|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
![]() |
#361 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#362 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#363 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Republic of Ireland
Posts: 21,216
|
|
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive? ...love and buttercakes... |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#364 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,841
|
I'll direct the question to you if you don't mind. Because you are the one who referenced
and I asked why I should be impressed by such a source unless I was already a Catholic. The quoted verse has nothing to do with Pius IX anyway, who declared himself infallible because his territorial possessions were about to be annexed by Italy.
And I pointed out that he was running a Ghetto for Jews right up to that time. The only one left in Europe in those years. That's not infallible, is it? And I quoted sources for this, and I quoted and commented on the encyclical Vehementer nos, which is a monstrosity; and your only response is "huh folks". Do you wonder sometimes why religion is losing its grip on society in general, in the more advanced countries at least? |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#365 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#366 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Republic of Ireland
Posts: 21,216
|
|
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive? ...love and buttercakes... |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#367 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#368 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#369 |
Philosopher
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 6,532
|
What are you on about? My argument is that the Catholic church is in trouble because the Catholic clergy are found wanting. A clergy that have enjoyed a special status in Christendom, because they are seen by their flock as an emissary, between themselves and God. A clergy that forgives sins and proscribes punishment on God's behalf. A clergy that manages to transform wine and wafers into the actual blood and body of Christ. A clergy ordained by God as it is precided over by the very rock that Jesus ordained as his spokesman on Earth. Someone incapable of error. Other ex Catholics have written on these pages about the reverence accorded Priests in there former churches - a reverence not seen in many other Christian orders. Evangelical preachers are routinely caught out as sinners but only need confess there misdeeds and all is well. The congregations just swell all the more. My contention is this does not work in the Catholic Church because of the special status of priests. Just look at Craig B #354 quotation of Pius X. Now we find from you, and the sources you quote, the Pope is capable of error most of the time, because he just doesn't use the God given power bestowed on him. He just hauls this out every couple of hundred years. ![]() |
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#370 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
I already explained, as did the very Wikipedia article upon which our correspondent relied, that ex cathedra only related to issues of faith and not "promotions"
Of course, if it behooves the argument to assert that everything is divinely inspired (except when one lies and claims it was not said) one should expect that things like facts ain't gonna get in the way. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#371 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,841
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#372 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#373 |
Philosopher
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 6,532
|
Straight from "Catholic Answers":
https://www.catholic.com/tract/papal-infallibility I am now the full bottle on papal infallibility.
Quote:
It goes on for some pages. From my experience when something needs a great deal of explaining like this it is usually nonsensical to start with. |
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#374 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
Papal infaliabilty is generally misunderstood.
See: this thread. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#375 |
Philosopher
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 6,532
|
Having read those few pages in "Catholic Answers" it is easy to understand why. Do we agree that the infallibility thing is linked to: "Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven" If so can you list for me some of the binding that Popes have done in the last 100 years or so? |
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#376 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
How about before we head down this frolic and detour we spend some time cleaning up the mess that was made in this thread by the contention that the promotion of Pell was divinely inspired?
It was not, papal infallibility has no application whatsoever to that situation, and the contention that it was is false. Anyone have any further doubts before the goalposts get moved again? |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#377 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Republic of Ireland
Posts: 21,216
|
|
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive? ...love and buttercakes... |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#378 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Republic of Ireland
Posts: 21,216
|
|
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive? ...love and buttercakes... |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#379 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#380 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Republic of Ireland
Posts: 21,216
|
OK, I mentioned that I am an atheist, but was born and raised RCC.
You need to understand that there is a huge chasm between "official" RCC and what actually happens on the ground. This is the elephant in the room that TBD desperately avoids. For example, what is the RCC position on contraception? Well, they are opposed to it in all it's forms, apart from the abacus method. They are quite happy to facilitate the spread of aids in Africa because god. And the Pope says so. Find the ex-cathedra statement to that effect. You will search in vain. There is none. Given that, the RCC congregation at large is quite free to ignore whatever the pope may say, and most do. Take something more controversial, like abortion. The RCC is so vehemently opposed to to that, that they are willing to see women die needlessly. But still, no ex-cathedra statement about it. It is simply the handiest of get-out clauses. One size fits nobody and the devil take the hindmost. When the contraception thing reared it's ugly head, there were priests fulminating in the pulpit on the basis of authority they did not actually have. I actually saw on such spittle flecked rant which provoked the entire congregation stand up and walk out mid sermon, which was astonishing, unprecedented. But hey, what do I know, I only grew up in holy roman catholic Ireland in a catholic family, where sex was something that happened to other strange people. Funny enough, also the first country to legalise same sex marriage, and by popular vote no less. |
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive? ...love and buttercakes... |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#381 |
Philosopher
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 6,532
|
Boy it's hard to get this infallibility thing nailed down. All this talk about goalposts is not helping The Big Dog.
Have a look at the following extract from "Catholic Answers":
Quote:
That Cyprian of Carthage and Augustine had the balls to tell it as it was. None of the wishy washy stuff we get today from the Vatican, a Vatican that leaves the no errors stuff alone. Can we try another tack perhaps (no, not moving goalposts), and talk about Priests giving absolution. When a priest gives absolution, on behalf of God, is he capable of error? |
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#382 |
Philosopher
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 6,532
|
|
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#383 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#384 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Republic of Ireland
Posts: 21,216
|
It was really weird. There was no plan, there wasn't even the idea. Everyone simply got up and walked out, amusingly on moral grounds, they said after. I was floored. But it did give me pause for thought. If sheer masses of catholics walk out from moral indignation, where did that moral impulse come from? If it were god, then god is rejecting the RCC. If it was not god, then whence the motivation? Let me introduce Satan. Need to excuse the inexcusable? Cool, just invent yet another imaginary being, that will make everything better, right?
|
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive? ...love and buttercakes... |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#385 |
Nasty Brutish and Tall
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Canberra
Posts: 17,459
|
Re that commission that Peter supposedly got from Jesus, according to rational wiki:
Quote:
I'm starting to suspect the whole question of apostolic succession is just a bit of ancient BS retcon. It's as if they based their authority on Greedo shooting first: It never happened. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#386 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,841
|
Even if it did happen, how long did infallibility last? Until 1870 and beyond, as far as 1950? No, for it had evidently dissolved a mere four verses after Matt 16:19! In Matt 16:23 we read
But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.These are harsh and surprising words to be addressed to a person whom God has just made infallible. I don't think, on the strength of that, we need to bother our heads much about the ridiculous Bodily Assumption defined in 1950. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#387 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#388 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,841
|
You won't answer anything, will you?
Why should a non believer believe in a verse because it comes from a source like Matthew, when it is contradicted four verses later anyway? This Petrine proclamation supposedly makes Pius IX infallible, eighteen centuries later, but it didn't even make Peter himself infallible, to whom it was allegedly addressed, eighteen days later! LOL indeed. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#389 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
Why indeed, but of course that does not stop anti-catholicists from doing so, rooting around for "inconsistencies" where none exist. heck your claims would not be out of place in a Chick Tract or on the web pages of Fred Phelps. But you have found another one that reflects what theologians call the “stumbling-block of the Cross” 1 Corinthians 1:18-25. Here Peter the man was concerned about his friend, Jesus the man. And Jesus said, to put it in the lingo even the kids can understand: Peter, stop opposing me and get behind the plan! Or to put it another way:
Quote:
Must feel good to resurrect an argument that was rebutted 1000 years ago, and none of which you actually believe in the first place, huh? |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#390 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,841
|
lol, heck, huh? What next, I wonder?
So, according to your source. What He is saying, then, is this: with human reasoning you think that suffering does not befit Me, but you fail to understand that by this means God is accomplishing salvation and that this, on the contrary, greatly befits MeSo the first recipient of infallibility possesses only human reasoning, and therefore doesn't understand the means by which God accomplishes salvation. These are serious limitations in a person possessed of infallibility, I would think. But I still take the view that in deciding if a person is infallible, one should pay attention to that person's deeds, not to the words allegedly addressed to another person two millennia earlier. Pius and his successors fail that infallibility test. If one notes that the only use of Infallibility in practice has been to define the dogma of the Bodily Assumption in 1950, then it is of no relevance to the world at large. If God has in truth deigned to vouchsafe such a remarkable power to the Pope, why has He not made better use of it? |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#391 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
I notice you complain about the single word "heck" but slice off the remainer of the sentence...
![]() Your analysis of "human reasoning" predates the crucifixion, resurrection and Pentecost, the development of the Magisterium and the College of Cardinals. Plain cherry picking, folks. Because it is a remarkable extraordinary power, that I have explained repeatedly. Here is another lesson from the wikipedia article:
Quote:
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#392 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,841
|
No but others do. Don't you care about others? You will recall that I have pointed out how on the basis, purely and admittedly, of pontifical authority the Church has imposed the disastrous encyclical Humanae vitaeWP on now two generations of suffering people. Agreed, Catholics in my home country, Scotland, and in other advanced countries, pay little attention to its terms, and are not normally sanctioned by the Church for their laxity; but the consequences in the third world, where sacerdotal authoritarianism, ignorance and superstition are more prevalent, have been malign in the highest degree.
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#393 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#394 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,841
|
In what way is it an argument based on racism? I notice you've left my accusation of "sacerdotal authoritarianism" off your list. Why is that?
Yes, the Church does best where people have least. Or people have least in places where the Church does best; but to be fair, I think causality runs in the other order I put first. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#395 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
I guess I was just blown away that that you went with the whole third world is filled with "ignorance and superstition."
I mean, claiming that "sacerdotal authoritarianism" "first" does not really do all that good of a job of walking back the whole racist "ignorance and superstition" that followed it, now does it, no matter what order you put it in, right? Hey, I said a non-racist thing first, so that makes it pretty clear. Say, thanks for posting today. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#396 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,841
|
No. I didn't. I went with
... the third world, where sacerdotal authoritarianism, ignorance and superstition are more prevalentas you will see if you look at my post again. Heck, its no big deal. I might post again later, or tomorrow, OK, huh? |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#397 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
Yep, I saw that you did. Just to be clear you went with:
FIRST: sacerdotal authoritarianism! SECOND: ignorance THIRD: superstition 2 out of 3 racist, not really saved by your FIRST "point" but heck fire please don't let us forget : "the third world, where sacerdotal authoritarianism, ignorance and superstition are more prevalent." Heck, I look forward to more analysis about superstition, ignorance AND "sacerdotal authoritarianism" in the third world. I made them three different colors in case any one got confused by the ignorance and superstition claims, and did not give proper heed to the equally important sacerdotal authoritarianism claim, which is also a thing. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#398 |
Philosopher
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 6,532
|
Sorry to interrupt the friendly exchange between you guys but another news item of relevance is hot off the press.
It would seem the RCC are not changing much in spite of the rhetoric and breast beating by some. The "Good Name" of the church is floating in effluent and may be beyond resuscitation, but the coffers are being held in a tight grip. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-1...sation/9044660
Quote:
By the By, as I understand it these "deeds of release" were something Pell had a hand in, and were part of the "response' he championed, and was lauded for by his supporters. |
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#399 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
So they settled the claim, signed a settlement document and now want to unroll that and get more money?
Is that something that is happening in all claims in Australia, are people who settled with doctors and hospitals and negligent drivers advocating for having their settlement agreements tossed aside because people who are going through trials now are getting more money? "Catholic Church 'hiding behind the law' over historic abuse compensation claims." hiding behind the law? that is a hell of a way to put it by the ABC, or or it should be referred to as The Anti-Catholicism Broadcasting Network? Weren't they the ones who blatantly misrepresented the evidence on domestic violence in religious homes? Yeah, that was them. Nice of them to act as press agent for the plaintiff's lawyer in support of her new case! |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#400 |
Philosopher
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 6,532
|
|
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
|
|