Laudate_Dominum Posted January 17, 2006 Posted January 17, 2006 [quote name='Theoketos' date='Jan 17 2006, 01:05 PM']L_D I think [url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=9236&hl=pope"]This[/url] is what you are looking for...oh the good times. [right][snapback]858864[/snapback][/right] [/quote] I totally remember that thread!! I wonder what the lumberjack has been up to? I really liked that guy..
Extra ecclesiam nulla salus Posted January 18, 2006 Author Posted January 18, 2006 so during the avigon Papacy were the avigon popes all anti-popes? what about the time when three people claimed the seat of Peter?
Socrates Posted January 18, 2006 Posted January 18, 2006 [quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Jan 17 2006, 05:40 PM']so during the avigon Papacy were the avigon popes all anti-popes? what about the time when three people claimed the seat of Peter? [right][snapback]859194[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Only one was the true Pope. The other two were anti-Popes. There can only be one Pope at a time.
Laudate_Dominum Posted January 18, 2006 Posted January 18, 2006 [quote name='Socrates' date='Jan 17 2006, 05:44 PM']Only one was the true Pope. The other two were anti-Popes. There can only be one Pope at a time. [right][snapback]859197[/snapback][/right] [/quote] yeah, and there was a time when it was unclear which one was the actual pope, but eventually the cardinals got together and figured it out. Prior to that it really was debatable which is a scary thought.
OLAM Dad Posted January 18, 2006 Posted January 18, 2006 [quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='Jan 17 2006, 09:09 PM']yeah, and there was a time when it was unclear which one was the actual pope, but eventually the cardinals got together and figured it out. Prior to that it really was debatable which is a scary thought. [right][snapback]859289[/snapback][/right] [/quote] The world is a different place now. It would be hard to imagine something similar happending in the age of instant communication and news reporting.
Extra ecclesiam nulla salus Posted January 23, 2006 Author Posted January 23, 2006 what about them? what does a holy war have to do with Deneying A Dogma of the Church?
ironmonk Posted January 24, 2006 Posted January 24, 2006 [quote name='Cam42' date='Jan 15 2006, 07:50 PM']And......? Why didn't you just post it on the Q&A then, if you don't want a debate on the debate board........ummmm...... [right][snapback]857041[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Why Cam, you are sounding like me. : : To the point... there will always be someone who misunderstands. Extra, Maybe a question should be "Since they were not Pope, does it matter?". Once they are Pope, when addressing from the Chair of Peter, the Church they are infallible. If they did teach heresy, I doubt that they would be considered to be elected for Pope. Now, they might hold a particular personal belief that differs from official teaching, but they could not teach heresy once Pope. God guides them. You will hear some anti-Catholics talk about "bad" popes and trying to use that as a reason to prove the Catholic Church wrong... but they forget about Judas. God picks the Pope just as God picked Judas... bad people will be used for God's plan, just as Judas was. There have been bad popes, but they never taught anything heretical and never made Excathedra Statements (infallible). [url="http://www.NewAdvent.org"]http://www.NewAdvent.org[/url] is a great resource for studying this topic. God Bless, ironmonk
ironmonk Posted January 24, 2006 Posted January 24, 2006 Extra, I tried to PM you but it won't send so I'll post this here since you mention Peter... I'm curious to what point you are making with your signature... When Dominic was in Rome, seeking authorization for his order from the Pope, the Pope gave him a tour of the treasures of the Vatican, and remarked complacently (referring to Acts 3:6), "Peter can no longer say, 'Silver and gold have I none.'" Dominic turned and looked straight at the Pope, and said, "No, and neither can he say, 'Rise and walk.'" God Bless, max, aka ironmonk
infinitelord1 Posted January 24, 2006 Posted January 24, 2006 havent there been popes who were permisscuous? and bad popes?
Extra ecclesiam nulla salus Posted January 24, 2006 Author Posted January 24, 2006 you bet! but they were not heretics.
Guest rocky37 Posted January 24, 2006 Posted January 24, 2006 Hello, this is my 1st time on this board and I should admit that I am an ex-Catholic. I respect the church and the religion, even though it is not for me. I am NOT trying to start an arguement just talk back and forth. Isn't the very fact that the church claims the Pope is Perfect (therby being all knowing) heresy against the bible. Doesn't the bible claim only one perfect entity (jesus, the father, and the holy spirit). Let me know what you think.
rkwright Posted January 24, 2006 Posted January 24, 2006 [quote name='rocky37' date='Jan 23 2006, 11:43 PM']Hello, this is my 1st time on this board and I should admit that I am an ex-Catholic. I respect the church and the religion, even though it is not for me. I am NOT trying to start an arguement just talk back and forth. Isn't the very fact that the church claims the Pope is Perfect (therby being all knowing) heresy against the bible. Doesn't the bible claim only one perfect entity (jesus, the father, and the holy spirit). Let me know what you think. [right][snapback]864469[/snapback][/right] [/quote] I think you're a bit misinformed... no where do we claim the Pope is perfect especially by the meaning of 'all knowing'.
CatholicCid Posted January 24, 2006 Posted January 24, 2006 It would be if we declared the Pope perfect... Then he'd basically be god no? The Pope is infallible when teaching Ex Cathedra on matters of Faiths and Morals to my knowledge... Other than that, he is just as human as us I think these might help [url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=45407&hl=pope"]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?s...c=45407&hl=pope[/url] [url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=25829&hl="]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=25829&hl=[/url] [url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=18531&hl="]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=18531&hl=[/url] [url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=4716&hl="]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=4716&hl=[/url]
ironmonk Posted January 24, 2006 Posted January 24, 2006 [quote name='rocky37' date='Jan 24 2006, 12:43 AM']Hello, this is my 1st time on this board and I should admit that I am an ex-Catholic. I respect the church and the religion, even though it is not for me. I am NOT trying to start an arguement just talk back and forth. Isn't the very fact that the church claims the Pope is Perfect (therby being all knowing) heresy against the bible. Doesn't the bible claim only one perfect entity (jesus, the father, and the holy spirit). Let me know what you think. [right][snapback]864469[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Welcome to the board. There are a lot of misunderstandings and misconceptions about the Catholic Church. The Pope is the successor of Peter the Apostle. Remember in the bible where and how Judas was replaced, we called that Apostolic Succession. Through Apostolic Succession we have the successor of Peter today, which is the Pope. The Apostles were the first Bishops, as the Church grew so did the number of Bishops. Here are a couple of links that can help clarify some things for you... [url="http://www.catholic.com/library/church_papacy.asp"]http://www.catholic.com/library/church_papacy.asp[/url] [url="http://www.scripturecatholic.com/"]http://www.scripturecatholic.com/[/url] God Bless, ironmonk [url="http://www.CatholicSwag.com"]http://www.CatholicSwag.com[/url]
thessalonian Posted January 24, 2006 Posted January 24, 2006 [quote name='rocky37' date='Jan 23 2006, 10:43 PM']Hello, this is my 1st time on this board and I should admit that I am an ex-Catholic. I respect the church and the religion, even though it is not for me. I am NOT trying to start an arguement just talk back and forth. Isn't the very fact that the church claims the Pope is Perfect (therby being all knowing) heresy against the bible. Doesn't the bible claim only one perfect entity (jesus, the father, and the holy spirit). Let me know what you think. [right][snapback]864469[/snapback][/right] [/quote] This contains several false claims. 1) The Pope is not perfect. He does sin. He can make errors about the future price of stocks. Even some of his writings may well contain things are are not completely correct. When he speaks on matters of faith and morals for the whole Church in his capacity as successor of Peter however he IS ALWAYS PERFECT. 2) This does not impy all knowing. It only says that when he speaks in this limited capacity he will not error. We can trust his words, i.e. the Holy Spirit will speak through him just as it spoke PERFECTLY through the 40 some odd scripture writers and even through the likes of Caiphas the High Priest. John 11 49] But one of them, Ca'iaphas, who was high priest that year, said to them, "You know nothing at all; [50] you do not understand that it is expedient for you that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation should not perish." [51] He did not say this of his own accord, but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus should die for the nation, [52] and not for the nation only, but to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad. 3) Perfection does not imply that one is God or all knowing or any kind of a diety. God is perfect of course but there are other beings that are perfect. Angels for instance. Also those who are in heaven are now perfect. This does not mean they are all knowing, though the do have access to the knowledge of God, yet have limited, finite capacity to comprehend the all knowing. Yet what they know is perfect. This distinction can be understood if one considers a red rubber ball. One understands it as a round object that is the color red and bounces. Another understands it as having certain elastic properties, a color on the color spectrum, and a certain radius. Does either have an imperfect knowledge of the ball? No. One has a deeper understanding. Yet it is not imperfect. Hope that helps.
bx_racer Posted February 1, 2006 Posted February 1, 2006 hmm well the crusades just seemed like a really big bad and the church supported it i dont know what was up with that. but hey it wasnt agaisnt Church teaching i guess. another thing however was the inquisition. i read in history class that the Church taught the Earth is the center of the universe.
Extra ecclesiam nulla salus Posted February 1, 2006 Author Posted February 1, 2006 Crusades were good.
Ora et Labora Posted February 1, 2006 Posted February 1, 2006 [quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Feb 1 2006, 02:51 PM']Crusades were good. [right][snapback]872299[/snapback][/right] [/quote] yeparooni...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now