Extra ecclesiam nulla salus Posted February 1, 2006 Author Posted February 1, 2006 [quote name='Ora et Labora' date='Feb 1 2006, 04:38 PM']yeparooni... [right][snapback]872337[/snapback][/right] [/quote] despite what all the liberals think
dairygirl4u2c Posted February 1, 2006 Posted February 1, 2006 So we have the doctrine that teaches a Pope cannot teach error due to his infallibilty, *but if he does*, then.... (we must obey in all things but sin) is this what the teaching really comes down to? Or is it.. if it's the Pope can teach error.. and we must obey him in all but sin.. this is like saying there's no way to prove the CC wrong. You'd say of course there's not, but by the very virtue of this doctrine, even if the CC wasn't legitimate, there's no way to prove it................................
rkwright Posted February 2, 2006 Posted February 2, 2006 [quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Feb 1 2006, 04:54 PM']despite what all the liberals think [right][snapback]872345[/snapback][/right] [/quote] umm call me a liberal for this... but the 3rd crusade which ransacked canstantinople, killed eastern christians, and stole many of their relics, furthered the schism between the east and west, is hardly what I would call a good crusade...
rkwright Posted February 2, 2006 Posted February 2, 2006 [quote name='qfnol31' date='Feb 2 2006, 12:07 AM']Might have been fourth. [right][snapback]872683[/snapback][/right] [/quote] oops am I getting 'em mixed up?
rkwright Posted February 2, 2006 Posted February 2, 2006 (edited) [quote name='dairygirl4u2c' date='Feb 1 2006, 05:01 PM']So we have the doctrine that teaches a Pope cannot teach error due to his infallibilty, *but if he does*, then.... (we must obey in all things but sin) is this what the teaching really comes down to? Or is it.. if it's the Pope can teach error.. and we must obey him in all but sin.. this is like saying there's no way to prove the CC wrong. You'd say of course there's not, but by the very virtue of this doctrine, even if the CC wasn't legitimate, there's no way to prove it................................ [right][snapback]872351[/snapback][/right] [/quote] You're mixing up a few different things.... The Pope can only teaching infallibly when speaking ex cathedra on faith and morals. This has only happened twice (I'm pretty sure on this... though someone may correct me) and these statements are infallible, without error. The Pope can have other teachings, that are not considered infallible teachings. These teachings or opinions can have fallacy and are not free from error. Even if the Pope were to hold to some opinion that was in error, we don't have the authority to call him a heretic, and would continue to follow him. Thats what the cannon laws are talking about. At least thats how I understand it, though I'm waiting for one of those Church scholars to jump on it. Edited February 2, 2006 by rkwright
bx_racer Posted February 3, 2006 Posted February 3, 2006 yeah cause the Church had its shot at governing in the middle ages and we blew it what the hell
Extra ecclesiam nulla salus Posted February 3, 2006 Author Posted February 3, 2006 [quote name='bx_racer' date='Feb 2 2006, 08:10 PM']yeah cause the Church had its shot at governing in the middle ages and we blew it what the hell [right][snapback]873765[/snapback][/right] [/quote] coming from a liberal. How did we "Blow it"? the crusades were in defense of the Christian Empire of the Byzantines and to take Jerusalem back from the Mohammedans. Don't listen to Liberal lies.
Ora et Labora Posted February 3, 2006 Posted February 3, 2006 [quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Feb 2 2006, 07:17 PM']coming from a liberal. How did we "Blow it"? the crusades were in defense of the Christian Empire of the Byzantines and to take Jerusalem back from the Mohammedans. Don't listen to Liberal lies. [right][snapback]873778[/snapback][/right] [/quote] hey you...um, i don't think he's a liberal. lol
Extra ecclesiam nulla salus Posted February 3, 2006 Author Posted February 3, 2006 in this respect he is
Ora et Labora Posted February 3, 2006 Posted February 3, 2006 [quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Feb 2 2006, 07:31 PM']in this respect he is [right][snapback]873804[/snapback][/right] [/quote] really?
Extra ecclesiam nulla salus Posted February 3, 2006 Author Posted February 3, 2006 Anyone who bashes the crusades is a liberal.
Ora et Labora Posted February 3, 2006 Posted February 3, 2006 [quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Feb 2 2006, 07:38 PM']Anyone who bashes the crusades is a liberal. [right][snapback]873826[/snapback][/right] [/quote] really..? i didnt know that was the definition of a liberal.....
Extra ecclesiam nulla salus Posted February 3, 2006 Author Posted February 3, 2006 its my own special defentition.
Ora et Labora Posted February 3, 2006 Posted February 3, 2006 [quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Feb 2 2006, 07:42 PM'] its my own special defentition. [right][snapback]873837[/snapback][/right] [/quote] yep, i know.
Extra ecclesiam nulla salus Posted February 3, 2006 Author Posted February 3, 2006 would you agree that Liberals bash the Crusades? I would say so. I have a lot of contact with liberals.
rkwright Posted February 3, 2006 Posted February 3, 2006 [quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Feb 2 2006, 08:45 PM']would you agree that Liberals bash the Crusades? I would say so. I have a lot of contact with liberals. [right][snapback]873844[/snapback][/right] [/quote] DId you read what I posted earlier about the 4th Crusade??? Its not the liberal who bashes this crusade, its anyone who has any knowledge of history. Killing our brother Christians for no real reason was a BAD thing.
Extra ecclesiam nulla salus Posted February 3, 2006 Author Posted February 3, 2006 the crusades were not about Killing Christians. In fact the atrocities of the fourt crusade were no good. Pope Inocent III exommunicated all praticipants in that. But thats not what the crusades were about. they were about a holy pilgramige to Jerusalem to rescuse the Holy City from Moslems.
rkwright Posted February 3, 2006 Posted February 3, 2006 [quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Feb 2 2006, 08:52 PM']the crusades were not about Killing Christians. In fact the atrocities of the fourt crusade were no good. Pope Inocent III exommunicated all praticipants in that. But thats not what the crusades were about. they were about a holy pilgramige to Jerusalem to rescuse the Holy City from Moslems. [right][snapback]873855[/snapback][/right] [/quote] yea intentions might be good... but killing christians is what happened. And it was a crusade... :. Not all the crusades were good It doesn't make one a liberal to tell the truth
Extra ecclesiam nulla salus Posted February 3, 2006 Author Posted February 3, 2006 but your telling a lie. the idea behind the crusades were good, and overall the crusades were carried out in a good moral way except for a couple incidents like that, to achieve a divine goal of freeing Holy Jerusalem.
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