Who was Paul?

[LittleLes]

[quote name='Archangel' date='May 18 2005, 02:29 AM'] Because they don't want to believe what we believe, they have to keep finding reasons to justify their denial. If they had any confidence in their own beliefs, they wouldn't bother with trying to debunk ours. [/quote]
"But it is part of the tragic and irreducibly obscure historicity of the Church that in both theory and practice it used bad arguments to defend moral mazims based on problematic, historically conditions pre-convictions, 'prejudices'...This dark tragedy of the Church's intellectually history is so burdensome, because we are dealing here, in all or very many cases, with questions which penetrate deeply into the concrete lives of human beings, because such false maxims, which were never objectively valid..placed burdens on people..that from the standpoint of the freedom of the Gospel were not legitmate."

-Fr. Karl Rahner S.J.


Errors which adversely affect the lives of people should be corrected!

[Socrates]

[quote name='LittleLes' date='May 18 2005, 08:22 AM'] "But it is part of the tragic and irreducibly obscure historicity of the Church that in both theory and practice it used bad arguments to defend moral mazims based on problematic, historically conditions pre-convictions, 'prejudices'...This dark tragedy of the Church's intellectually history is so burdensome, because we are dealing here, in all or very many cases, with questions which penetrate deeply into the concrete lives of human beings, because such false maxims, which were never objectively valid..placed burdens on people..that from the standpoint of the freedom of the Gospel were not legitmate."

-Fr. Karl Rahner S.J.


Errors which adversely affect the lives of people should be corrected! [/quote]
Ho hum . . . Yeah, quoting a dissident heretical priest here is sure to win us over!

[LittleLes]

[quote name='Socrates' date='May 18 2005, 01:12 PM'] Ho hum . . . Yeah, quoting a dissident heretical priest here is sure to win us over!


[/quote]
I believe that Karl Rather, one of the major theologians of at Vatican II, remained a priest in good standing until his death.

Which bishop declared him a heretic? Or is this just a term you apply to anything you don't like to hear?

[Myles Domini]

[quote]I believe that Karl Rather, one of the major theologians of at Vatican II, remained a priest in good standing until his death.[/quote]

Rahner rather than Rather

[LittleLes]

Lets compare the very early Christian communities, especially with the ones that Paul founded:

Name(s): Messianic Jews, Sect called the Way, Nazarenes, (negative Judaziers)
Members: Original Apostles and disciples of Jesus
Place: Primarily Jerusalem
Leader: James, the brother of Jesus
Time of preeminence: 30 A.D to 135 A.D (ie. Roman conquest of Judea)
Basis for Belief: The Torah, (Law, behavioral, and dietary codes) and teachings of the Apostles
Condemned: Paul (as an apostate from the Law)

Name(s) Pauline Christian Communities
Members: Gentiles, Hellenists, some Jews
Place: Mediterranean area ( except Jerusalem), Rome
Leader: Paul
Time of preeminence: 35 A.D. until the present
Basis for Beliefs: Paul's "visions," later his writings. Developed set of doctines.
Condemned: Nazarenes and Gnostics.

Name(s) Gnostic Christian Communities
Members: Many separate groups.
Place: Primarily eastern Mediterranean area
Leader: Each community had a teacher, like Marcion, Valentinus, and Carpocrates.
Time of preeminence: Predates Christianity, became a Christian Gnostic movement from about 60 A.D to about 600 A.D.
Basis of Beliefs: Special knowledge, Supreme Being, Demiurge, "the Logos" (or "Word"), and various powers.
Condemned: None

[Cam42]

[quote name='LittleLes' date='May 18 2005, 08:09 AM'] "Liberty must play a central role in society."

And you say that this is not compatible at all with Catholicism?

Obedience over liberty, is that what you mean? [/quote]
In the sense that Mill intended....no, it is not compatible.

Try reading his stuff sometime....it is just subjective modernism....nothing more. That is totally incompatible with the Roman Catholic Church.

Cam

[Cam42]

[quote name='LittleLes' date='May 18 2005, 02:13 PM'] I believe that Karl Rather, one of the major theologians of at Vatican II, remained a priest in good standing until his death.

Which bishop declared him a heretic? Or is this just a term you apply to anything you don't like to hear? [/quote]
Rahner was silenced.....I believe that it was John XXIII who silenced him. Paul VI rehabilitated him and he became heterodox again on matters of contraception and priestly ordination. He was then again silenced by the CDF, which has the right to do so, under the name of John Paul II. Since he was a Jebbie, he wasn't bound to a bishop.

Cam

[LittleLes]

[quote name='Cam42' date='May 18 2005, 03:14 PM'] Rahner was silenced.....I believe that it was John XXIII who silenced him.  Paul VI rehabilitated him and he became heterodox again on matters of contraception and priestly ordination.  He was then again silenced by the CDF, which has the right to do so, under the name of John Paul II.  Since he was a Jebbie, he wasn't bound to a bishop.

Cam [/quote]
So you agree that Socrates was wrong. Karl Rahner (thank you, Myles) was never declared to be a heretic.

The really neat part of being a cleric with authority over others is that you can "silence" them if you disagree with them. This, of course, has nothing to do with whether they are right or wrong.

Edited May 18, 2005 by LittleLes

[Socrates]

[quote name='LittleLes' date='May 18 2005, 03:24 PM'] So you agree that Socrates was wrong. Karl Rahner (thank you, Myles) was never declared to be a heretic.

The really neat part of being a cleric with authority over others is that you can "silence" them if you disagree with them. This, of course, has nothing to do with whether they are right or wrong. [/quote]
The reason Rahner was silenced by the Church was for teaching heresy (teachings which go against the constant infallible teaching of the Church).

Anyway, Rahner's words carry no authority with me, nor with any other "true-beleiving" (eg. loyal) Catholic.

[LittleLes]

[quote name='Socrates' date='May 18 2005, 03:54 PM'] The reason Rahner was silenced by the Church was for teaching heresy (teachings which go against the constant infallible teaching of the Church).

Anyway, Rahner's words carry no authority with me, nor with any other "true-beleiving" (eg. loyal) Catholic. [/quote]
Are you repeating hearsay, or do you have any evidence to offer?

[Cam42]

[quote name='LittleLes' date='May 18 2005, 03:24 PM'] So you agree that Socrates was wrong. Karl Rahner (thank you, Myles) was never declared to be a heretic.

The really neat part of being a cleric with authority over others is that you can "silence" them if you disagree with them. This, of course, has nothing to do with whether they are right or wrong. [/quote]
No, actually, I agree with Socrates.

Karl Rahner SJ taught what was contrary to the Faith. He taught heresy. He was a heretic. He was rehabilitated by Paul VI after being silenced by John XXIII.

He again entered into heterodoxy by holding views that were contrary to Catholic teaching. Heretical views.

He held that women's ordination was acceptable and that Humanae Vitae was not a valid expression of Catholic Faith. Those are both heretical notions.

For what is heresy?

[quote]"Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same...." (CCC 2089)[/quote]

Duh....

[LittleLes]

[quote name='Cam42' date='May 18 2005, 05:29 PM'] No, actually, I agree with Socrates.

Karl Rahner SJ taught what was contrary to the Faith.  He taught heresy.  He was a heretic.  He was rehabilitated by Paul VI after being silenced by John XXIII.

He again entered into heterodoxy by holding views that were contrary to Catholic teaching.  Heretical views.

He held that women's ordination was acceptable and that Humanae Vitae was not a valid expression of Catholic Faith.  Those are both heretical notions.

For what is heresy?



Duh.... [/quote]
Any evidence this time CAM?

Edited May 18, 2005 by LittleLes

[Guest goingcatholic]

I believe he was a wonderful man and was inspired by the Holy Spirt.

[Cam42]

[quote name='LittleLes' date='May 18 2005, 06:18 PM'] Any evidence this time CAM? [/quote]
Does it really matter what I post? You won't believe it anyway....

I know you twisty noodle.

However, to show the other Catholics who are orthodox:

The Heresy that Rahner and his contemporaries Congar, Curran, deChardin, et al., subscribe to is MODERNISM.

I suggest that you find a copy of the book [i]Turmoil and Truth[/i] by Phillip Trower. It does the best job possible in explaining all of this.

Here is one of his books.....

[url="http://www.religion-online.org/showbook.asp?title=524"]The Christian of the Future by Karl Rahner[/url]

(disclaimer: In no way do I condone or support this work. It is heterodox and simply offered as a proof to the heterodox teaching of Karl Rahner.)

Cam

[Cam42]

Incidentally, I have always provided proof....you are the one who is lacking, brother Littleles.

[Archangel]

[quote name='LittleLes' date='May 18 2005, 04:22 AM']Errors which adversely affect the lives of people should be corrected![/quote]
What are these "errors which adversely affect the lives of people"?

[LittleLes]

[quote name='Cam42' date='May 18 2005, 09:01 PM'] Incidentally, I have always provided proof....you are the one who is lacking, brother Littleles. [/quote]

You've provided no "proof." Rather typically, only assertions without evidence which you then claim to be proof. As in the case with Rathner.

Edited May 19, 2005 by LittleLes

[LittleLes]

[quote name='Archangel' date='May 19 2005, 02:21 AM'] What are these "errors which adversely affect the lives of people"? [/quote]
I'm afraid that to answer this question properly, we would have to start its own thread. But lets take a few:

(1) The objection on moral grounds to tolerating the use of condoms to limit the spread of AIDs to the wifes and newborn of HIV positive persons.

(2) "Silencing" publications of any moral views other than those of the present hierarchy.

(3) Continuing to ascribe an inferior status of women.

(4) Failing to reexamine it's views on homosexuality.

(5) Failure to more thoroughly examine its views on birth control

etc.

[LittleLes]

[quote name='goingcatholic' date='May 18 2005, 06:33 PM'] I believe he was a wonderful man and was inspired by the Holy Spirt. [/quote]
But CAM tells us that Rahner was silenced for heresy!

As reported in our newspapers, Jesuit Father Thomas J. Reese, familiar to most Americans as the commentator on the events at the recent conclave, and the editor of "America" magazine, was force to resign that post as editor by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

Traditionally, the Catholic hierarchy "silences" anyone over which it has authority who questions the party line or insists on accountability (as in the managemnt of the recent sex abuse scandal). It doesn't want its "true believers" (aka "loyal Catholics" or "simple faithful") to ask questions. Just accept what they are told.

What was Reese's misdeed? As the editor of America, he sometimes allowed views other than current strictly orthodox ones to be published.

As "Commonweal" another Catholic magazine wrote in a recent editorial:

"Those calling for the strict regulation od Catholic discourse argue that public dissent from church doctrine creates scandal, confusing the "simple faithful." What really gives scandal to the people in the pews, however, is the arbitrary and self-serving exercise of ecclesiastical authority."

Edited May 19, 2005 by LittleLes

[Myles Domini]

All the reasons you mentioned are heretical and underscore Cam's point. The Church silences dissidents for heresy not for honest intellectual debate but for going beyond the boundaries of that debate.