Freethought & Rationalism Archive

UberLutheran · 07-04-2006, 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apologist

That said, Unam Sanctum is an infallible bull, and cannot be disregarded. Pope Boniface demands that the temporal authority be subject to the ecclessial.

I wouldn't say it's an infallible bull: I'd just say it's bull.

Pope Boniface lived and died six centuries ago. The rest of us have gone about our lives since then. I suggest you might want to do the same.

Apologist · 07-04-2006, 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Revolutionary

I suppose my comments on infallibilty will remain unchallenged.

Your comments on infallibility are irrelevent in the context of a Catholic discussion.

Apologist · 07-04-2006, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UberLutheran

I wouldn't say it's an infallible bull: I'd just say it's bull.

Pope Boniface lived and died six centuries ago. The rest of us have gone about our lives since then. I suggest you might want to do the same.

You aren't a Catholic. In the context of the Catholic faith, what he said cannot be disregarded.

rigorist · 07-04-2006, 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apologist

What doctrine have I rejected? Give me Catechism excerpts.

¶¶ 1930, 1934, 1938, for starters.

¶ 1930 seems to completely contradict your fascist theory of the rights of Man.

If you cannot assent to this:

Respect for the human person entails respect for the rights that flow from his dignity as a creature. These rights are prior to society and must be recognized by it. They are the basis of the moral legitimacy of every authority: by flouting them, or refusing to recognize them in its positive legislation, a society undermines its own moral legitimacy.

you are not in communion with the Bishop of Rome.

You have been advocating a system of government that empirically does not justify itself upon respect for the rights of all human persons. Ergo, you are advocating a system condemned by the Church.

David B · 07-04-2006, 10:33 AM

So, what makes you think that there is a god, Apologist?

And, if the answer is the teachings of the catholic church, what makes you think that they are reliable?

David B

Apologist · 07-04-2006, 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rigorist

¶¶ 1930, 1934, 1938, for starters.

¶ 1930 seems to completely contradict your fascist theory of the rights of Man.

If you cannot assent to this:

Respect for the human person entails respect for the rights that flow from his dignity as a creature. These rights are prior to society and must be recognized by it. They are the basis of the moral legitimacy of every authority: by flouting them, or refusing to recognize them in its positive legislation, a society undermines its own moral legitimacy.

Fascism does not intrinsically "flout or refuse to recognize" the intrinsic rights of a human person.

rigorist · 07-04-2006, 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apologist

Your comments on infallibility are irrelevent in the context of a Catholic discussion.

*shnort*

The concept of infallibility is an interesting construct. Have you reviewed Hans Küng's analysis?

Apologist · 07-04-2006, 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David B

So, what makes you think that there is a god, Apologist?

Reason alone can bring the conclusion of a good, infinate, all existing, immutable, eternal, Monotheistic, all knowing, loving, all powerful God.

rigorist · 07-04-2006, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apologist

Fascism does not intrinsically "flout or refuse to recognize" the intrinsic rights of a human person.

You have previously made the following statements, calling them "More or less, that is my political ideaology."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apologist

Fascism is a military dictatorship based on ideaology. The person in charge (The leader of the Fascist Party) is the one who has absolute control over the military, and therefore absolute control over his nation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apologist

Rather than the social standard being set by the People (As in a Democracy), it is set by traditional social standards as enforced by Il Duce. (Preferably, Catholicism)

This is fundamentally incompatible with this

Quote:

Originally Posted by Catechism of the Catholic Church

Respect for the human person entails respect for the rights that flow from his dignity as a creature. These rights are prior to society and must be recognized by it.

See that? According to the Church, the rights of the individual are prior to society. You are advocating the exact opposite--that the rights of the individual are dependent upon the State.

You are in schism, I am afraid.

rigorist · 07-04-2006, 10:45 AM

I'm trying to think of a joke that begins this way:

"So a Catholic, a Lutheran, and a Quaker meet a Fascist on the Internet . . . ."

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

07-04-2006, 10:33 AM	#95
David B Contributor Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Wales Posts: 11,620	So, what makes you think that there is a god, Apologist? And, if the answer is the teachings of the catholic church, what makes you think that they are reliable? David B

07-04-2006, 10:45 AM	#100
rigorist Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: The Court of the Weirdo King Posts: 8,818	I'm trying to think of a joke that begins this way: "So a Catholic, a Lutheran, and a Quaker meet a Fascist on the Internet . . . ."

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.