Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: DEBATE Catholic brother Dimond vs protestant Keith Thompson  (Read 10048 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Lover of Truth

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8700
  • Reputation: +1158/-863
  • Gender: Male
DEBATE Catholic brother Dimond vs protestant Keith Thompson
« Reply #90 on: February 07, 2014, 09:57:57 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    The great good that comes from an examination of this controversy is a realization of the fact that the teaching of the Catholic Church is authoritative in a unique sense. Ultimately it is Our Lord Himself who teaches within the Church, and the doctrines set forth in His name and by His authority by His ministers demand full acceptance on the part of all subjects of the Church. When the ecclesia docens acts, it inevitably binds the consciences of all Christians to accept its teachings and to manifest that acceptance. It forbids, by the very nature of its activity, any inaccurate statement about the doctrine which has been proposed, or any refusal to receive that doctrine as the personal tenet of the persons to whom it is addressed. The man who rejects that teaching, rejects Our Lord Himself.

    Ultimately, we must not allow ourselves to forget, the perfection of the Church’s teaching authority is such that the Church itself does not need to add any other jurisdictional act to its authoritative condemnation of some teaching at variance with that doctrine in order to impose upon its subjects the obligation to accept that declaration with a true and inward assent, and in order to forbid, under penalty of offense against God Himself, any outward expression of opposition to what the Church has taught. The teaching power of the Church is inherently and essentially jurisdictional. The man who is subject to the authority of the Church has a duty before God of accepting the acts of the ecclesiastical magisterium with a sincere and genuine inward assent. He is obliged to manifest that acceptance, and to refrain from any oral or written opposition to or misinterpretation of what Our Lord, acting through the ecclesia docens, has proposed authoritatively for his guidance in His Church.  http://www.strobertbellarmine.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=691&p=7510


    The Feeneyites have been warned.  Seemingly a billion times.  It is difficult for me how they would be able to claim invincible ignorance on this matter.
    "I receive Thee, redeeming Prince of my soul. Out of love for Thee have I studied, watched through many nights, and exerted myself: Thee did I preach and teach. I have never said aught against Thee. Nor do I persist stubbornly in my views. If I have ever expressed myself erroneously on this Sacrament, I submit to the judgement of the Holy Roman Church, in obedience of which I now part from this world." Saint Thomas Aquinas the greatest Doctor of the Church


    Offline SJB

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5171
    • Reputation: +1932/-17
    • Gender: Male
    DEBATE Catholic brother Dimond vs protestant Keith Thompson
    « Reply #91 on: February 07, 2014, 11:50:04 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Deliveringit
    Quote from: Lover of Truth
    (Quanto Conficiamur Moerore) by Pope Pius IX, 1863


    Lover of Truth, why do you cite a teaching that is not "infallible"?

    Unlike you, we traditional Catholics hold to the "infallible" teachings of the Church and if we see any fallible teachings that is not in line with the "infallible" dogmatic teachings, then we simply discard those fallible teachings.

    So why are you rejecting the "infallible" teachings which says that ONLY through the Sacrament of baptism can one enter into the Church and therefore have the hope of receiving salvation. Plus, why are you rejecting to believe in EENS "as it is written", but instead look to the interpretations of others?[/b]

    True traditional Catholics look to the "infallible" declarations and definitions themselves as the proximate of faith. I have noticed that the modernists do not hold to the dogmatic declarations and definitions "as they are written", but instead look to the fallible interpretations of others in order to justify their modernist opinions.


    So you are not a Catholic. You have created your own rule of faith.
    It would be comparatively easy for us to be holy if only we could always see the character of our neighbours either in soft shade or with the kindly deceits of moonlight upon them. Of course, we are not to grow blind to evil