Author Topic: New book arguing against Sedevacantism (Read 80919 times)

PaulFC · « **Reply #265 on:** December 01, 2015, 11:00:47 AM »

Quote from: Bellator Dei

You believe, as I do, that the Magisterium of the Catholic Church is infallible - when certain conditions are met (Pope Leo XIII, etc.).

However, you believe that the Magisterium of the Catholic Church is fallible when certain conditions are not met.

You're completely fabricating your own Catholicism making such statements. Nowhere does the Church teach that there are exceptions to the infallibility of the magisterium. Nowhere. People in this forum love to say it because it helps them justify the errors of Vatican II, but it is complete nonsense.

I will ask again where you think the Church has ever taught there are exceptions to the infallibility of the magisterium, but no matter how many times this is asked, no one ever responds. No one responds because the Church never taught it. Go look at the list of quotes just posted about the magisterium.

There is no such thing as a General Council that teaches error. But there IS such a thing as a General Council that is illegitimate. There have been many illegitimate Councils throughout the history of the Church and Catholics need to start realizing this is the only logical explanation for Vatican II.

McCork · « **Reply #266 on:** December 01, 2015, 12:03:41 PM »

Quote from: Stubborn

I've asked those who say the magisterium is always infallible to produce magisterial teachings first, then theologian teachings second for the purpose of demonstrating the differences. The differences cannot be reconciled.

I ask you to do the same thing

I have long ago asked you the same basic question of you and you refused to answer it under the plea that it was immature and not topical to the thread. Why the double standard?

I quoted the Vatican Council saying that Catholics believe with "divine and Catholic faith" not only solemn teaching but teaching that is not solemn. I asked to you list things that YOU believe with the same faith that were never solemenly taught.

This is perfectly topical and always was, which is why you yourself are basically asking the same of others now. It is precisely a question about the UOM and you keep refusing to answer it. The Pharisees answered not a word, and we all know what that meant...that they couldn't.

Stubborn · « **Reply #267 on:** December 01, 2015, 12:39:46 PM »

Quote from: PaulFC

Quote from: Stubborn

I've asked those who say the magisterium is always infallible to produce magisterial teachings first, then theologian teachings second for the purpose of demonstrating the differences. The differences cannot be reconciled.

I ask you to do the same thing - stop posting from the encyclopedia and post from any magisterial docuмent as 2Vermont and BD did. *Then* go ahead and reconcile the Cekadian UOM with the Church's - so far, no one has been able to. All they've done so far is post the papal teachings, then try and convince us that they do not actually say what they say or mean what they say.

Stubborn,

As you've asked for, below I am providing a list of quotes from the Church on the infallibility of the ordinary magisterium and the solemn magisterium (Cantarella, Mr Salza, and Mr Siscoe take note). This list contains quotes from a General Council, Canon law, A Commentary on Canon Law, papal letters and encyclicals, the Catholic Encyclopedia, A Catholic Dictionary, and The Catechism Explained. All of these sources contain imprimatur.

I just lost my reply as I was logged out when I hit reply, so here is the condensed version anyway....

Out of all the quotes, there is one quote I found that disagrees with all the rest, it is from the catechism;

"Nor was this solemn declaration (of the Immaculate Conception in 1854) necessary; it was quite sufficient that all the bishops since the time of the apostles should teach in the same sense in regard of any given subject to make that teaching infallible; were it otherwise the Church would be capable of teaching heresy, or of falling away from the truth. Hence the Vatican Council declared that not only must that be accepted which has been solemnly defined by the Church, but also whatever is proposed by the lawful and general teaching authority which are contained in the written Word of God or in Tradition.

The quote from the catechism (I bolded) disagrees with all the other quotes by stating the half truth that whatever the bishops teach is made infallible. I made it agree with the decrees and other teachings with my edit in blue.

It seems this quote in bold is what nearly everyone believes, regardless of what the decrees and all your other quotes actually teach.

Stubborn · « **Reply #268 on:** December 01, 2015, 01:09:03 PM »

Quote from: Bellator Dei

Quote from: Stubborn
Quote from: Bellator Dei

Do you believe that there are different "levels" of the Magisterium?

Yes.

Do you believe the living magisterium from say, 500 years ago could make any teaching at all an infallible teaching by virtue of them all teaching it?

No.

What are the different "levels" of the Magisterium?

I thought we already discussed this somewhere.....

The Ordinary Magisterium
Extraordinary Magisterium

What is it with the 20 questions anyway?

Can we say the Ordinary Magisterium is the living Magisterium, that is the magisterium alive today, and the Ordinary Universal Magisterium is all the ordinary magisterium in union with the pope from the time of the Apostles till today? It is the UOM's teachings that are infallible.

Stubborn · « **Reply #269 on:** December 01, 2015, 01:14:17 PM »

Quote from: McCork

Quote from: Stubborn

I've asked those who say the magisterium is always infallible to produce magisterial teachings first, then theologian teachings second for the purpose of demonstrating the differences. The differences cannot be reconciled.

I ask you to do the same thing

I have long ago asked you the same basic question of you and you refused to answer it under the plea that it was immature and not topical to the thread. Why the double standard?

I quoted the Vatican Council saying that Catholics believe with "divine and Catholic faith" not only solemn teaching but teaching that is not solemn. I asked to you list things that YOU believe with the same faith that were never solemenly taught.

This is perfectly topical and always was, which is why you yourself are basically asking the same of others now. It is precisely a question about the UOM and you keep refusing to answer it. The Pharisees answered not a word, and we all know what that meant...that they couldn't.

I told you I would reply when you answered my question - you said you would but for whatever reason haven't.

I will give you some I do not know if they were ever solemnly defined or not - after you do what you said you would do.