| We hope you enjoy your visit! You're currently viewing Catholic CyberForum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our online cyberparish, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! Messages posted to this board must be polite and free of abuse, personal attacks, blasphemy, racism, threats, harrassment, and crude or sexually-explicit language. If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Vatican Councils | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Sunday, 26. September 2010, 17:10 (353 Views) | |
| Gerard | Tuesday, 28. September 2010, 10:19 Post #16 |
|
No need to apologise Alpac - glad you are joining in. Gerry |
| "The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998). | |
![]() |
|
| Gerard | Tuesday, 28. September 2010, 10:44 Post #17 |
|
P.S. Alpac - I dont agree that V2 concluded the issue of infallibility. I would say it started the process of balancing it. But only a start. P.P.S. Thats obviously an opinon Gerry |
| "The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998). | |
![]() |
|
| Alpac | Tuesday, 28. September 2010, 11:08 Post #18 |
|
Thanks Gerard, you are quite right the matter of Infallibility is not concluded and the debate on collegiality is very much alive. As for the wider topic of Vatican Councils I have found the link to the Vatican on the forum to the Vatican II documents come up in there. I will come back to the topic once I have read a little more. Edited by Alpac, Tuesday, 28. September 2010, 11:20.
|
![]() |
|
| Phil_sfo | Wednesday, 29. September 2010, 22:59 Post #19 |
|
“Nonsense! That is exactly what Councils do - reform definitions of earlier Councils.” Nonsense? You’re using the wrong word Gerry and that makes me think that maybe you only glanced at the post. Tell me where does the sentence“This doctrine was taken up again, confirmed and further explained.” talk about reform? I’m talking about infallibility of the Pope on the subjects of faith and morals only. Other people of note have voiced their opinion. Who are they to do such a thing when Jesus made it crystal clear to St Peter when he said "Thou art Peter etc“., and “whatsoever thou shall bind upon earth it shall be bound also in Heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth it shall be loosed also in Heaven.” (Matthew 16:18-19) and that He would be with the Church for all time, until the end of the world? And that was not the only occasion where Jesus gave his disciples his authority and backing. You can’t just cherry-pick the gospel. I wholly agree with looking critically, on occasions, at certain aspects of varied statements regarding our religion and I accept, too, that a man learned in dogma could, at the same time be proud, greedy or cruel…and I’m not convinced that the fear of Freemasonry within the Vatican is unfounded, but come on… Are we only trying to find fault? PJD:- I don't agree that an ecumenical couincil without the Pope has the prerogative of infallibiility. |
![]() |
|
| Gerard | Thursday, 30. September 2010, 09:12 Post #20 |
|
Phil, Trent said, under anathema, that there is no salvation outside the church. (Now I would say that could not be an infallible statement since it blatantly contradicts the whole Bible - but I suggest leaving that aside and dealing only with the infallibility of the Pope/Councils) Vatican two said that in some way unknown to us Jesus saves people who are outwith the church. I say that is reforming a dogmatic excathedra conciliar pronouncement. Hence, when another pope says that such pronouncemnts are irreforamble or not reformable, I say: Nonsense. Gerry Edited by Gerard, Thursday, 30. September 2010, 11:14.
|
| "The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998). | |
![]() |
|
| Gerard | Thursday, 30. September 2010, 11:20 Post #21 |
|
Just had another thought, It seems to me that this concentration on "irreformable" or "can't change a dogma" is itself cherry picking. If I use your translation:
It seems to me that the conservative minded cherry pick the first part of the sentence (about binding) and ignore the second part (about loosing). And:
Members of the Body of Christ? Part of the People of God? Baptised Christians? Priests Prophets and Kings? Gerry Edited by Gerard, Thursday, 30. September 2010, 11:21.
|
| "The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998). | |
![]() |
|
| Alpac | Thursday, 30. September 2010, 12:01 Post #22 |
|
I think we should be careful not to ascribe the 1870 definition of infallibility to ‘The Council of Trent’ the 19th Ecumenical Council 1545-1563 I suggest it is inaccurate to claim that any statements in it where considered by the church to be 'Infallible' in line with a teaching that was not proclaimed until 307 years after it was concluded. The other point of interest is that the one thing that everyone associates with the Council of Trent, the Tridentine Rite, was actually the result of a liturgical reform started in 1564 and published in 1570 as the Pius the V Missal. The topic is Vatican Councils of which thus far there have only been two, although there have been 4 Lateran Council’s in Rome. Thus two thirds of the Churches Ecumenical Councils took place outside Rome. This I think reflects not only the early geographical disposition of the church but also suggests that the greater collegiality of the earlier church. I am not sure but would be interested to hear other opinions on whether we should regard the Vatican Councils as of greater authority or is it that each council is of equal authority in relation to its context in time, place, academic/ scientific knowledge and educational abilities of both clergy and laity. An educated Catholic today may well baulk at some of the ideas formulated 500 years ago just as 16th century clerics may baulk at some of the current liturgical practices. (Actually some 21st Century clerics may baulk at some of the current practices.) I consider that judgement of events and sayings of the past ought to be contextualised. |
![]() |
|
| Anne-Marie | Thursday, 30. September 2010, 13:24 Post #23 |
|
When we are talking about practices and behaviour, it might well be appropriate to view teachings of the Magisterium (however you choose to define that) as variable. Trent is a particularly bizarre episode, since it became anathema to vary a Mass that had not even been determined then! And anyway, it has now been varied: which makes either them or us look rather silly, rather than representative of God. Sometimes I wonder what the Guy thinks of us as He watches what we get up to in His name.... What clearly cannot (under any circumstances) be variable is infallible teachings: either those teachings are correct or they aren't. God may have a time machine - we don't! Something either is true or it isn't (such as the Assumption, for example). And if infallible teachings turn out not to be infallible (because they might be wrong/untrue, for example) then clearly popes would not be infallible. Either they are or they aren't. Where I start to feel distinctly uneasy is when folks get excommunicated (barred from Heaven)... then get told they weren't... or the excommunication gets cancelled/annulled centuries later. I just cannot comprehend how God (who suffered terrible torture and execution for us) can take the slightest notice of such human shenanigans. It is for God to decide when we are fit to enter Heaven (if at all), not for some spiteful prelate/pope with a substantial plank on his shoulder. |
|
Anne-Marie FIAT VOLUNTAS DEI | |
![]() |
|
| Alpac | Thursday, 30. September 2010, 14:19 Post #24 |
|
Does excommunication bar us from heaven or the receipt of the Sacraments? Sorry probably a topic for another debate but I can sit more comfortably with the idea that people are excluded from the sacraments for a while and then readmitted than I can with the idea of people popping in and out of hell, particularly in light of last Sunday's gospel. |
![]() |
|
| Rose of York | Thursday, 30. September 2010, 14:31 Post #25 |
![]()
Administrator
|
There is an old thread about Excommunication. If you want to revive to it just click this link. http://s10.zetaboards.com/Catholic_CyberForum/topic/7094694/1/ |
|
Keep the Faith! | |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Archived Discussions · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2







7:53 PM Jul 11