Login Register

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic Page 9 of 11   [ 203 posts ]   Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Questioning Catholicism because of Pope Francis
PostPosted: Tue Dec 18, 2018 9:35 pm 
Offline
Citizen
Citizen

Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2018 7:53 pm
Posts: 332
Religion: Looking for answers
Alexandros wrote:
Denise Dee wrote:
Alexandros wrote:
Or, in other words. It’s your interpretation that is the issue.

Why should we listen to your interpretation of the Council of Florence and Vatican I?

Why is Jack3’s “interpretation” invalid when he reads Francis and JPII – but you yourself are allowed to make an interpretation when you read ecumenical councils approved by Popes?

That is a double-standard.


That's not a double standard because I never said Jack3's interpretation is invalid.


Yeah you did:

Quote:
But your belief that your interpretation is "the interpretation of other Popes" is your interpretation. It's not Pope Francis's interpretation. You think the teachings of Pope Francis conflict with the teachings of previous Popes. But Pope Francis says his teachings do not conflict with the teachings of previous Popes. You think you can understand and interpret Catholic teachings better than Pope Francis. I have no reason to believe that you can.


And:

Quote:
There may be some people more knowledgeable about Catholic teaching than Pope Francis but I doubt that Jack3 is one of them.


You don’t believe it, so it’s invalid for you.

Then you give us your own interpretation of an ecumenical council.

So, we have to question Jack3 and ultimately say “we have no reason to believe him,” and then turn around and accept you? What?



Quote:
What I said to Jack3 was that, with his credentials and position in the Catholic Church, a teenage student, compared to the credentials and position of the Pope, I see no reason to believe that his interpretation is correct and the Pope's is wrong. Jack3 is entitled to his own opinion and he could be correct and the Pope could be wrong, but I see no reason why I should think Jack3's interpretation is correct and the Pope's wrong.


If you don’t believe him, then you think his interpretation is invalid. If you’re stuck on the word “invalid” just replace it with “unacceptable,” and all of my points still stand.

Also, you don’t have the credentials either, so why quote and interpret ecumenical councils for us?



Quote:
Also I pointed out that Catholics are required to give the same level of assent to Pope Francis's encyclicals and apostolic exhortations as they are required to give to all previous encyclicals and apostolic exhortations from all other Popes.



Please prove “level of assent” includes, “after assent is given, it cannot later be rejected.”

Is every teaching found in an encyclical, apostolic exhortation, etc. result in the same level of authority and hence demands an unchanging assent?

Where’s the Catholic teaching that says a person is unable to decipher that the current Pope is wrong about doctrine X by referencing other Popes?

Quote:
And when registering for this message board it states that if you want to denote your religion below your username in these posts, '"Catholic" is reserved for practicing Catholics (upper case C, please) under the authority of the Pope.'



Let’s pretend “under the authority of the Pope” means to accept every single thing he says, it cannot be questioned, and no one can interpret it otherwise. Who cares? It’s a message board statement, not the Papacy.


I will put these questions to you in order to prove a point:

Where’s the Catholic teaching that says a person is unable to decipher that the current Pope is wrong about doctrine X by referencing other Popes?

Please prove “level of assent” includes, “after assent is given, it cannot later be rejected.”

Is every teaching found in an encyclical, apostolic exhortation, etc. result in the same level of authority and hence demands an unchanging assent?

Please prove that, “the only way to understand what the Church teaches is to listen to Pope Francis/current Pope.”



And finally, as a great example, which one do you “assent” to:

Pius XI via Leo XIII wrote:
29. With great wisdom Our predecessor Leo XIII, of happy memory, in the Encyclical on Christian marriage which We have already mentioned, speaking of this order to be maintained between man and wife, teaches: "The man is the ruler of the family, and the head of the woman; but because she is flesh of his flesh and bone of his bone, let her be subject and obedient to the man, not as a servant but as a companion, so that nothing be lacking of honor or of dignity in the obedience which she pays. Let divine charity be the constant guide of their mutual relations, both in him who rules and in her who obeys, since each bears the image, the one of Christ, the other of the Church."

https://w2.vatican.va/content/pius-xi/e ... nubii.html



Or:

John Paul II wrote:
According to the Letter to the Ephesians, marriage excludes that element of the pact which was a burden and, at times, does not cease to be a burden on this institution. The husband and the wife are in fact "subject to one another," and are mutually subordinated to one another. The source of this mutual subjection is to be found in Christian pietas, and its expression is love.



Love excludes every kind of subjection whereby the wife might become a servant or a slave of the husband, an object of unilateral domination. Love makes the husband simultaneously subject to the wife, and thereby subject to the Lord himself, just as the wife to the husband.

https://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/jp2tb88.htm





I’m not trying to play a game here. I am trying to get away from the “interpretation of an interpretation of an interpretation” endlessness.

Hint: The Church has never taught that everything a Pope writes and says requires absolute unchanging religious assent. And the Church has never taught that a person can never decipher that a Pope is wrong via other Popes and ecumenical councils. Can you prove otherwise?

I stopped reading after you again asserted that I said Jack3's interpretation was not valid. I've already clearly explained how I did not say that. I don't have unlimited time.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Questioning Catholicism because of Pope Francis
PostPosted: Tue Dec 18, 2018 9:49 pm 
Offline
Citizen
Citizen

Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2018 7:53 pm
Posts: 332
Religion: Looking for answers
Peregrinator wrote:
Denise Dee wrote:
I don't understand the difference between teachings of a Pope, e.g. Pope Francis, some of which a faithful Catholic may be allowed to respectfully disagree with, and teachings of the Magisterium which faithful Catholics must accept.

Not everything a Pope teaches belongs to the Magisterium. It's (sometimes but with increasing frequency) his own private opinion. How can one tell? Oftentimes by reference to what the Church taught in the past -- a Pope's job isn't to make some new doctrine but to guard the deposit of faith and preserve it from any corruption. So if the Pope is teaching something new, whether it be St. John Paul II's teaching on the death penalty, or Pope Francis's even more radical teaching on the death penalty, we can see that he is putting forth his private opinion by comparing it to what the Church has always taught on the subject. I think Pope John Paul II was clearer (although not entirely clear) that what he was teaching was private opinion since he still made a theoretical allowance for the death penalty.

That makes it a bit clearer for me.

Does Pope Francis's teaching about communion for (some) divorced remarried Catholics belong to the Magisterium?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Questioning Catholicism because of Pope Francis
PostPosted: Tue Dec 18, 2018 10:08 pm 
Offline
Citizen
Citizen

Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2018 7:53 pm
Posts: 332
Religion: Looking for answers
In Catholicism 101 p.falk asked this question:
p.falk wrote:
Is this a treacly, soft answer that Bishop Barron gives? I'm seeing this posted around a lot with declarations that it's another example of prominent Catholics being unwilling to say the hard truth so they sugar coat it and bake up something contrary to the Christian tradition on how one is saved.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EevRrWyBllY


Not to say that there isn't invincible ignorance. But Bishop Barron's response doesn't mention that.


No doubt different Catholics will interpret it differently. Is that okay? Does it matter which interpretation a Catholic accepts on this issue? If it matters, then how is one to decide which is the correct interpretation? Personally I think the Pope is the best person to guide, but if you don't trust Pope Francis then how do you decide which is the correct interpretation?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Questioning Catholicism because of Pope Francis
PostPosted: Wed Dec 19, 2018 6:32 pm 
Offline
Paladin
Paladin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2003 2:12 am
Posts: 6613
Location: Filii Tonitrui
Religion: Catholic
Denise Dee wrote:
I stopped reading after you again asserted that I said Jack3's interpretation was not valid. I've already clearly explained how I did not say that. I don't have unlimited time.



I already said you can replace the word "invalid" with "unacceptable" and all my points still stand.


You can't just stop because you are obsessed with the word "invalid," just pretend I said "unacceptable." In fact, just replace it with any word that is synonymous with "disagree" or "rejected" or whatever you like. All my objections still stand and have not been addressed.


Unless, of course, you are trying to wiggle your way out something that you simply can't cry "interpretation" ad infinitum over.

_________________
-Alexander
"The proof of love is to suffer for the one you love." -St. Pio


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Questioning Catholicism because of Pope Francis
PostPosted: Wed Dec 19, 2018 6:58 pm 
Offline
Journeyman
Journeyman
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 9:16 pm
Posts: 903
Religion: Catholic
One of these days wrote:
Sabbath wrote:
One of these days wrote:
Francis is not the pope he is the antipope, Benedict XVI is the one true Pope. His resignation was a partial abdication (his words). Canon Law does not accept his words...very involved, but we've had antipopes previously....



Do we have a troll?


Just because someone has a different point of view should not open the door for derogatory character assassinations....

Open your mind and do some due diligence.....


Any one else here question his validity to the papacy?

_________________
"Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death, amen!"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Questioning Catholicism because of Pope Francis
PostPosted: Wed Dec 19, 2018 8:01 pm 
Offline
Citizen
Citizen

Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2018 7:53 pm
Posts: 332
Religion: Looking for answers
Alexandros wrote:
Denise Dee wrote:
I stopped reading after you again asserted that I said Jack3's interpretation was not valid. I've already clearly explained how I did not say that. I don't have unlimited time.



I already said you can replace the word "invalid" with "unacceptable" and all my points still stand.


You can't just stop because you are obsessed with the word "invalid," just pretend I said "unacceptable." In fact, just replace it with any word that is synonymous with "disagree" or "rejected" or whatever you like. All my objections still stand and have not been addressed.


Unless, of course, you are trying to wiggle your way out something that you simply can't cry "interpretation" ad infinitum over.

I don't think Jack3's interpretation is "invalid" or "unacceptable" or any synonym of those two words. There's no point in wasting time arguing with you arguing with me about something I never said.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Questioning Catholicism because of Pope Francis
PostPosted: Wed Dec 19, 2018 8:05 pm 
Offline
Citizen
Citizen

Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2018 7:53 pm
Posts: 332
Religion: Looking for answers
Does Pope Francis's teaching about communion for (some) divorced remarried Catholics belong to the Magisterium?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Questioning Catholicism because of Pope Francis
PostPosted: Wed Dec 19, 2018 8:07 pm 
Offline
Paladin
Paladin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2003 2:12 am
Posts: 6613
Location: Filii Tonitrui
Religion: Catholic
Denise Dee wrote:
I don't think Jack3's interpretation is "invalid" or "unacceptable" or any synonym of those two words. There's no point in wasting time arguing with you arguing with me about something I never said.




But I also said you could use "disagree."



How about this: forget the “invalid” etc. stuff and just answer the questions:


Where’s the Catholic teaching that says a person is unable to decipher that the current Pope is wrong about doctrine X by referencing other Popes?

Please prove “level of assent” includes, “after assent is given, it cannot later be rejected.”

Is every teaching found in an encyclical, apostolic exhortation, etc. result in the same level of authority and hence demands an unchanging assent?

Please prove that, “the only way to understand what the Church teaches is to listen to Pope Francis/current Pope.”

And don’t forget, please choose which Pope you assent to with regards to spousal submission.

_________________
-Alexander
"The proof of love is to suffer for the one you love." -St. Pio


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Questioning Catholicism because of Pope Francis
PostPosted: Wed Dec 19, 2018 8:24 pm 
Offline
Citizen
Citizen

Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2018 7:53 pm
Posts: 332
Religion: Looking for answers
Alexandros wrote:
Denise Dee wrote:
I don't think Jack3's interpretation is "invalid" or "unacceptable" or any synonym of those two words. There's no point in wasting time arguing with you arguing with me about something I never said.




But I also said you could use "disagree."




I never said that Jack3's interpretation is wrong, I asked why should I believe that his interpretation is correct and Pope Francis's interpretation is wrong when I compare Pope Francis's credentials and authority to Jack3's credentials and authority to interpret Catholic teaching.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Questioning Catholicism because of Pope Francis
PostPosted: Wed Dec 19, 2018 8:47 pm 
Offline
Paladin
Paladin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2003 2:12 am
Posts: 6613
Location: Filii Tonitrui
Religion: Catholic
Denise Dee wrote:
I never said that Jack3's interpretation is wrong, I asked why should I believe that his interpretation is correct and Pope Francis's interpretation is wrong when I compare Pope Francis's credentials and authority to Jack3's credentials and authority to interpret Catholic teaching.


Okay.

Watch:
Why should I believe your interpretation of ecumenical councils? (i.e. the double standard)


Using your own logic, I have no reason to believe you in your initial response to me.

That was my whole point the entire time.

And if we have no reason to believe you, due to lack of credentials, then the concepts of, “all teachings of a Pope must be accepted,” and, “the only way to understand what the Church teaches is to listen to Pope Francis” are untenable.


Since these concepts are untenable, then Jack3 et al. should have the ability to decipher that the current Pope is wrong about doctrine X by referencing other Popes.


Now that we can determine if a Pope is wrong, we can now say not everything a Pope does and says at all times demands assent.


So, with that out of the way, we can drop this endless “interpretation” copout and we should now have the ability to actually look at what Francis does and says, comparing to other Popes; it should be a valid task that does not infringe upon the concept of assent and authority. Just to be clear: your initial questioning of authority and interpretation was fine and helpful for the discussion.

_________________
-Alexander
"The proof of love is to suffer for the one you love." -St. Pio


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Questioning Catholicism because of Pope Francis
PostPosted: Wed Dec 19, 2018 9:34 pm 
Offline
Citizen
Citizen

Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2018 7:53 pm
Posts: 332
Religion: Looking for answers
Your Question: Where’s the Catholic teaching that says a person is unable to decipher that the current Pope is wrong about doctrine X by referencing other Popes?

My answer: I'm no expert, I've only recently been reading this stuff on the Internet, but as I understand it, the Church teaches that Catholics are required to publicly accept the teachings of the Pope when set out in encyclicals and apostolic exhortations (which Pope Francis has written).


Your Question: Please prove “level of assent” includes, “after assent is given, it cannot later be rejected.”

My answer: I don't understand that question.

Your Question: Is every teaching found in an encyclical, apostolic exhortation, etc. result in the same level of authority and hence demands an unchanging assent?

No, but my understanding is that Catholics are required to publicly assent to even non-infallible teachings, and certainly not show disrespect. It's a bit confusing, maybe others understand it better.

Your Question: Please prove that, “the only way to understand what the Church teaches is to listen to Pope Francis/current Pope.”

My answer: It's the only way for Catholics who don't think they are cleverer or holier or better Catholics than the Pope to understand what the Church teaches. That's just my opinion, I can't "prove" it, at least not in the time I have available.

Your Question:
please choose which Pope you assent to with regards to spousal submission.

First of all, I am not a practicing Catholic (I'm interested but I haven't yet made the commitment, I think it's important to be sure before making any important commitment) so I don't have to assent to either of the Popes. Secondly, why does the choice have to be one or the other, Pope Leo or Pope John Paul II, why can't it be both?

I agree with Pope Leo that a wife should not be obedient to her husband as a servant. If in the blissful situation of divine charity being the constant guide, I'm sure Catholic women would be happy to be in the situation Pope Leo recommended. But in this day and age, in the reality of many people's married lives, and with increased awareness of how teachings can unintentionally or wilfully be misunderstood, I understand why Pope John Paul II clarified it, I get it, I agree with it. If you think Pope John Paul's teaching contradicts Pope Leo's teaching, it's not entirely clear to me, I could make a case either way, but I'd say that Pope John Paul II had more authority and competence to interpret Pope Leo's teaching, and his own teaching, than you or I have, and I would assume that Pope John Paul didn't do anything a Pope isn't allowed to do.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Questioning Catholicism because of Pope Francis
PostPosted: Wed Dec 19, 2018 9:49 pm 
Offline
Citizen
Citizen

Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2018 7:53 pm
Posts: 332
Religion: Looking for answers
Alexandros wrote:
Denise Dee wrote:
I never said that Jack3's interpretation is wrong, I asked why should I believe that his interpretation is correct and Pope Francis's interpretation is wrong when I compare Pope Francis's credentials and authority to Jack3's credentials and authority to interpret Catholic teaching.


Okay.

Watch:
Why should I believe your interpretation of ecumenical councils? (i.e. the double standard)


Using your own logic, I have no reason to believe you in your initial response to me.

That was my whole point the entire time.

And if we have no reason to believe you, due to lack of credentials, then the concepts of, “all teachings of a Pope must be accepted,” and, “the only way to understand what the Church teaches is to listen to Pope Francis” are untenable.


Since these concepts are untenable, then Jack3 et al. should have the ability to decipher that the current Pope is wrong about doctrine X by referencing other Popes.


Now that we can determine if a Pope is wrong, we can now say not everything a Pope does and says at all times demands assent.


So, with that out of the way, we can drop this endless “interpretation” copout and we should now have the ability to actually look at what Francis does and says, comparing to other Popes; it should be a valid task that does not infringe upon the concept of assent and authority. Just to be clear: your initial questioning of authority and interpretation was fine and helpful for the discussion.

I can't make head nor tail of that.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Questioning Catholicism because of Pope Francis
PostPosted: Wed Dec 19, 2018 10:33 pm 
Offline
King of Cool
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 11, 2003 1:30 pm
Posts: 75936
Religion: Anticukite Catholic
Peregrinator wrote:
I think Pope John Paul II was clearer (although not entirely clear) that what he was teaching was private opinion since he still made a theoretical allowance for the death penalty.



Private opinion is not the right term. A better term would be 'prudential judgment'. John Paul II never denied the principle that the state has the moral right to execute criminals. In fact, the Catechism affirms this teaching. But the Church has always tempered this belief that the state has the right to execute criminals with the caveat that executions should be performed only when necessary and that at least some of the time mercy is better than justice, and that if it is possible that justice could be served without execution, this would be best of all. None of this is novel. The Church taught this in the Middle Ages.


In fact, the movement away from capital punishment pre-dates the 20th century, in the Middle Ages, there were many laws on the books in the Papal States that required execution. But capital punishment was abolished in practice (if not in theory as the laws remained on the books) in the Papal States during the 19th century, or possibly earlier.

The shift away from capital punishment has been gradual over a period of several centuries. The Popes have taken a gradually dimmer and dimmer view of capital punishment for quite some time.


It is similar to the Papal attitude towards war.

Popes waged war for centuries, Julius II saw no moral problem with going on the battlefield in armor leading the charge himself. A century later, the Popes had no apparent problem with Cardinal Richelieu in France waging war against Austria and Spain, both Catholic countries, and forging an alliance with Sweden, a Protestant country. When the question came before the Pope of whether it was really appropriate for a Cardinal (and bishop!) of the Church to be responsible for leading armies into war, the Pope gave his blessing.

And yet, by the time of Pius IX, the Popes had come to a generally negative view of war, and when the Italian nationalist army entered Rome, Pope Pius IX ordered them to offer no resistance.

Julian II, not to mention someone like Boniface VIII or Innocent III, would have surrounded the Vatican palace with large cannons and opened fire, there would have been a bloody battle that might have lasted for weeks, with casualties on both sides in the tens of thousands and 'The Battle of Rome' would be in the history books as one of the bloodiest battles on Italian soil in history. But Pius IX chose to offer no resistance because the Popes even then were becoming extremely hostile to war.

_________________
Excelsior!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Questioning Catholicism because of Pope Francis
PostPosted: Wed Dec 19, 2018 10:42 pm 
Offline
Paladin
Paladin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2003 2:12 am
Posts: 6613
Location: Filii Tonitrui
Religion: Catholic
Denise Dee wrote:
Your Question: Where’s the Catholic teaching that says a person is unable to decipher that the current Pope is wrong about doctrine X by referencing other Popes?

My answer: I'm no expert, I've only recently been reading this stuff on the Internet, but as I understand it, the Church teaches that Catholics are required to publicly accept the teachings of the Pope when set out in encyclicals and apostolic exhortations (which Pope Francis has written).


Yes. But, assent or acceptance is not absolute unless it’s an infallible declaration. Earlier in the thread, you said a Pope could be wrong about something: “I understand that the Pope can be wrong when not speaking ex cathedra” – so if he can be wrong, then it necessarily follows that assent should not be given.


Quote:
Your Question: Please prove “level of assent” includes, “after assent is given, it cannot later be rejected.”

My answer: I don't understand that question.


This means that by default we are supposed to assent to what the Pope teaches. If one discovers that he is not teaching properly – i.e. it contradicts previous Popes and the constant teaching of the Church (found in Popes and councils), then one can reject said assent. If it’s not obvious that there is a contradiction, people really should not shout on the roof tops that the Pope is wrong. The other option is to give the benefit of the doubt and defer to a clearer previous teaching.

I don’t think the common person should worry about every word in every Papal writing – they aren’t even required to read them in the first place. If someone says Pope Francis is in err, the best thing to do is give him assent until proven otherwise. The proof must come from authority – other Popes or councils. It’s not really going to be 100% perfect, but it was never intended to be in the first place.



Quote:
Your Question: Is every teaching found in an encyclical, apostolic exhortation, etc. result in the same level of authority and hence demands an unchanging assent?

No, but my understanding is that Catholics are required to publicly assent to even non-infallible teachings, and certainly not show disrespect. It's a bit confusing, maybe others understand it better.


That’s true. But sometimes there are issues – like how you mentioned with the death penalty, or my example with spousal submission. When Francis spoke of the death penalty, I immediately knew he was in error and I did not assent. Why? Because it contradicts all past teaching, so it is illogical. I will defer to past teaching.

In other words, it is impossible for me to assent to two contradictory positions at the same time. There are far more Popes and theologians who taught the traditional view of the death penalty – and I can only think of one Pope who agrees with Francis, which is Francis himself.


Quote:
Your Question: Please prove that, “the only way to understand what the Church teaches is to listen to Pope Francis/current Pope.”

My answer: It's the only way for Catholics who don't think they are cleverer or holier or better Catholics than the Pope to understand what the Church teaches. That's just my opinion, I can't "prove" it, at least not in the time I have available.


Okay. I see what you mean here. But, my point was that there is nothing in Church history or doctrine that says we must only listen to the current Pope – there is a whole body of authoritative teachings and pronouncements that are from other Popes or approved by other Popes – they also had the same teaching authority as Francis currently does.


Quote:
Your Question:
please choose which Pope you assent to with regards to spousal submission.

First of all, I am not a practicing Catholic (I'm interested but I haven't yet made the commitment, I think it's important to be sure before making any important commitment) so I don't have to assent to either of the Popes. Secondly, why does the choice have to be one or the other, Pope Leo or Pope John Paul II, why can't it be both?

I agree with Pope Leo that a wife should not be obedient to her husband as a servant. If in the blissful situation of divine charity being the constant guide, I'm sure Catholic women would be happy to be in the situation Pope Leo recommended. But in this day and age, in the reality of many people's married lives, and with increased awareness of how teachings can unintentionally or wilfully be misunderstood, I understand why Pope John Paul II clarified it, I get it, I agree with it. If you think Pope John Paul's teaching contradicts Pope Leo's teaching, it's not entirely clear to me, I could make a case either way, but I'd say that Pope John Paul II had more authority and competence to interpret Pope Leo's teaching, and his own teaching, than you or I have, and I would assume that Pope John Paul didn't do anything a Pope isn't allowed to do.


So, this is good because we can now examine what Popes have said try to figure things out.

Firstly, John Paul II is not interpreting Pope Leo XXIII or Pope Pius IX. What you have is two different interpretations of Scripture. Popes interpreting scripture with different results.

Secondly, John Paul II never mentions that the husband has any kind of primacy over his wife – in any way – but Leo and Pius do in fact teach this: “The man is the ruler of the family, and the head of the woman; but because she is flesh of his flesh and bone of his bone, let her be subject and obedient to the man, not as a servant but as a companion.”

Third, JPII states, “Love makes the husband simultaneously subject to the wife, and thereby subject to the Lord himself, just as the wife to the husband.”

He makes the concept of “subjection” exactly the same between spouses.

With all this in mind, there is a blatant contradiction.




I don’t really want to argue the submission thing. But, it rests itself in Natural Law. There is no evolution of doctrine that changes natural law because of a modern situation (we can check this via Pope St. Pius X). It is based on Genesis when God created man and then women from man, and then designated natural authority. This was reconfirmed by St. Paul.

We can know for sure that this concept doesn’t change with the times because Leo uses the Book of Genesis to justify submission of wife to husband – a book that is certainly well over 2000 years old. Also, divine charity does not change (John Paul II’s reasoning). Or in other words, if JPII is right, divine charity should have superseded any cultural modality in the 19th century - and Leo should have realized this. But he doesn't. So that means one of them is wrong.

I.e. divine charity does not take a back seat to some kind of so-called social construct.


That right there is an entirely different topic – which is possible because we can look at more than just three Popes on this issue.



Even if you think they can be reconciled, the point was to produce a situation where you would choose to “assent” to one Pope over the other.

1. A Pope can be wrong (your words).
2. Hence, hypothetically, two Popes can teach in contradiction.
3. Resulting problem: It’s impossible to assent to both.

Ergo, one must use their deductive powers via other authoritative teachings, to determine which is correct and hence which one to give assent.

_________________
-Alexander
"The proof of love is to suffer for the one you love." -St. Pio


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Questioning Catholicism because of Pope Francis
PostPosted: Thu Dec 20, 2018 10:11 am 
Offline
Prodigal Son of Thunder
Prodigal Son of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2002 10:54 am
Posts: 39879
Location: Ithilien
Religion: Dunedain Catholic
Church Affiliations: AWC, CSB, UIGSE-FSE (FNE)
Doom wrote:
Private opinion is not the right term. A better term would be 'prudential judgment'.

One could apply "prudential judgment" to his belief about modern penal systems rendering executions unnecessary since they (supposedly) can render society safe from criminals. However, the idea that defense of society is the only, or even the main, reason for the death penalty is not a prudential judgment, it is a Pope's private theological opinion, and one which conflicts with the Church's traditional teaching that retribution is the primary end of punishment.

_________________
Formerly Bagheera

"Honour all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the King." (1 Peter 2:17)
Federation of North-American Explorers - North Star Group - How You Can Help


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Questioning Catholicism because of Pope Francis
PostPosted: Thu Dec 20, 2018 10:15 am 
Offline
Prodigal Son of Thunder
Prodigal Son of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2002 10:54 am
Posts: 39879
Location: Ithilien
Religion: Dunedain Catholic
Church Affiliations: AWC, CSB, UIGSE-FSE (FNE)
Denise Dee wrote:
Does Pope Francis's teaching about communion for (some) divorced remarried Catholics belong to the Magisterium?

Insofar as he can be said to have a teaching on the subject, no, it does not belong to the Magisterium.

_________________
Formerly Bagheera

"Honour all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the King." (1 Peter 2:17)
Federation of North-American Explorers - North Star Group - How You Can Help


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Questioning Catholicism because of Pope Francis
PostPosted: Thu Dec 20, 2018 11:34 am 
Offline
Citizen
Citizen

Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2018 7:53 pm
Posts: 332
Religion: Looking for answers
Alexandros, of course anyone can believe a Pope is wrong. Pope Benedict wrote a book and said "feel free to disagree". But there are also teachings Catholics are supposed to assent to. I'm very confused as to which teachings a Catholic can disagree with and which teachings a Catholic must accept.

I have a question for you: If a minority of priests, bishops and cardinals disagree with a teaching of the Pope, how is an ordinary average Catholic supposed to decide which is the right teaching?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Questioning Catholicism because of Pope Francis
PostPosted: Thu Dec 20, 2018 1:47 pm 
Offline
Some Poor Bibliophile
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2003 10:22 pm
Posts: 19221
Would an exposition on the topic of theological grades of certainty be of use here?

Or reading the introduction to Ott, generally? That's short.

_________________
"I tell you naught for your comfort,
Yea, naught for your desire,
Save that the sky grows darker yet
And the sea rises higher."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Questioning Catholicism because of Pope Francis
PostPosted: Thu Dec 20, 2018 2:00 pm 
Offline
Jedi Master
Jedi Master
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 9:55 am
Posts: 79958
Location: 1.5532386636 radians
Religion: Catholic
Church Affiliations: 4th Degree KofC
It's already showed up in one of these discussions, I think.

_________________
Nos autem in nomine Domini Dei nostri

Need something to read?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Questioning Catholicism because of Pope Francis
PostPosted: Thu Dec 20, 2018 3:21 pm 
Offline
Some Poor Bibliophile
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2003 10:22 pm
Posts: 19221
Obi-Wan Kenobi wrote:
It's already showed up in one of these discussions, I think.


Doom hinted at it.

I'm suggesting an immersion. Latin and all.

_________________
"I tell you naught for your comfort,
Yea, naught for your desire,
Save that the sky grows darker yet
And the sea rises higher."


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic Page 9 of 11   [ 203 posts ]   Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


Jump to: