CathInfo.com

There are many distinctions in canon law which you are obviously unaware.  But why should I be surprised at this?
Depends on the circuмstances.  Your general statement is erroneous without necessary distinctions.
Since this statement is full of more generalities, i'll answer 1 point, the issue of scripture.  "Who determines the ...reality of scripture?"
Answer:  The Church did over 1,500 years ago.  It is not necessary for the current pope to confirm this fact, nor can he edit, alter or undue it in any way.  So, based on the debate at hand, the reality of Scripture is unaffected by who is or isn't the pope.
Depends on the circuмstances.  Your general statement is erroneous without necessary distinctions.

Your rabid foaming of the mouth like a mad dog only serves to strengthen my opinion of you as a circus buffoon who is getting old and tiring when the audience demands to see a new act in a subpar performance.


1. Distinctions in Canon Law are notoriously difficult for even the most seasoned Canonists. A presumed novice such as yourself should not be so quick as to click his tongue to sing and whistle "Baby its easy." Even those who are considered to be Canon Law experts disagree amongst thenselves on many points and the most intelligent of them will often debate another. Fr. Cekada and "Bishop" Sanborn, two of the most intelligent Sedevacantists I have ever seen, often have trouble with points of Canon Law. Yet you speak of the matter as if it were basic Catechism. Moreover I did not make my case based on Canon Law. My argument was based off of a different premise completely unrelated to your blabbering.


2. My general statements were of a general nature for a reason. They were meant to illustrate my point, the importance of the Roman Pontiff,further without going too deep on any one point.


3. The Church has not determined the meaning of all of scripture 1500 years ago infallibly. Many points are still disputed and even the Church Fathers are not in agreement on all points. But why should I be surprised that you do not know this given your breathtaking ignorance in matters much simpler such as comprehending grade school level English.


4. The Pope most certainly can teach on and alter matters that have not been settled infallibly.


5. The meaning of faith, scripture, and everything else is determined by authority. I can give you a great example. Please tell me who is right on the issue of BOD and BOB? Each will say that a Pope, Church Father, or Doctor has spoken definitively on the matter and both sides have their proofs from authority. So we need an authority to interpret authority. A living infallible guide. Not fools such as yourself.

The pope and bishops are not the Church, they were/are disobedient to the same Church that you say are the popes and bishops themselves. Your confusion here is not uncommon.

+ABL, remaining faithful to the Church, was on that account by default, disobedient to the pope and bishops, how can you question if his disobedience to the pope and bishops was justified? - read my signature.



I never said nor even implied what you said in your quote - rather than veering off topic, you should ask for an explanation rather than give scandalous meaning to those things you have no understanding of.

Do you have the Catholic faith, assist at the Holy Sacrifice and are you receiving the sacraments? If so and you still need to ask where the Church is, then the allegory of you not being able see the forest through all those trees you're standing in the middle of applies.

If you lack or do not have the faith, then no answer or explanation to your questioning of where to find the Church will suffice for you. So if you do not understand what I just explained in the paragraph directly above, then that is telling you that you have a problem of not enough faith and you need to strive to increase and grow in the Catholic faith. Strive to do this and you will find out that the answer begins with the faith, and it is only with that faith that you know you can only be within the Church whenever you assist at the Holy Sacrifice and receive the sacraments, which is why I said it was a rhetorical question.      
 

First of all, I appreciate your civility in conversation!


Secondly, I did not say that they were "The Church." I said that they are the authority of the Church which must be obeyed if one is to be considered Catholic. I highly recommend you read The Papal Monarchy by Dom Gueranger. It will clear up the inconsistency in mindset you seem to hold to.


As for Msgr. Lefebvre, he was disobedient, but as to how to go about determining if he was justified in his disobedience? I will leave that question to someone more knowledgeable than I. I have no authority to determine that.


3. I know yours was a rhetorical question. The reason I asked what I asked was for this reason: if Catholicism consists of simply the Sacraments, Faith, & Mass then the Orthodox would certainly be part of the Church. Their Priests and Bishops are valid, Sacraments are valid, Mass is valid, yet they are schismatics who will go to hell. Pope Boniface VIII said it clearly: "Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff."