(July 25, 2014 at 4:32 pm)Ben Davis Wrote:

(July 25, 2014 at 2:55 pm)Purplundy Wrote: Actually, it's the bishops who independently cover them up, not the pope himself.
But let's say that Pope Francis was personally responsible for the legal protection of every priest on the face of the earth. Papal infallibility, as a Church doctrine and not a set of two words, doesn't mean that the pope can't make mistakes. He can say and do a lot of stuff, like allow the ordination of future child rapists, but very rarely does the Catholic Church take some of it and say, "This is right." Twice in its history, actually.
And, considering that absolutely none of his actions, let alone his words, let alone official Church teaching, indicates that child rape is morally acceptable, except that he's afraid to take it on, his infallibility is nowhere close to coming into play.

...and you're either missing the point. In principle, the Cardinals are selected infallibly by the Pope who, in turn, infallibly select the bishops and so on. The processes & actions of the church are a reflection of Papal infallibility . If the hierarchy can fail, in process or action, the Pope is fallible. Consequently, to protect the concept, the entire foundation upon which the authority of the church rests, any failures mut be covered up. Whether the church officially endorses failures or not is beside the point. The bare existence of failures negates the possibility of Papal infallibility.

In reality, we see that infallibility is a joke. It's a despicable and insulting motive for the act of covering up child-molestation.

I know I'm going to wear out this phrase, but quoted for truth.

(July 25, 2014 at 3:59 pm)Purplundy Wrote:

(July 25, 2014 at 3:47 pm)StealthySkeptic Wrote: Such as for instance Jesus saying that his followers couldn't take time to bury their dead parents?

That was probably more of a Jesus short story (it was pretty short), and would be an interesting policy for the Church to adopt.
So far as this guy in the tale didn't have ailing family to take care of, it's not as if he would have hurt anybody by leaving rotting corpses in their deathbeds. I'd charge the Son of God with perhaps being insensitive. The man who came to Jesus was there for his parents when they died, wasn't he? Besides, the story's probably been mythicized. Was this guy so unlucky that both of his parents died at the same time?
Of course, this is not addressed to anyone with actual deceased family members.

A Jesus story mythicized? Say it ain't so.

Another way to look at this is that it didn't matter that the parents were buried because Jesus said he would be right back. A fact of scripture that modern Christians must ignore to keep their fantasy alive.

(July 25, 2014 at 4:36 pm)Cato Wrote:

(July 25, 2014 at 3:59 pm)Purplundy Wrote: That was probably more of a Jesus short story (it was pretty short), and would be an interesting policy for the Church to adopt.
So far as this guy in the tale didn't have ailing family to take care of, it's not as if he would have hurt anybody by leaving rotting corpses in their deathbeds. I'd charge the Son of God with perhaps being insensitive. The man who came to Jesus was there for his parents when they died, wasn't he? Besides, the story's probably been mythicized. Was this guy so unlucky that both of his parents died at the same time?
Of course, this is not addressed to anyone with actual deceased family members.

A Jesus story mythicized? Say it ain't so.

Another way to look at this is that it didn't matter that the parents were buried because Jesus said he would be right back. A fact of scripture that modern Christians must ignore to keep their fantasy alive.

Matthew 24:34: Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.

What, is one of the apostles still among us and just really, really, REEEEEALLY old? #2000isthenew60

(July 25, 2014 at 4:32 pm)Ben Davis Wrote: In principle, the Cardinals are selected infallibly by the Pope who, in turn, infallibly select the bishops and so on.

No, they're not. That is exactly what the Catholic Church doesn't teach. But if you want to hold that ground, you'll have to come up with some proof.

Quote:If the hierarchy can fail, in process or action, the Pope is fallible.

Yeah, he is. Sometimes, he forgets his car keys. But the Catholic Church holds that its teaching (what is written down in the Catechism) is infallible, so when the Pope decides to add something to that, he is infallible. And that doesn't happen often.

(July 25, 2014 at 5:46 pm)Purplundy Wrote:

(July 25, 2014 at 4:32 pm)Ben Davis Wrote: In principle, the Cardinals are selected infallibly by the Pope who, in turn, infallibly select the bishops and so on.

No, they're not. That is exactly what the Catholic Church doesn't teach. But if you want to hold that ground, you'll have to come up with some proof.

Quote:If the hierarchy can fail, in process or action, the Pope is fallible.

Yeah, he is. Sometimes, he forgets his car keys. But the Catholic Church holds that its teaching (what is written down in the Catechism) is infallible, so when the Pope decides to add something to that, he is infallible. And that doesn't happen often.

From what evidence, though, can you say that the Catholic Church's teaching is infallible? The hierarchy? And why is the hierarchy infallible? Because of Catholic teaching (by this I include the Bible) saying so? Around and around it goes...

(July 25, 2014 at 4:43 pm)StealthySkeptic Wrote: Matthew 24:34: Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.

Jesus was talking about his Resurrection and the destruction of the Jewish Temple in 70 AD, not Obama being the Antichrist and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Admittedly, Matthew wrote this down AFTER those things had happened to comfort Jewish Christians, so I don't hold that passage up as some sort of prophecy. But I can't prove that Jesus didn't say it, either.

---

(July 25, 2014 at 5:51 pm)StealthySkeptic Wrote: From what evidence, though, can you say that the Catholic Church's teaching is infallible?

I was just saying that that is what it teaches. The Catholic Church endorses itself as infallible. Yeah, yeah, yeah, circular logic.
However, the Catholic Church isn't a warehouse of cold hard facts. It just teaches people what they should do to live a moral life. And since "love thy neighbor" is completely out of the realm of science or logic, a subject that the Church does not make claims about, the Church hasn't said anything factually untrue, nor has it said anything factually true.

(July 25, 2014 at 5:55 pm)Purplundy Wrote:

(July 25, 2014 at 4:43 pm)StealthySkeptic Wrote: Matthew 24:34: Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.

Jesus was talking about his Resurrection and the destruction of the Jewish Temple in 70 AD, not Obama being the Antichrist and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Admittedly, Matthew wrote this down AFTER those things had happened to comfort Jewish Christians, so I don't hold that passage up as some sort of prophecy. But I can't prove that Jesus didn't say it, either.

---

(July 25, 2014 at 5:51 pm)StealthySkeptic Wrote: From what evidence, though, can you say that the Catholic Church's teaching is infallible?

I was just saying that that is what it teaches. The Catholic Church endorses itself as infallible. Yeah, yeah, yeah, circular logic.
However, the Catholic Church isn't a warehouse of cold hard facts. It just teaches people what they should do to live a moral life. And since "love thy neighbor" is completely out of the realm of science or logic, a subject that the Church does not make claims about, the Church hasn't said anything factually untrue, nor has it said anything factually true.

*Cough* Galileo *Cough*

*Cough* Everything to do with the Virgin Mary *Cough*

*Cough* Implausibility of the Resurrection *Cough*

I could go on...

(July 25, 2014 at 4:19 pm)Purplundy Wrote: Well, actually, I hold fast to the notion that, as far as the Gospel accounts go, Jesus was infallible, in the literal sense of the term.
With the dude with the dead parents, I can't peg Jesus with doing something wrong. There's just too little information.

Matthew 10:34-35

34 "Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword."
35 "For I came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law."

Luke 12:51-52

51 "Do you suppose that I came to grant peace on earth? I tell you, no, but rather division."
52 "For from now on five members in one household will be divided, three against two and two against three"

Sounds like a fallible human being said these things.

(July 25, 2014 at 6:24 pm)Godslayer Wrote:

(July 25, 2014 at 4:19 pm)Purplundy Wrote: Well, actually, I hold fast to the notion that, as far as the Gospel accounts go, Jesus was infallible, in the literal sense of the term.
With the dude with the dead parents, I can't peg Jesus with doing something wrong. There's just too little information.

Matthew 10:34-35

34 "Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword."
35 "For I came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law."

Luke 12:51-52

51 "Do you suppose that I came to grant peace on earth? I tell you, no, but rather division."
52 "For from now on five members in one household will be divided, three against two and two against three"

Sounds like a fallible human being said these things.

I can't believe I forgot about that goodness.

(July 25, 2014 at 5:46 pm)Purplundy Wrote: No, they're not. That is exactly what the Catholic Church doesn't teach. But if you want to hold that ground, you'll have to come up with some proof.

No problem. Check the Code of Canon Law for yourself (330 - 367)

The Pope's selection of Cardinals is covered by Papal infallibility otherwise the Cardinals couldn't be empowered to select the Pope. If the Cardinals are infallible by proxy (the only logical interpretation of the Canon), so is their selection of Bishops which makes Bishops infallible by proxy and so on. The College of Cardinals official line is that they hold no Power of the Holy Orders (the phrase representing Papal infallibility) but that's an obvious contradiction.

Quote:Yeah, he is. Sometimes, he forgets his car keys. But the Catholic Church holds that its teaching (what is written down in the Catechism) is infallible, so when the Pope decides to add something to that, he is infallible. And that doesn't happen often.

Like when the articles of faith regarding unbaptised babies & Limbo were retracted.