re: Pope Leo: If You Promote War You’re Not A Christian

quote:

---

quote:

---

So no, when I share my beliefs about God’s Word, I do not ever consider myself infallible.

---

I dont believe you

---

I don’t know why not. I explained what I mean by infallibility, and I am a sinner who is fallible.

I believe that my understanding of God’s infallible Word is correct and therefore I proclaim it as true, however I don’t believe I have an infallible understanding of it, which means I am open to correction where I could in error, if I am in error. The Bible is infallible so it cannot be corrected, but I can be corrected by God’s infallible Word.

I hope that clarifies things some.

I agree El Papa, but I would also add - if you intend to carry on your predecessors initiative "Seamless Garment of Synodality" to mean allowing muslims to pray (without acknowledging that Jesus Christ is the Son of God) in areas set aside in the Vatican Library then I have to say I have a problem with that.

We traditionalist Catholics just want Catholic doctrine to be rooted in scripture with concise clearly defined boundries (stuff like homosexuality is a grave sin, the nuclear family is the way God intended, and the Priest is Personna Christi)

Send us Holy Priest to baptize our babies, administer the Sacraments to our children, marry our sons and daughters and console us and preside over the funerals of our loved ones. And remember it's the little things you Priest do that have the greatest impact. The Holiest Priest I ever knew made it clear to us parishioners that the door to the rectory was always open - He was a 24/7 Priest. And to console and affirm the grief stricken parishioners he personally went to the funeral home to escort the deceased and their family to the Church for services. He's in heaven now and I miss him.

Pope John Paul II will forever be my hero. I shall never forget how on his elevation to the Papacy he addressed the crowd in St. Peter's Square with these simple but profound words - Be Not Afraid. I remember those words calmed me and gave me confidence that God had sent us a true Shepherd of the Flock.

My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: and I give unto life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hands - John 10:27-28

....and those guys in that scene ended up losing to Salahdin....in the movie.. and in reality.

quote:

---

You have clarified things greatly, Pope Foo. You talk out of both sides of your mouth. While declaring your Theological Pronouncements to be Infallible, in the same breath, you say "but I'm a Sinner and I'm fallible."

You want it both ways. You want to be seen as a fallible sinner, but you want us to believe your Papal Foo Bulls are Infallible.

---

I have certainly clarified things but you seem to be just as confused as ever. I’m starting to think it is willful, but I want to think charitably of you.

I’m not speaking out of both sides of my mouth. I am being consistent. I have never said that I am infallible, only that God’s Word is. We are talking about authority, not interpretation, when we discuss infallibility. The source of authority is what is or is not infallible. In this case, the Bible alone is infallible and cannot be wrong. I can be wrong, you can be wrong, the Popes and Councils can be wrong, but God in His Word cannot be wrong.

When proclaim truth statements, I am saying what I believe to be true, but understanding that I could be wrong.

You are mocking me by calling me a Pope, but ironically, I am open to reform, but when the Pope speaks from the chair of his supposed authority, there is no reform possible. I am no Pope.

quote:

---

Pope Foo is Fallible, but, what Pope Foo preaches is Infallible.

---

Small clarification needed here: I am not infallible, but God’s Word is. Where my understanding matches the truth of God’s Word, it is objectively true, but where it does not, it is not, and must be reformed according to the Bible in reliance upon the Holy Spirit.

quote:

---

Tell us, Foo. Was Martin Luther's preaching Infallible? What about John Calvin? Was John Calvin's preaching Infallible? What about John Knox?

---

Nope. None of those men were infallible authorities, though I believe much of what they taught were in alignment with the unchangeable truth of God’s infallible Word.

quote:

---

Let me help you - when you tell us that your preaching is Infallible, that is the same as saying that YOU are Infallible, with regard to your preached Theological pronouncements.

---

I am once again saying I am not infallible but only God’s Word is. I hope that is becoming clear for you.

quote:

---

Open to correction, are you? Are you sure about that? I don't think that you've ever been open to correction on Theology. I've not witnessed that in the years I've read your preaching here on Political Talk.

---

Just because I have not been “corrected” on the particular topics that you have witnessed doesn’t mean I haven’t been corrected in my theology over time.

However, my understanding of many scriptural teachings has certainly been corrected and grown over the years, including changes and refinements in eschatology, worship, the Lord’s Day, ecclesiology, and even my understanding of justification and sanctification. I’m sure if I give it some thought, I could make a long list of ways the Lord has corrected and refined my understanding from His Word over the years. Suffice it to say, I have been corrected by God and I continue to be corrected by Him.

quote:

---

Was John Calvin "open to correction"? Martin Luther? Zwingli? Of course not. They are all their very own "Pope" figures who preached Infallible Truths. Heck, that's why they founded their own New Religions. If they thought that they might be teaching error, they would not have become "Pope" of their own new denominations.

---

More irony. Catholics regularly claim that their knowledge of church history supports their faith, but you all are woefully ignorant of church history.

The fact that those men believed Catholic teaching and then left Catholicism is evidence enough that they were not infallible, but they never claimed to be infallible, either.

quote:

---

The Catholic Pope speaks Infallibly on matters of Theology in the same manner that Pope Foo speaks Infallibly on matters of Foo-ology.

And then, when Pope Foo deigns to "test" his own Theological Pronouncments for "error", Pope Foo conducts the "test" himself and then pronounces his Pronouncement as Infallible Truth and then credits "Scripture" as the Authority when in fact the "authority" is actually POPE FOO himself !!

What a neat trick !!

And at what point is Pope Foo infallible? Pope Foo will self- test his own Theology doctrine against Scripture to make sure that there is no error. Then after the self-test, Pope Foo finds no error.

At that point, is Pope Foo's theological opinion then Infallible? Or does he do a second test and THEN it is Infallible?

---

You have been mistaken from the start, so this is nothing more than a rambling mess. See above.

quote:

---

Pope’s have been involved in political affairs for centuries.

---

Pope is head of state, so, yes, he will be involved in political affairs. I disagree with the nature of his involvement. Pope can be low key and refrain from internationally publicly vague statements.

And we both agree that Pope's worldly politics are never Infallible, because that pertains only to Theology and no Pope has made an Infallible theological statement since the year 1950.

Thousands of church pastors across the globe will preach on politics to their flocks - this is not unusual.

quote:

---

Pope is head of state, so, yes, he will be involved in political affairs. I disagree with the nature of his involvement. Pope can be low key and refrain from internationally publicly vague statements.

---

He certainly can, but I was just pointing out that because he is a head of state, he necessarily would be expected to delve into politics. You were suggesting he remain quiet on that front and stick to theology. I was just reminding you that he proclaims to have an important role in both matters.

quote:

---

And we both agree that Pope's worldly politics are never Infallible, because that pertains only to Theology

---

I agree that his scope is limited, however he could make theological applications that apply to the civil sphere, including politics. His fallible declarations about the death penalty touch on this, in particular.

I wasn't intending to imply that the Pope is infallible in these matters, only that he is expected to speak on political matters due to the nature of the claimed office he holds. I think you're conflating my commentary about infallibility in another post with this topic of the role of the Pope in civil affairs and politics.

quote:

---

and no Pope has made an Infallible theological statement since the year 1950.

---

I'm aware. It seems to make the argument for papal infallibility rather inconsequential in the grand scheme of things if he rarely actually speaks with infallibility. The clarity to the faith that he provides is not very helpful, then, especially when he regularly provides fallible statements that require a lot of interpretation by other catholic authorities who argue with one another to figure out what the church should know about and how they should apply his words.

quote:

---

Thousands of church pastors across the globe will preach on politics to their flocks - this is not unusual.

---

Thousands of church pastors across the globe do not require implicit faith ("religious submission of mind and will") in themselves like Catholicism does for the Pope. There is a due submission to the teachings of the Pope, even when he speaks fallibly that Protestant pastors typically do not require, but Protestants typically call their own words and teachings to be checked by the Scriptures. So yeah, it's a bit different than what you're trying to make it out to be.

quote:

---

my understanding of God’s infallible Word is correct

---

quote:

---

The Bible is infallible so it cannot be corrected

---

You presuppose biblical univocality and infallibility because it’s a part of your dogma, not because it’s supported by evidence, and despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Your post history on here aligns with your comment about you believing your understanding is correct, but your post history indicates there is no possible for you to be convinced otherwise - of anything anyone says.

quote:

---

however I don’t believe I have an infallible understanding of it, which means I am open to correction where I could in error

---

You might have tricked your brain into believing it, like George telling Jerry “It’s not a lie if you believe it.”

Be true to yourself and all of us here. Don’t piss on our boots and tell us it’s raining.

Crusades' anyone????

I'm not a fan of this Pope. He seems like a moron