Who was Paul?

[LittleLes]

[quote name='Archangel' date='May 19 2005, 05:14 AM'] There was discussion. 2000 years' worth. And the Church has arrived at God's Truths.

Do you allow anyone to question your party line? Or do they have to accept it? [/quote]
Really. Lets see. The earth is the center of the universe and doesn't move, women are inferior because they are malformed males (and so can't be priests, naturally), slavery is justified by both scripture and the natural law, and charging interest on loans is a sin, etc.

But now, after 2000 years, the Church has finally arrived at "God's Truths."

I would allow people to question anything. They might even come up with some good ideas.

But, of course, just like the Church, my "party line" is "infallible"! Well, almost anyway.

[Archangel]

[quote name='LittleLes' date='May 19 2005, 01:31 AM']Really. Lets see. The earth is the center of the universe and doesn't move, women are inferior because they are malformed males (and so can't be priests, naturally), slavery is justified by both scripture and the natural law, and charging interest on loans is a sin, etc.

But now, after 2000 years, the Church has finally arrived at "God's Truths."

I would allow people to question anything. They might even come up with some good ideas.

But, of course, just like the Church, my "party line" is "infallible"!  Well, almost anyway.[/quote]
During the past 2000 years, the Church has questioned all of that and it has come to believe its truths are God's truths.

Is it okay to question your belief that you are wrong about the Church?

Edited May 19, 2005 by Archangel

[LittleLes]

[quote name='Myles' date='May 19 2005, 05:05 AM']
Depends on the issue doesnt it? Women's ordination for example has been ruled out by Mother Church's disclaimer that she has no authority to do such things. Therefore continued 'discussion' of the topics by Catholics is superflous at best and sedition at worse. Vatican II's document 'Lumen Gentium' paragraph 25 spells out what Catholics' responsibilities are and if they feel their conscience tells them otherwise maybe they should read 'Gaudeum et Spes' paragraph 16 [/quote]
Ah, yes. The Church's disclaimer that she has no authority to ordain women. That must settle it, and any questioning of the validity of that disclaimer must be "seditious."

Maybe even heretical! And if done by a cleric; he must be silenced!!!

So all "faithful Catholics" just have to accept it. Like the earth not moving and being the center of the universe.

And, despite disclaimers, have you ever noticed that some Church teachings have changed?

But when they do, apologists have to regroup and argue that the previous teaching was never the Church's teaching after all. Only that of her errant sons!

[Archangel]

[quote name='LittleLes' date='May 19 2005, 01:41 AM'] Ah, yes. The Church's disclaimer that she has no authority to ordain women. That must settle it, and any questioning of the validity of that disclaimer must be "seditious." [/quote]
Is it okay to question your belief that women should be ordained? Or does someone have to accept your belief that ordination is co-ed?

[Archangel]

[quote name='LittleLes' date='May 19 2005, 01:41 AM'] Like the earth not moving and being the center of the universe. [/quote]
Is it okay for someone to believe that the earth is the center of the universe?

[Archangel]

[quote name='LittleLes' date='May 19 2005, 01:41 AM']And, despite disclaimers, have you ever noticed that some Church teachings have changed?[/quote]
Is it okay for the Church to clarify its teachings as it understands it better through the guidance of the Holy Spirit?

[Fidei Defensor]

[quote name='LittleLes' date='May 19 2005, 05:31 AM'] But now, after 2000 years, the Church has finally arrived at "God's Truths." [/quote]
Hmm.. I am thinking that most people are going to go with the people who studied and worked on this over the past 2,000 years. rather than some creepy person arguing with no evidence of what he claims. Just a thought.

[Archangel]

[quote name='LittleLes' date='May 19 2005, 01:31 AM']But, of course, just like the Church, my "party line" is "infallible"!  Well, almost anyway.[/quote]
What are some of the infallible teachings of your party line?

[Cam42]

[quote name='LittleLes' date='May 19 2005, 03:49 AM']
You've provided no "proof." Rather typically, only assertions without evidence which you then claim to be proof. As in the case with Rathner. [/quote]
Whatever.....you are so obtuse....and it is Rahner.

[Cam42]

[quote name='LittleLes' date='May 19 2005, 04:28 AM'] No Myles, as in Fr. Reese's case, it is for allowing any debate at all.

Current Catholic teachings are the only thing permitted. At least until they change. But, there's the rub, how will errors be corrected if debate isn't allowed?

We don't want to confuse the "simple faithful" now do we?

LittleLes

If Galileo were a member of the clergy who could have been effectively silenced, we would still have to believe the Church's scriptural interpretation that the earth doesn't move. [/quote]
Since when is the Church a democracy? And since when does the Truth need anything more than teaching?

Why try and change the truth brother Littleles? Unless, of course, you don't like the truth?

Ahhhhh....now we are getting somewhere. Brother Littleles is one of those 60s liberals. He wants his cake and be able to eat it too. He wants to be Catholic, but believe on his own level. Sorry, that simply isn't the case. That simply won't happen.

You have to accept what Holy Mother Church teaches or you don't. If you don't, you dissent. If you do, you believe. If you believe part, you don't accept all that she teaches....that is contrary to being catholic and Catholic. To be catholic is to be universal. To be Catholic is to accept being catholic.

You are so blinded by your own pride....which is to say, "I am right, at all costs, therefore, let's believe what I want to and to hell with the rest of it," that you forget an important part of the universality of the church.

To be truly universal, to be truly catholic, one must submit to those things which are true and deny those things which are not. The Church, because it is Jesus Christ, cannot be wrong. To say anything otherwise is to be wrong.

Sorry, but brother Littleles, you throw your hat in with the Kennedy's and Kerry's of the world and you will (sic, are) being left behind. There is nothing intellectual about your tactics. There is nothing honest about your tactics. This is why I don't engage you any longer, I know what you are. I know what you are trying to do. As I posted earlier, on another thread, you have no intrest in honest conversation. You only have intrest in proving "true believers" wrong.

Your Woodstockian veiw of the Church was wrong in the 60s and it is wrong today. Get over yourself, open your heart to those who can teach you....but I don't think that you can do it. You are too set in your ways. You are fooled, fooled by liberalism. Liberalism in the Church is not being Catholic, it is being less than catholic, it is being narrow minded and obtuse at the same time.

Open your heart, open your soul....assent to the Chuch FIRST. Then debate is allowed. The problem is that metaphysics comes BEFORE epistemology, not the other way around. Modern philosophy doesn't work.....precisely because of that reason.

That is why Decartes (who was a priest) failed. That is why Mill, Kant, and other philosophers fail. That is why Rahner, Curran, Congar, etc...fail.

I would suggest that you read [i]Ethics of Authenticity[/i] by Charles Taylor. It will give you insight into your maladay.....

Cam

[LittleLes]

[quote name='Archangel' date='May 19 2005, 05:46 AM'] Is it okay to question your belief that women should be ordained? Or does someone have to accept your belief that ordination is co-ed? [/quote]
I'll defend to the death your right to be wrong!!!!!

[LittleLes]

[quote name='Archangel' date='May 19 2005, 05:48 AM'] Is it okay for someone to believe that the earth is the center of the universe? [/quote]
One can "believe" that the earth is the center of the universe if one wants, but that would be contrary to the facts.

One may "believe" that the earth is flat, too.

Once again, "belief" lies in the will. It is not the same as truth or fact which reside in the intellect. I might demonstrate that two plus two equals four, but you might still believe otherwise.

LittleLes

[LittleLes]

[quote name='Archangel' date='May 19 2005, 05:52 AM'] Is it okay for the Church to clarify its teachings as it understands it better through the guidance of the Holy Spirit? [/quote]
Sure. But then the Church acknowledges that it's "truth" is relative and not "absolute." Or in some cases, historically and culturally conditioned.

[LittleLes]

[quote name='fidei defensor' date='May 19 2005, 05:53 AM'] Hmm.. I am thinking that most people are going to go with the people who studied and worked on this over the past 2,000 years. rather than some creepy person arguing with no evidence of what he claims. Just a thought. [/quote]

Not necessarily. That the earth is round and it moves and revolves around the sun was not believed for 1500 years. That's changed.

That illness was caused by evil spirits is no longer believed except in a few cultures or belief systems.

And in matters of religion, please note that Judaism is twice as old as Christianity. Does this make it twice as correct? What about Hinduism, at least three times as old?

That a belief is old is no gaurantee that it is correct. Only that it should be reexamined periodically. The "we have always believed..." argument is flawed.

Edited May 19, 2005 by LittleLes

[LittleLes]

[quote name='Archangel' date='May 19 2005, 05:56 AM'] What are some of the infallible teachings of your party line? [/quote]
Only one, actually. I exist. Everything else is of lesser certitude.