Author Topic: False BOD is Foundational to VatII (Read 10384 times)

SJB · « **Reply #30 on:** February 11, 2014, 01:54:17 PM »

Quote from: bowler

Sure SJB, Abp. Lefebvre should not be understood as he wrote it, and all the dogmas on EENS and baptism should not be understood as they are written, and maybe you and I should not be understood as we write. And maybe what should not be understood as it is written should not be understood as it is written.

"There was once a cat that fell asleep and dreamed that he was a man dreaming that he was a cat, and when he woke up, he did not know whether he was a man or a cat".

There once was an idiot who did his own theology, saw things that were not really there, and due to his stupid pride he never woke up to see what a fool he has been.

bowler · « **Reply #31 on:** February 12, 2014, 09:12:03 AM »

To BOders, the councils teach in parables so only theologians understand what is being taught - except when it comes to a few certain things - -like "the desire thereof" means BOD has been defined.

Then you have Ambrose saying "When a doctrine is taught in an ecuмenical council, it is de fide." Yet he rejects de fide teachings from ecuмenical councils as though rejecting them were the rule of faith taught in ecuмenical councils.

SJB · « **Reply #32 on:** February 12, 2014, 10:18:53 AM »

Quote from: bowler

To BOders, the councils teach in parables so only theologians understand what is being taught - except when it comes to a few certain things - -like "the desire thereof" means BOD has been defined.

Then you have Ambrose saying "When a doctrine is taught in an ecuмenical council, it is de fide." Yet he rejects de fide teachings from ecuмenical councils as though rejecting them were the rule of faith taught in ecuмenical councils.

How do you explain away all the catechisms?

bowler · « **Reply #33 on:** February 12, 2014, 11:08:36 AM »

Quote from: SJB

Quote from: bowler
To BOders, the councils teach in parables so only theologians understand what is being taught - except when it comes to a few certain things - -like "the desire thereof" means BOD has been defined.

Then you have Ambrose saying "When a doctrine is taught in an ecuмenical council, it is de fide." Yet he rejects de fide teachings from ecuмenical councils as though rejecting them were the rule of faith taught in ecuмenical councils.

How do you explain away all the catechisms?

You deny ALL the clear dogmas using "catechisms" of which you never any quotes. That's called an end run. You don't have the mental wherewithal to answer any of the questions that come from directly reading clear language Dogmas.

SJB · « **Reply #34 on:** February 12, 2014, 02:57:40 PM »

Quote from: Bowler

You deny ALL the clear dogmas using "catechisms" of which you never any quotes.

Catechisms do not contradict dogmas. Many catechisms have been clearly quoted, so you're either blind or just to stupid to realize what people have been posting for days, months, years and even decades now.