Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Roger Pearse · 05-29-2006, 06:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eowyn

Could you please say where he does this? What exactly he says?

Thanks for responding!!!

Only one comes readily to mind: De praescriptione haereticorum ch. 36.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

yalla · 05-29-2006, 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

You didn't mention the criteria for winning, or the prize. It does involve dancing-girls, doesn't it?

All the best,

Roger Pearse

No winning involved Roger.
But when I did the exercise some time ago [so long ago I wasn't sure if you were the critic of Wheless] I found the literary analysis process fascinating and illuminating. Weighing 3 sources against [ is that the right word?] each other and considering the merit of each taught me something. I'm not sure what.
But you did come out with more credit than the CE.
Thanks for providing the counterbalance to Wheless, a worthy effort.
cheers yalla

Roger Pearse · 05-29-2006, 09:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yalla

No winning involved Roger.
But when I did the exercise some time ago [so long ago I wasn't sure if you were the critic of Wheless] I found the literary analysis process fascinating and illuminating. Weighing 3 sources against [ is that the right word?] each other and considering the merit of each taught me something. I'm not sure what.
But you did come out with more credit than the CE.
Thanks for providing the counterbalance to Wheless, a worthy effort.
cheers yalla

I'm glad that you got something out of it. The process of going through someone else's book checking if they have misquoted something is a bit morose for me as a rule. I only came to it quite by accident.

I work as a freelance, and was on the last week of a contract with nothing actually to do (waiting for calls which didn't come), and no-one to report to. In sheer boredom I was surfing the net when I came across Wheless' intro, and wondered idly what the real context of one of his quotes was.

I knew a lot of the stuff is online, so I went and looked; and was annoyed to find that he had chopped his quote just before an explicit denial to the view that he was trying to attribute to the author. That opened my eyes.

I had nothing else to do, so I did more; and more. And so I ended up with that collection of quotes and assessments.

Fortunately people (probably in perfect innocence) do not these days quote Wheless as an authority on the fathers so much as they did in those days.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

post tenebras lux · 05-29-2006, 09:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huon

In the late 1960s Küng became the first major Roman Catholic theologian to reject the doctrine of papal infallibility. Consequently, on december 18,1979, he was stripped of his license to teach as a Roman Catholic theologian but carried on teaching as a tenured professor of ecumenical theology at the University of Tübingen until his retirement (Emeritierung) in 1996. To this day he remains a persistent critic of papal authority, which he claims is man-made (and thus reversible) rather than instituted by God. He was not excommunicated and remains a Roman Catholic priest.

[nitpick]
Well apart from the 'Old Catholics' who split with Rome in the 1870s precisely due to the First Vatican Council's dogma on Papal Infallibility.
[/nitpick]

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.