The Christian Discussion thread IX: Pelagius Rising.

[Diopolis]

It has nothing to do with American politics. This is about the ancient doctrine of the Church, and many are rightfully concerned about Francis's apparent willingness to change it or otherwise support contrary ideas.

Sorry, no. Maybe the solution for some people is to abandon something when it doesn't go 100% their way (a la every democrat in Hollywood saying they'll move to Canada if Trump wins. Which they have yet to do.) but obviously plenty of people have deeper loyalties and more maturity than that. The Pope is not God, he can be criticized if one thinks he's doing the wrong thing.

The Pope is not changing anything. This is something that has been refuted time and time again. He does make some suggestions that do come out of left-field at times, sure, but he's not changing church doctrine.

Of course not, because changing church doctrine is impossible. Anyone claiming it can be done- by anyone- commits heresy.
The accusation is that he's attempting to change church doctrine.

[Bari]

And unofficially, maybe a couple more times.

Technically those were made before the Doctrine was made "official"

But to make clear, the doctrine has always been there; it just was never explicated in the times past. Dogma does not change or adapt, as I am sure you know. This doctrine simply was not defined and pronounced definitively.

[Diopolis]

(a la every democrat in Hollywood saying they'll move to Canada if Trump wins. Which they have yet to do.)

Sort of like all the Christians who claimed they'd do that too if gay marriage got passed.

He's being accused of spreading heresy. There are seven errors he's accused of encouraging. All of them have to do with some variant on moral theology. They're not wrong.

Not to mention, Benedict did more to protect minors than any of the other popes. He just gets a bad rap in comparison to his more liberal successor(who was actually a massive step in the wrong direction on that issue). I wonder why...

What did Benedict do more for minors in contrast to Francis?

Benedict changed the law so that the church department handling such cases would be the rather-less-corrupt-than-average congregation for the doctrine of the faith. Francis did.... what exactly? Oh, right, he pardoned a bunch of offending priests because they were connected to his political allies.

[Thermodolia]

The Pope is not changing anything. This is something that has been refuted time and time again. He does make some suggestions that do come out of left-field at times, sure, but he's not changing church doctrine.

Of course not, because changing church doctrine is impossible. Anyone claiming it can be done- by anyone- commits heresy.
The accusation is that he's attempting to change church doctrine.

So even if I'm not Christian I've committed a heresy by saying that the church can change?

[Dylar]

Sort of like all the Christians who claimed they'd do that too if gay marriage got passed.

What did Benedict do more for minors in contrast to Francis?

Benedict changed the law so that the church department handling such cases would be the rather-less-corrupt-than-average congregation for the doctrine of the faith. Francis did.... what exactly? Oh, right, he pardoned a bunch of offending priests because they were connected to his political allies.

Hey, don't forget about Francis excommunicating Fr. Jose Mercau! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_excommunicated_by_the_Catholic_Church

Fr. Jose Mercau in 2014 as part of the Catholic Church sexual abuse cases scandal

[Salus Maior]

Sort of like all the Christians who claimed they'd do that too if gay marriage got passed.

Haha, touche.

I guess the lesson here is that Americans are pretty flimsy when it comes to outward loyalty to the country, if the wrong president is in office.

[Salus Maior]

Of course not, because changing church doctrine is impossible. Anyone claiming it can be done- by anyone- commits heresy.
The accusation is that he's attempting to change church doctrine.

So even if I'm not Christian I've committed a heresy by saying that the church can change?

Well no, you can only be a heretic if you're a Christian.

[Luminesa]

The Pope is not changing anything. This is something that has been refuted time and time again. He does make some suggestions that do come out of left-field at times, sure, but he's not changing church doctrine.

I thought that there was something to do with a chair and that when he's on it everything he says is gods word or something like that

The infalliability of the pope is a complicated subject, but it can be somewhat surmised by this: if he is speaking on matters of church doctrine, what he says is infalliable. If he is speaking for politics (such as not being a massive fan of Trump) he is not infalliable. Ultimately, his role is to protect and to communicate the teachings of the Church, as it is for every priest, bishop, and clergyman of the Church.

[Luminesa]

Sort of like all the Christians who claimed they'd do that too if gay marriage got passed.

What did Benedict do more for minors in contrast to Francis?

Benedict changed the law so that the church department handling such cases would be the rather-less-corrupt-than-average congregation for the doctrine of the faith. Francis did.... what exactly? Oh, right, he pardoned a bunch of offending priests because they were connected to his political allies.

He has also been working to try and fix the issue with the child abuse scandal...with limited success.

[Luminesa]

"The doctrine of Papal infallibility teaches that the Holy Spirit preserves the Pope from error, when he speaks with the officaility of his office on doctrines of moral and guidance for the true Church."

However, this is a very rare occurrence, and has only officially been invoked twice in church history.

Essentially, in order for something the Pope says to be infallible, it has to be declared infallible through special proclamation. It's not that every word he says is the direct word of God delivered two way radio.

And unofficially, maybe a couple more times.

The Immaculate Conception and the the Assumption of Mary are concepts that have been more or less totally accepted since the days of the early Church. The only difference is that they were made official teachings of the Church at these specific points. So it's more like "putting a ring on it" versus "being in a relationship".

[Pasong Tirad]

And unofficially, maybe a couple more times.

The Immaculate Conception and the the Assumption of Mary are concepts that have been more or less totally accepted since the days of the early Church. The only difference is that they were made official teachings of the Church at these specific points. So it's more like "putting a ring on it" versus "being in a relationship".

[Tarsonis]

Of course not, because changing church doctrine is impossible. Anyone claiming it can be done- by anyone- commits heresy.
The accusation is that he's attempting to change church doctrine.

So even if I'm not Christian I've committed a heresy by saying that the church can change?

Depends on how you define Change. It can technically change in that it can codify Doctrine that wasn't codified before. The Doctrine was always true just not officially recognized. Onotoligically this is a change though an extremely minor one.

The church however cannot alter doctrine or remove doctrine.

It can grow, it can never backstep

[The Alexanderians]

Technically those were made before the Doctrine was made "official"

But to make clear, the doctrine has always been there; it just was never explicated in the times past. Dogma does not change or adapt, as I am sure you know. This doctrine simply was not defined and pronounced definitively.

Are you...kidding?

[Tarsonis]

Technically those were made before the Doctrine was made "official"

But to make clear, the doctrine has always been there; it just was never explicated in the times past. Dogma does not change or adapt, as I am sure you know. This doctrine simply was not defined and pronounced definitively.

Yes of course, but therefore one couldn't officially invoke PI before PI was officially defined

[Salus Maior]

[Tarsonis]

But to make clear, the doctrine has always been there; it just was never explicated in the times past. Dogma does not change or adapt, as I am sure you know. This doctrine simply was not defined and pronounced definitively.

Are you...kidding?

Not at all. Dogma does not change . We may not have fully recognized it and defined it, but it doesn't change. It was always true, whether we were aware of it or not.

[Stonok]

I've been listening to Mormon hymns. I dislike many of their doctrines, especially those that teach anyone, through obedience, can become a God. But their hymns are so beautiful, for instance "If You Could Hie to Kolob" there's three verses I absolutely love

The works of God continue, and worlds and lives abound; improvement and progression, have one eternal round. There is no end to matter; there is no end to space; there is no end to spirit; there is no end to grace. There is no end to virtue; there is no end to might; there is no end to wisdom; there is no end to light.There is no end to union; there is no end to youth; there is no end to priesthood; there is no end to truth. There is no end to glory; there is no end to love; there is no end to being; there is no death above. There is no end to glory; there is no end to love; there is no end to being; there is no death above.

I almost wish the LDS hadn't written it so it could've been used in a mainstream Christian hymn.

[Tarsonis]

(Image)

Well the Church does need to be aware of the times and interact with the times otherwise it could become aloof.

It mustn't compromise it's doctrines with the times however.

[The Alexanderians]

Are you...kidding?

Not at all. Dogma does not change . We may not have fully recognized it and defined it, but it doesn't change. It was always true, whether we were aware of it or not.

If that were true the Protestants wouldn't exist. Sure you could argue the Catholic/Orthodox split was understanding and interpretations being very different between two groups (I wouldn't personally) but thats hardly true of the Low Church.

[Salus Maior]

(Image)

Well the Church does need to be aware of the times and interact with the times otherwise it could become aloof.

It mustn't compromise it's doctrines with the times however.

Well, when most people say "it has to change with the times" they mean compromising doctrine.

[The Alexanderians]

Sort of like all the Christians who claimed they'd do that too if gay marriage got passed.

Haha, touche.

I guess the lesson here is that Americans are pretty flimsy when it comes to outward loyalty to the country, if the wrong president is in office.

Or they realized Canada was even more politically far and away from them than America was.

[Tarsonis]

Not at all. Dogma does not change . We may not have fully recognized it and defined it, but it doesn't change. It was always true, whether we were aware of it or not.

If that were true the Protestants wouldn't exist. Sure you could argue the Catholic/Orthodox split was understanding and interpretations being very different between two groups (I wouldn't personally) but thats hardly true of the Low Church.

No, the Protestants are heretics. The truth of Dogma doesn't preclude heretics from rejecting said truth.

[The Alexanderians]

If that were true the Protestants wouldn't exist. Sure you could argue the Catholic/Orthodox split was understanding and interpretations being very different between two groups (I wouldn't personally) but thats hardly true of the Low Church.

No, the Protestants are heretics. The truth of Dogma doesn't preclude heretics from rejecting said truth.

Shame you don't agree about Catholic Dogma :^)

[Tarsonis]

No, the Protestants are heretics. The truth of Dogma doesn't preclude heretics from rejecting said truth.

Shame you don't agree about Catholic Dogma :^)

Catholic Dogma is true though.

[The Alexanderians]

Shame you don't agree about Catholic Dogma :^)

Catholic Dogma is true though.

Not gonna pull at that thread and start High Church hostilities.