ECT INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE: Common Non-Catholic Misconceptions

[Cruciform]

Only if the accused is found guilty by a duly appointed mod, Matlock.

Exactly.

 

[musterion]

I prefer...

....Jedediah.

I bet you hate when Ken Barry took over in color, too.

 

[Cruciform]

so, we should report you for trolling the site with your silly threads that you start with no intention of engaging in a dialogue?

Report whatever you like. I've never once been banned on this forum, which hardly supports your charge above. Now you're actually trolling about trolling.

 

[musterion]

Report whatever you like. I've never once been banned on this forum, which hardly supports your charge above. Now you're actually trolling about trolling.

Meta!

 

[john w]

I bet you hate when Ken Barry took over in color, too.

And Sam's son "Mike" was no "Opie."

 

[musterion]

Neither is this.

Spoiler

 

[john w]

Neither is this.

Spoiler

Clint "Leon" Howard went down hill after this:

He should have donned the "piece"/rug William Shatner did in "TJ Hooker," or those tribbles must have done something miraculous with his hair:

 

[resodko]

those are some awesome eyebrows, ya gotta admit!

 

[musterion]

Never noticed that thing on his head before! Balok, I mean, or Tranya, or whatever his name is.

 

[Crowns&Laurels]

Of course, the Church didn't make a claim of papal infallibility until it felt secured on an idea that it won't go away. Had to test the waters first before Rome went and tried to make itself superior to the world again

 

[musterion]

"Oh yeah, The Shat is back on prime time TV again, baby! No more Devil's Rain, no more haunted airliners, no more Columbo villain of the week...oh, wait..."

 

[resodko]

no more haunted airliners,

wasn't that scooby doo?

 

[musterion]

Nope.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00H7BJ0C4/communistvampire

Actually, both Shanter and Buddy Ebsen were in that one. AND, The Shat played a drunk, down-on-his-faith priest. That's a threefer for this thread.

 

[resodko]

:doh:

i thought you were talking about his twilight zone episode, flying much lower

 

[dreadknought]

The Catholic Church’s teaching on papal infallibility is one which is generally misunderstood by those outside the Church. In particular, Fundamentalists and other "Bible Christians" often confuse the charism [gift] of papal "infallibility" with "impeccability." They imagine Catholics believe the pope cannot sin. Others, who avoid this elementary blunder, think the pope relies on some sort of amulet or magical incantation when an infallible definition is due.

Given these common misapprehensions regarding the basic tenets of papal infallibility, it is necessary to explain exactly what infallibility is not. Infallibility is not the absence of sin. Nor is it a charism that belongs only to the pope. Indeed, infallibility also belongs to the body of bishops as a whole, when, in doctrinal unity with the pope, they solemnly teach a doctrine as true. We have this from Jesus himself, who promised the apostles and their successors the bishops, the magisterium of the Church: "He who hears you hears me" (Luke 10:16), and "Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven" (Matt. 18:18)...

Since Christ said the gates of hell would not prevail against his Church (Matt. 16:18b), this means that his Church can never pass out of existence. But if the Church ever apostasized by teaching heresy, then it would cease to exist; because it would cease to be Jesus’ Church. Thus the Church cannot teach heresy, meaning that anything it solemnly defines for the faithful to believe is true. This same reality is reflected in the Apostle Paul’s statement that the Church is "the pillar and foundation of the truth" (1 Tim. 3:15). If the Church is the foundation of religious truth in this world, then it is God’s own spokesman. As Christ told his disciples: "He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me" (Luke 10:16).

http://www.catholic.com/tracts/papal-infallibility​

The Roman "catholic" 'church' is a historical fallicy. Argue from Scripture and the body of Christ.... the body has no choice. :sigh:

 

[john w]

"Oh yeah, The Shat is back on prime time TV again, baby! No more Devil's Rain, no more haunted airliners, no more Columbo villain of the week...oh, wait..."

His rug won an Emmy for "best piece in a supporting role."

 

[oatmeal]

Already decisively answered in the OP.


Given that you are decidedly NOT an ordained member of the Magisterium of Christ's one historic Church (i.e., a bishop), your attempted comparison here is laughably off base. Try again.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

What is laughable is infallibility

Unless he is literally Jesus Christ, no one is infallible.

David erred, Solomon erred, Abraham erred. All humans except Jesus Christ have erred.

Some believers are most certainly more trustworthy than others, but none, absolutely none, except Jesus Christ is absolutely trustworthy.

 

[Dona Bate]

so, you should report me for trolling the site with my silly posts that start with no intention of engaging in a dialogue?

Exactly!

2 Thessalonians 2:10-12

 

[Cruciform]

Of course, the Church didn't make a claim of papal infallibility until it felt secured on an idea that it won't go away. Had to test the waters first before Rome went and tried to make itself superior to the world again.

Straw Man Fallacy.

 

[Cruciform]

What is laughable is infallibility. Unless he is literally Jesus Christ, no one is infallible. David erred, Solomon erred, Abraham erred. All humans except Jesus Christ have erred.

Already answered---and corrected---in the OP itself. Try again.