Freethought & Rationalism Archive

sotto voce · 05-16-2012, 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer

Quote:

Originally Posted by sotto voce

If Herr Ratzinger is the Vicar of Christ, to reject him as such is to reject Christ. Either Catholics are Christians, and no others can make the claim, or Catholics are the most deluded people on earth.

Either that

:angry:

Read.

Tom Sawyer · 05-16-2012, 11:45 AM

I did read. You didn't really say anything.

Ratzinger is not the Vicar of Christ. He's someone whom some people believe is the Vicar of Christ and who believe that one cannot reject without rejecting Christ. Their beliefs about this issue aren't really all that relevant to anyone who's not them and they don't have any position to speak on behalf of anyone who's not in their group. Some other people who aren't them can very easily go and accept Christ while thinking that the Pope is Satan and that can be completely irrelevant to anything that Catholics think.

Christianity doesn't have any single person or group that gets to make a definitive call about what's part of it. Each sect of it can go around saying that they're the only Real Christians and everyone else is wrong (and at least a few of them do), but none of them are speaking for Christians as a whole, so they don't actually have the authority to make that call.

AdamWho · 05-16-2012, 11:48 AM

Is this really just a thread about 'stomping my feet because people are not paying enough attention to me?' Really?

People who post quality posts get attention.

... and people who post incomprehensible nonsense also get some attention too....

sotto voce · 05-16-2012, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer

I did read.

In that case, there is nothing to be said here.

Tom Sawyer · 05-16-2012, 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sotto voce

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer

I did read.

In that case, there is nothing to be said here.

OK, but I get the last word.

tanya · 05-16-2012, 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

catholic is a term used by all christians from before the time of luther.

This is a nonsensical sentence....

What do you imagine the earliest folks would have thought of such a notion...

I refer here to the Nazarenes, and Ebionists, for example. I cannot imagine such folks finding harmony with your concept....

sotto voce · 05-16-2012, 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

catholic is a term used by all christians from before the time of luther.

And after. Anglicans and Baptists call themselves catholic. But not Catholic.

Posters who don't capitalise appropriately could be regarded as under-educated or suspicious interlopers.

Take your pick.

stephan huller · 05-16-2012, 12:41 PM

Tanya

The question becomes what term should be used to distinguish people like Irenaeus from the heretics? I have a problem with orthodox because I think the heretics likely thought themselves 'orthodox' but not necessarily 'catholic.' Clement uses orthodox a number of times. I can't think of an example where he describes himself as catholic off hand

la70119 · 05-16-2012, 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sotto voce

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

Only the Catholics held that Jesus was a man and that he was actually crucified it seems.

Interesting you grinned at stephan huller. For when the Catholics (and the Protestants, the Orthodox, the Coptics, the Syriacs and all the rest that call themselves and each other Christians) say that Jesus was a man, they do not mean he was an ordinary man. rather, he was a Child of a Ghost, who, in their and your own terms, "put on flesh," beginning as a blastocyst.

andrewcriddle · 05-16-2012, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

Tanya

The question becomes what term should be used to distinguish people like Irenaeus from the heretics? I have a problem with orthodox because I think the heretics likely thought themselves 'orthodox' but not necessarily 'catholic.' Clement uses orthodox a number of times. I can't think of an example where he describes himself as catholic off hand

Stromateis book 7

Quote:

Those, then, that adhere to impious words, and dictate them to others, inasmuch as they do not make a right but a perverse use of the divine words, neither themselves enter into the kingdom of heaven, nor permit those whom they have deluded to attain the truth. But not having the key of entrance, but a false (and as the common phrase expresses it), a counterfeit key (ἀντικλεῖς), by which they do not enter in as we enter in, through the tradition of the Lord, by drawing aside the curtain; but bursting through the side-door, and digging clandestinely through the wall of the Church, and stepping over the truth, they constitute themselves the Mystagogues of the soul of the impious.

For that the human assemblies which they held were posterior to the Catholic Church requires not many words to show.

.................................................. ............

Therefore in substance and idea, in origin, in pre-eminence, we say that the ancient and Catholic Church is alone, collecting as it does into the unity of the one faith— which results from the peculiar Testaments, or rather the one Testament in different times by the will of the one God, through one Lord— those already ordained, whom God predestinated, knowing before the foundation of the world that they would be righteous.

Andrew Criddle

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

05-16-2012, 11:45 AM	#22
Tom Sawyer Talk Freethought Staff Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Toronto, eh Posts: 42,293	I did read. You didn't really say anything. Ratzinger is not the Vicar of Christ. He's someone whom some people believe is the Vicar of Christ and who believe that one cannot reject without rejecting Christ. Their beliefs about this issue aren't really all that relevant to anyone who's not them and they don't have any position to speak on behalf of anyone who's not in their group. Some other people who aren't them can very easily go and accept Christ while thinking that the Pope is Satan and that can be completely irrelevant to anything that Catholics think. Christianity doesn't have any single person or group that gets to make a definitive call about what's part of it. Each sect of it can go around saying that they're the only Real Christians and everyone else is wrong (and at least a few of them do), but none of them are speaking for Christians as a whole, so they don't actually have the authority to make that call.

05-16-2012, 11:48 AM	#23
AdamWho Contributor Join Date: May 2001 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 13,389	Is this really just a thread about 'stomping my feet because people are not paying enough attention to me?' Really? People who post quality posts get attention. ... and people who post incomprehensible nonsense also get some attention too....

05-16-2012, 12:41 PM	#28
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Tanya The question becomes what term should be used to distinguish people like Irenaeus from the heretics? I have a problem with orthodox because I think the heretics likely thought themselves 'orthodox' but not necessarily 'catholic.' Clement uses orthodox a number of times. I can't think of an example where he describes himself as catholic off hand

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.