(September 7, 2017 at 3:13 pm)Jehanne Wrote:

(September 7, 2017 at 3:02 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I am well aware that you are a former Catholic. And one that has proven time and time again to be very ignorant of your former faith. You should understand the differences between doctrines that are dogmatic and those that aren't, and the revisions of Vatican II. It's pretty basic stuff dude. Even the Poe who started this thread knew better than you.

Well, let's try another:

Quote:Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff. (Unam Sanctam, Pope Boniface VIII - November 18, 1302)

http://www.papalencyclicals.net/bon08/b8unam.htm

Still not convinced?  How about this one, from the Fifth Lateran Council in 1512:

Quote:Moreover, since subjection to the Roman pontiff is necessary for salvation for all Christ’s faithful, as we are taught by the testimony of both sacred scripture and the holy fathers, and as is declared by the constitution of pope Boniface VIII of happy memory, also our predecessor, which begins Unam sanctam, we therefore, with the approval of the present sacred council, for the salvation of the souls of the same faithful, for the supreme authority of the Roman pontiff and of this holy see, and for the unity and power of the church, his spouse, renew and give our approval to that constitution, but without prejudice to the declaration of pope Clement V of holy memory, which begins Meruit.

http://www.papalencyclicals.net/councils/ecum18.htm

Ignorant of the Catholic Faith???  Ignorant of words, that you are.

Lol, are you being serious? 

First you pulled something from the year 1442, and after explaining to you why/how that is no longer a position being held, you then pull from the years 1302 and 1512. I mean, what the ef? 

Again, you are continuing to completely ignore the differences between doctrines that are dogmatic and those that are not, as well as completely disregarding the revisions of Vatican II. You are claiming that the Church still holds a position that it simply does not. At first I'd say you were just ignorant. But after explaining to you and having you come back with the same bull shit, I'm now tempted to just say you're kinda dumb...

(September 7, 2017 at 3:58 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(September 7, 2017 at 3:13 pm)Jehanne Wrote: Well, let's try another:


http://www.papalencyclicals.net/bon08/b8unam.htm

Still not convinced?  How about this one, from the Fifth Lateran Council in 1512:


http://www.papalencyclicals.net/councils/ecum18.htm

Ignorant of the Catholic Faith???  Ignorant of words, that you are.

Lol, are you being serious? 

First you pulled something from the year 1442, and after explaining to you why/how that is no longer a position being held, you then pull from the years 1302 and 1512. I mean, what the ef? 

Again, you are continuing to completely ignore the differences between doctrines that are dogmatic and those that are not, as well as completely disregarding the revisions of Vatican II. You are claiming that the Church still holds a position that it simply does not. At first I'd say you were just ignorant. But after explaining to you and having you come back with the same bull shit, I'm now tempted to just say you're kinda dumb...

Well, I am in good company then!  This guy must have been a complete moron:

Quote:According to Wisdom 11:11, "By what things a man sinneth, by the same also he should be punished" [Vulgate: 'he is tormented']. Now a schismatic, as shown above (Article 1), commits a twofold sin: first by separating himself from communion with the members of the Church, and in this respect the fitting punishment for schismatics is that they be excommunicated. Secondly, they refuse submission to the head of the Church, wherefore, since they are unwilling to be controlled by the Church's spiritual power, it is just that they should be compelled by the secular power.  (Saint Thomas Aquinas Summa Theologica II II, 39, 4)

http://www.newadvent.org/summa/3039.htm

(September 7, 2017 at 5:01 pm)Jehanne Wrote:

(September 7, 2017 at 3:58 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: Lol, are you being serious? 

First you pulled something from the year 1442, and after explaining to you why/how that is no longer a position being held, you then pull from the years 1302 and 1512. I mean, what the ef? 

Again, you are continuing to completely ignore the differences between doctrines that are dogmatic and those that are not, as well as completely disregarding the revisions of Vatican II. You are claiming that the Church still holds a position that it simply does not. At first I'd say you were just ignorant. But after explaining to you and having you come back with the same bull shit, I'm now tempted to just say you're kinda dumb...

Well, I am in good company then!  This guy must have been a complete moron:

Quote:According to Wisdom 11:11, "By what things a man sinneth, by the same also he should be punished" [Vulgate: 'he is tormented']. Now a schismatic, as shown above (Article 1), commits a twofold sin: first by separating himself from communion with the members of the Church, and in this respect the fitting punishment for schismatics is that they be excommunicated. Secondly, they refuse submission to the head of the Church, wherefore, since they are unwilling to be controlled by the Church's spiritual power, it is just that they should be compelled by the secular power.  (Saint Thomas Aquinas Summa Theologica II II, 39, 4)

http://www.newadvent.org/summa/3039.htm

Oh good, something from the year 1200. You're getting warmer. 

(September 7, 2017 at 5:17 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(September 7, 2017 at 5:01 pm)Jehanne Wrote: Well, I am in good company then!  This guy must have been a complete moron:


http://www.newadvent.org/summa/3039.htm

Oh good, something from the year 1200. You're getting warmer. 

Hey, sounds good to me!  Let's toss it all out, from the crap in the 1st century all the way up until yesterday!!  It's all a bunch of fanciful bullshit, and if you want to live in your every-changing, every-morphing make-believe world, go right ahead!  You'll convince no one here, that's for sure.  I have much better things to do with my time and money than to waste it on a Marxist Pope who is probably an atheist anyway but who probably is molesting little boys on the side while trying to enhance his political power and standing in the World.  In the end, he's just another nonelected nut-job.

So, do the pagans murdered under the old policy, whenever it was, get an apology or something ?

The truth is, guys, Catholics love dead Jews. I mean I remember reading some Catholic newspapers and they made a whole show inside of trivia quiz where Anne Frank and Einstein were mentioned as worth knowing about. So if they want it, and is in their PR interest, Catholics will go out of their ways to defend dead Jews and even accept them into their make-belief place, even if it takes stepping over Jesus' commands. I mean they even have a dead Jew hanging on their walls, so you can't win this argument. But to have a rabbi write a column in Catholic newspapers now that's never gonna happen.