[geocentrism] Re: papal infallibility
- From: "philip madsen" <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 19:17:57 +1000
Neville, you wrote a good letter, and I have to think a little harder to do it
justice of a intelligent reply. However Marc gave me the opening to clarify one
question you posited.
\
Marc failed to mention, not only is the popes book or books or pronouncements
or actions not infallible outside of an "excathedra' declaration, they can be ,
and as far as the post V2 popes are, often heretical.
This Neville, is by way of explaining "real Catholics". A heretic cannot be a
member of the Church of Jesus Christ. We divide the word heretic into
subjective and formal.. Even though anyone including a Pope commits heresy
subjectively, one cannot be declared formally as a heretic without a trial.
After being called to trial if one fails to submit and repent he denies the
church and is declared a heretic. Thats a "formal heretic".
However the Pope is the supreme head after Jesus Himself of the church. We can
accuse him of a heretical statement , we can ask him to repair the damage, but
we cannot bring him to trial. None on earth can make the formal judgement. Why?
Because, apart from none having the higher authority, none can know the state
of his mind as to the guilt, save God Himself. I cannot know your mind. Below
that position, the case can be cut and dried. A superior can inform the heretic
that he is in error, ask him to retract, and so on.
Why do I hold the opinion that this is not the real catholic church that holds
the seat of power in Rome? Why do I hold that the true church is in exile,
without a viable or conscientious leader? Because there is an exception to the
rule I put above. In the real church of the past, the cardinals would by
majority censure an errant and heretical pope, as has been done in the past.
Todays cardinals however are complicit not only in the popes errors, but have
many scandals of their own, and so on down through the Bishops to the majority
of pleasure seeking laity. The new orientation church panders to pagan
pleasures.
That is the sign of the world we live in today, and a prophecy of a great
apostasy. Oh yes these may be valid clerics, but apostates or heretics
nonetheless, and perhaps only a chastisement as seems looming today might bring
them back to their knees in submission. A fairly ancient prophet, Catherine
Emmerich, upon whose writings Mel Gibson produced his movie the Passion, said
that she had a vision of a future apostate Rome, wherein the Bishops and
cardinals were walking around in circles, but their heads were hidden in a fog.
I hope that makes my position a little clearer. Unfortunately, it does not make
me any less a sinner.
Philip.
----- Original Message -----
From: marc-veilleux@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To: Geocentric
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 8:33 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: papal infallibility
For those who don't understand the Catholic dogma of papal infallibility,
look at the first book written by pope Benedict XVII on matters concerning the
Faith, but as the pope claims in his book: «... it is not part of the
Magisterium, everybody is free to refute me». It doesn't matter if a pope
says that what he writes is infallible, what makes his teachings infallible is
when he speaks or write «ex cathedra» or when he speaks or writes the beliefs
and teachings of the Church from the beginning.
MV
Father John Zuhlsdorf was at the presentation of the Pope’s book, Jesus of
Nazareth in the Aula del Sinodo on Friday 13 April 2007 and offers a lengthy
account of his first impression:
It is not new to receive a book from a Pope. In the past, they were the
fruits of interviews, or they were biographical or poetry. But this is a work
of theology. That’s new. Even though it is a work of theology, it is not a
contribution to the Magisterium. That’s new. This point was heavily stressed in
the presser. This book is a contribution of “Joseph Ratzinger” to all who are
interested in Jesus. The novelty of this book is its context, coming as it does
from a Pope. . . .
http://www.popebenedictxvifanclub.com/blog/
----- Original Message -----
From: Dr. Neville Jones
Sent: 14 avril 2007 07:56
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Forsaken Roots
We have communicated now for several years, Philip, and throughout that
time I have always perceived you to be honest, genuine and questioning. I do
not understand the distinction between the "real" Catholic Church and what I
observe to be the Catholic Church, but I respect your position. However, a very
large number of people are dishonest and you and I know from experience that
such people extend throughout any religion, Catholicism and Judaism included.
Now, if you accept that the Devil really does exist (and I only came to
this conclusion last year), and if you accept that he can manifest himself as
an angel of light, then we all have to face the fact that the sole reason for
manifesting himself thus is to lead people astray - i.e., to deceive as many as
possible. Does this not account perfectly for the fact that there are
apparently over 28,000 different sects, denominations, cults, ..., within the
so-called Christian category alone. And what about the Jews and the Muslims, do
they not argue amongst themselves as to meaning and interpretation constantly.
The Sunnis, the Shi-ites, the Orthodox Hassidic, the Revisionist, ... We cannot
put all of this down to lost meaning in ancient languages or translation. Even
using our intellect, we must see that this confusion and these contradictions
are designed, planned, deliberate.
You have used a combination of your spirit and your intellect to discount
certain popes as being false, in doing that you have held fast to your belief
in the fundamentals of the Catholic Church. All I have done is use my spirit
and my intellect to reject large sections of the "Old Testament," in
particular, based solely upon my belief in God.
Instead of never-ending debates, interpretations, word studies, etc., do we
not instantly obtain two things simply by recognizing the Devil for what he is:
1. Harmony and agreement.
2. A view of the world which enables us to make sense of what is going on
around us.
It is not adequate for anyone to state that the Bible is God-breathed
simply because the Bible claims itself to be so (2 Tim. 3:16, from memory).
Such a claim must be in harmony with the Spirit. This is where the intellect
must give way to the joining of our spirit with the Spirit of God.
Best wishes,
Neville.
philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
but are you not in danger of abandoning your responsibility in this
respect by accepting the conclusions of the Council of Trent, or Cardinal
Belarmine (my apologies - I can see that I have spelt his name wrongly, but
cannot remember the correct spelling at the moment), or Pope JP2, or whoever?
Neville..
No apology needed. I would probably have spelt it the same way..
However you may have misread me, but you know from experience of my
previous utterings that "my responsibility" prevents me from falling into the
trap of blind obedience. This is where intellect is guided by the spirit
perhaps, but if the Spirit intervenes with every individual, then He is
certainly a complicated and confused person, given the variety of
contradictions among most of the people, Catholic or not Catholic.
I would accept the Council of Trent as dogmatic, but not Bellarmine. But
I should not entirely trust my interpretation of Trent, it being a very
complicated Latin presentation. I would listen to Bellarmine because he was
closer to it, and had more authority than I.. I also allow my intellect, or
the Spirit if you prefer, to abandon almost all of what popes Paul VI , or any
of his successors say or have said , simply because they have shown themselves
to be either confused or anti-catholic.. more probably the latter.
The trouble with the spirit Neville is a very troublesome problem for the
reasons I gave. Scripture says ( I cannot find where) we must test the Spirit
in all things.. To do that we must have intellect and reason.
Are we not in danger of abandoning our responsibility in accepting the
conclusions of men whether they be other men or ourselves, deluded as we may
well be by false spirits.
God must be worshipped in spirit and in truth. You cannot have one
without the other. Truth can be ascertained by correct reason. Discerning the
Spirit outside of Scripture is not so cut and dried. As you have chosen to
censor scripture, and reject large portions of it, how can you be certain of
the authenticity of your "spirit" without intellect?
Finally I have no dispute with this:
it is not primarily intellect, but a striving of the spirit towards truth
and constant prayer to request wisdom and understanding. That is why Christ
states that we shall know the truth, rather than unravel it or work it out.
Provided we are on track, He will give to our intellect the grace of
comprehension. But Neville, both you and I know people who strive with
constant prayer , but who are on many differing tracks....So what striving, and
on what track was Paul, when he took the road to Damascus?
Philip.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Answers - Got a question? Someone out there knows the answer. Try it
now.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.4.0/762 - Release Date: 15/04/2007
4:22 PM
Other related posts:
