Catholics Have To Submit To The Pope No Matter How Wicked

[RezaMikhaeil]

[quote name='Aloysius' post='1221866' date='Mar 29 2007, 01:30 AM']The Council of Basel-Ferrara-Florence-Rome (commonly referred to as Florence) happened after Chalcedon; it was there that the Bull of Union with the Copts was agreed to by the delegate of the Coptic Patriarch, Andrew. Any insult incurred by not being involved in Chalcedon due to misunderstandings should be ancient history considering that at Florence we condemned Monophysitism together. Your Patriarch's delegate was questioned at length and we determined he did not hold any monophysite heresy. That particular matter was settled there in the year of our Lord 1434ish.[/quote]

[b]Copts suffered under the rule of the Byzantine Eastern Roman Empire. The Melkite Patriarchs, appointed by the emperors as both spiritual leaders and civil governors, massacred the Egyptian population whom they considered heretics. Many Egyptians were tortured and martyred to accept the terms of Chalcedon, but Egyptians remained loyal to the faith of their fathers and to the Cyrillian view of Christology. One of the most renowned Egyptian saints of that period is Saint Samuel the Confessor.[/b]

[Winchester]

[quote name='Budge' post='1214889' date='Mar 17 2007, 07:12 AM']Catholics do have to SUBMIT to the Pope no matter how wicked The CCC says this...[and it doesnt matter if the man is wicked, an apostate and more]





."

It gets even better then this...


If a Catholic is not following a Pope in matters of faith and morals...[that would include the Popes interfaith plans] they are sinning by the RCCs own teachings...
There are no provisions made for wicked Popes, and for one to NOT submit to that Popes teachings regarding faith and morals...is to be in sin according to Catholic teaching.

The house of cards fell for me, when I realized there was no charisma on a Magisterium that could be capable of such things as this...

[img]http://www.cephasministry.com/pope_assissi.jpg[/img]

[img]http://www.infowars.com/headline_photos/April/pope.jpg[/img]
I KNEW the Pope was not infallible when it came to faith or morals.

Gods Word was truth, the Pope no longer represented it.[/quote]
Budge! You're back. It's obviously old news.

You've managed to come up with an interpretation of passages that no one ever has before. Excellent work. I am sadmused (my own word, don't cut up your fingers flipping through the dictionary looking for it.) that this theory has warranted several pages.

It's probably been addressed already, but if the pope tells us something outside his authority (which is issued by Christ, not fro mthe pope himself and therefore does not excuse the pope's immoralities) then we can oppose him. If he's breaking into our houses or killing our children, we can defend ourselves the same as any other person. Of course, he usually sends the Swiss Guard to do those things while he eats bon bons made by SATAN HIMSELF!

NEXT!

[Laudate_Dominum]

[Anomaly]

[quote]I'm a militant Catholic, and if utter loyalty and obedience to one's commander-in-chief is a bad thing in your mind so be it. As for me: death before dishonor. [/quote][quote]It's probably been addressed already, but if the pope tells us something outside his authority (which is issued by Christ, not fro mthe pope himself and therefore does not excuse the pope's immoralities) then we can oppose him. If he's breaking into our houses or killing our children, we can defend ourselves the same as any other person. Of course, he usually sends the Swiss Guard to do those things while he eats bon bons made by SATAN HIMSELF![/quote]Does this mean that the Catholics have abandoned the tactic of establishing, clarifying, discussing, and defending their perspective as being most correct with reason and logic has been abandoned?

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Anomaly' post='1221904' date='Mar 29 2007, 06:14 AM']Does this mean that the Catholics have abandoned the tactic of establishing, clarifying, discussing, and defending their perspective as being most correct with reason and logic has been abandoned?[/quote]
No.

Anything else you'd like to know?

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Anomaly' post='1221904' date='Mar 29 2007, 06:14 AM']Does this mean that the Catholics have abandoned the tactic of establishing, clarifying, discussing, and defending their perspective as being most correct with reason and logic has been abandoned?[/quote]
It's hard to do that when the other party doesn't want to listen. That's all I spent my Budge vs. Raphael thread doing and Budge has now decided not to post in it anymore.

[Winchester]

[quote name='Anomaly' post='1221904' date='Mar 29 2007, 06:14 AM']Does this mean that the Catholics have abandoned the tactic of establishing, clarifying, discussing, and defending their perspective as being most correct with reason and logic has been abandoned?[/quote]
Simply because one Catholic (me) has chosen to do this does not mean all Catholics have chosen to do this. The moment even a shred of respect comes from the opposing corner, I shall change tactics. Meanwhile, I provide much needed levity.

[Laudate_Dominum]

Yes!!

[Anomaly]

I'm not saying...
just asking...

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Anomaly' post='1221987' date='Mar 29 2007, 08:50 AM']I'm not saying...
just asking...[/quote]
That's what I thought. Wooot!!

[Budge]

[quote]The moment even a shred of respect comes from the opposing corner, I shall change tactics. Meanwhile, I provide much needed levity.[/quote]

So two wrongs make a right?

Nice moral reaasoning there.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Budge' post='1222010' date='Mar 29 2007, 09:15 AM']So two wrongs make a right?

Nice moral reaasoning there.[/quote]
So you admit you're in the wrong? Yeah, I know that doesn't necessarily follow from your quote, but I want to verify.

Anyway, I don't think that it's wrong to try to make light of the situation, since no one on either side seems to be taking it seriously, either.

[Laudate_Dominum]

I must note that this statement of mine was completely serious:

"I'm a militant Catholic, and if utter loyalty and obedience to one's commander-in-chief is a bad thing in your mind so be it. As for me: death before dishonor."

[Budge]

[quote]"I'm a militant Catholic, and if utter loyalty and obedience to one's commander-in-chief is a bad thing in your mind so be it. As for me: death before dishonor."[/quote]

Dont you think blind obedience can be a problem?

[Winchester]

[quote name='Budge' post='1222010' date='Mar 29 2007, 09:15 AM']So two wrongs make a right?

Nice moral reaasoning there.[/quote]
I'll try.

Your false assumptions are thus:

1. That sarcasm is "wrong." You've provided no proof that sarcasm is wrong.

2. That I've said what I'm doing is right. I've not said it, you'll just have to wonder if I'm convinced of my moral superiority or if I live in a moral vacuum.

3. Apparently, you're assuming humor is wrong. Since the Bible doesn't really comment on humor being morally acceptable, I can see the point. Thankfully, us heathen Catholics don't use just the Bible. There's a papal bull about humor somewhere in the secret library.

You do realize you imply your tactics are wrong by your statement, yes? Obviously, you're not saying that and only a total jerk (me) would use that against you, thus taking complete rhetoric and using it to sway the public without any real substance to his arguments. Luckily, neither you nor I are above such tactics. The difference is, I admit it.

[Mateo el Feo]

[quote name='RezaLemmyng' post='1221857' date='Mar 29 2007, 04:24 AM']I was curious if you were going to respond back, but to respond to your post, I'm not sure what source you'd read about the council but it's true that the Coptic Church was kept from attending because of the monophysite/miaphysite situation and was labeled as "heretics". This is the primary [and pretty much the only] situation that keeps the Oriental and Eastern Orthodox seperate. At this point in history, the Eastern Orthodox had began sending their bishops to "replace" our Bishops in Egypt.[/quote]My source is the [url="http://www.amazon.com/Decrees-Ecumenical-Councils-Norman-Tanner/dp/0878404902/"]Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, edited by Norman Tanner, SJ.[/url] An online English translation also exists here:

[url="http://www.legionofmarytidewater.com/faith/ECUM04.HTM"]http://www.legionofmarytidewater.com/faith/ECUM04.HTM[/url]

[quote name='RezaLemmyng' post='1221857' date='Mar 29 2007, 04:24 AM']Copts suffered under the rule of the Byzantine Eastern Roman Empire. The Melkite Patriarchs, appointed by the emperors as both spiritual leaders and civil governors, massacred the Egyptian population whom they considered heretics. Many Egyptians were tortured and martyred to accept the terms of Chalcedon, but Egyptians remained loyal to the faith of their fathers and to the Cyrillian view of Christology. One of the most renowned Egyptian saints of that period is Saint Samuel the Confessor.[/quote]At the hands of the Jacobites of Antioch (aka Monophysites, now Syriac Orthodox, I suppose), many Maronites were tortured and martyred [u]because[/u] they accepted the Council of Chalcedon. Sadly, blood is on just about everyone's hands.

Wise leaders in both the Catholic Church and Eastern Christianity have learned that we need to acknowledge these tragedies of the past, but not dwell on them to the point that it weakens our resolve to achieve the goal of Our Lord's prayer to His Father, "that they may be one just as we are" ([url="http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/john/john17.htm#v11"]John 17:11[/url]).

[Mateo el Feo]

[quote name='Budge' post='1222047' date='Mar 29 2007, 11:39 AM']Dont you think blind obedience can be a problem?[/quote]If you're looking for the Biblical answer, you might want to ask St. Thomas after the Resurrection. Let's see who Our Lord is calling blessed:[quote name='John 20:29']Jesus said to him, "Have you come to believe because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and have believed."[/quote]Apparently, blind obedience is a blessing. Budge, do you have a problem with what Our Lord is saying here?

[thessalonian]

[quote name='Budge' post='1222047' date='Mar 29 2007, 10:39 AM']Dont you think blind obedience can be a problem?[/quote]


Obedience is what it is all about. Evidently you are of superior intelligence to Jesus because he said "the scribes and the pharasees sit on moses seat. THEREFORE DO WHATEVER THEY TELL YOU. But do not follow their deeds".

Ya get that? JESUS is telling them to obey their leaders even though there deeds were known. Though they did not practice what the preached (the case of some popes) they were still to be obeyed in what they preached.

[Aloysius]

I'm confused as to why that was a response to my citation of the Council of Florence? listing out the greviences of history does nothing; by the time of the Council of Florence your patriarch zealously sought union with us, the abbot Andrew was found to hold the same True Faith as us... we had unity for one breif shining moment. If there was blood spilled centuries before then it has no bearing... we were able to come to an agreement there.

[Anomaly]

[quote name='Mateo el Feo' post='1222153' date='Mar 29 2007, 12:31 PM']If you're looking for the Biblical answer, you might want to ask St. Thomas after the Resurrection. Let's see who Our Lord is calling blessed:Apparently, blind obedience is a blessing. Budge, do you have a problem with what Our Lord is saying here?[/quote]
Apparently, blind obedience to men isn't a blessing according to the RC Church. The RC Catechism promotes discernment and following your consicience. Blind obedience is ignoring your own consicience and just doing what people tell you to do.

[b]1800 A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience.[/b]