Here, I'll make an honest challenge to their doctrine using their own documents:

[quote][26] And Zeezrom said unto him: Thou sayest there is a true and living God?

[27] And Amulek said: Yea, there is a true and living God.

[28] Now Zeezrom said: Is there more than one God?

[29] And he answered, No.

[30] Now Zeezrom said unto him again: How knowest thou these things?

[31] And he said: An angel hath made them known unto me.
[b]Alma 11:26-31[/b][/quote]

But the Book of Abraham says
[quote]Abr. 4: 2
2 And the earth, after it was formed, was empty and desolate, because they had not formed anything but the earth; and adarkness reigned upon the face of the deep, and the Spirit of the Gods bwas• brooding upon the face of the waters.




Abr. 4: 3
3 And they (the Gods) said: Let there be light; and there was light.




Abr. 4: 4
4 And they (the Gods) comprehended the light, for it was abright•; and they divided the light, or caused it to be divided, from the darkness.




Abr. 4: 5
5 And the Gods called the light Day, and the darkness they called Night. And it came to pass that from the evening until morning they called anight•; and from the morning until the evening they called day; and this was the first, or the beginning, of that which they called day and night.




Abr. 4: 6
6 And the Gods also said: Let there be an aexpanse• in the midst of the waters, and it shall divide the waters from the waters.




Abr. 4: 7
7 And the Gods ordered the expanse, so that it divided the waters which were under the expanse from the waters which were above the expanse; and it was so, even as they ordered.




Abr. 4: 8
8 And the Gods called the expanse, Heaven. And it came to pass that it was from evening until morning that they called night; and it came to pass that it was from morning until evening that they called day; and this was the second atime• that they called night and day.




Abr. 4: 9
9 And the Gods ordered, saying: Let the awaters• under the heaven be gathered together unto bone• place, and let the earth come up dry; and it was so as they ordered;




Abr. 4: 10
10 And the Gods pronounced the dry land, Earth; and the gathering together of the waters, pronounced they, aGreat• Waters; and the Gods saw that they were obeyed.




Abr. 4: 11
11 And the Gods said: Let us prepare the earth to bring forth agrass•; the herb yielding seed; the fruit tree yielding fruit, after his kind, whose seed in itself yieldeth its own likeness upon the earth; and it was so, even as they ordered.




Abr. 4: 12
12 And the Gods organized the aearth• to bring forth grass from its own seed, and the herb to bring forth herb from its own seed, yielding seed after his kind; and the earth to bring forth the tree from its own seed, yielding fruit, whose seed could only bring forth the same in itself, after his kind; and the Gods saw that they were obeyed.




Abr. 4: 14
14 And the Gods organized the alights• in the expanse of the heaven, and caused them to divide the day from the night; and organized them to be for signs and for seasons, and for days and for years;




Abr. 4: 16
16 And the Gods organized the two great lights, the agreater• light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night; with the lesser light they set the stars also;




Abr. 4: 17
17 And the Gods set them in the expanse of the heavens, to give light upon the earth, and to rule over the day and over the night, and to cause to divide the light from the adarkness.




Abr. 4: 18
18 And the Gods watched those things which they had aordered until they obeyed.




Abr. 4: 20
20 And the Gods said: Let us prepare the waters to bring forth abundantly the moving creatures that have life; and the fowl, that they may fly above the earth in the open expanse of heaven.

[/quote]