I am the one reading it as it is written, you otoh, like the rabid BODer who zooms into the word "desire" and entirely ignore the rest of the Council, you zoom into the word "should" and ignore the rest of the teaching, presumably you do this because otherwise the thin ice you're already on turns to water and you fall right in. "if anyone says that it is not by the institution of Christ the lord himself (that is to say, by divine law) - you need to stop right there, because if you don't, it is apparent that you will remain in the water.
You are just a hypocrite (and not a smart one at that). No I don't need to stop right there
. You need to learn to read dogmas carefully (without adding or subtracting anything from them). You are only proving my point to well Stubborn. You accused Cardinal Manning and myself of adding and extending dogma. Yet (as I showed), we were merely reading the dogma for what it says. YOU are the one adding conditions to that dogma that are not there. Now you wish to subtract from a different dogma because the word "should" makes you uncomfortable. Well isn't that too bad? The one who says correctly, "we should trust the dogma for what it says" doesn't follow his own advice.
It is by Divine Law that the pope is the pope. Period.
Is there anyone out there reading this and not shaking his head in disbelief right now?
Thanks for providing your present error, as such, I will further point out that in your desperation to use Church teaching to vindicate sedevacantism - which I asked you to stop doing - you claim it is by Divine Law that blessed Peter *might not* have perpetual successors. WTH kind of divine law is that?
Here Stubborn - again - twists the dogma and makes it say something it does not. The dogma doesn't say "might not" Stubborn, it says "should". Looks like the accuser has condemned himself again. The dogma says "should
", because there were certain heretics that claimed the St. Peter does not
have successors (ever). Certain protestants like yourself. Also, I find it hilarious that you are begging me to stop using Church teaching. This is what protestants hate as well, Stubborn. It forces them to either twist the Catholic teaching or use their own false opinions (with no evidence). You have done both of these things quite well (up to now) Stubborn. You are making protestants very proud.
Only out of necessity to cling to their error do the sede's misinterpret the clear and infallible words from the mouth of the "true" pope (Pius IX) and the infallible Council - lest they sink in the water - and drown.
You have proven yourself to be the king of misinterpretation Stubborn (adding and subtracting from dogmas left and right). You like to accuse others, but cannot see that you are doing the very thing you accuse them of.