tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post2716045990133014470..comments2024-03-17T08:25:33.806+00:00Comments on Thoughts of Francis Turretin: The Perspicuity of the MagisteriumTurretinfanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01802277110253897379noreply@blogger.comBlogger17125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-54604233367144031052012-06-21T03:09:24.005+01:002012-06-21T03:09:24.005+01:00I had before me the other day just one of the ma...I had before me the other day just one of the many examples of the plethora of papal prolixity, an encyclical (QUADRAGESIMO ANNO, POPE PIUS Xl ,MAY 15, 1931) of over 20,000 words, with more than one paragraph of over 400 words, and at least one sentence of over 90 words, and which also abounds in punctuation.<br /><br />In addition are the pronouncements of the nearly 300 so-called popes PeaceByJesusnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-18146508407614151282011-06-18T02:10:02.801+01:002011-06-18T02:10:02.801+01:00hehhehTurretinfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01802277110253897379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-25227369034662495992011-06-18T02:05:45.021+01:002011-06-18T02:05:45.021+01:00Without ecclesiology, you cannot even technically ...<i>Without ecclesiology, you cannot even technically define 'schism'.</i><br /><br />That may be true, but it doesn't follow that ecclesiology is something over which to schism.Rhologyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14245825667079220242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-34181652351973566302011-06-18T00:03:28.075+01:002011-06-18T00:03:28.075+01:00"(1) Your claim that ecclesiology is a non-es..."(1) Your claim that ecclesiology is a non-essential. I just cannot imagine how you can say this, since in Protestantism there have been bitter disputes over ecclesiology among Protestants. Without ecclesiology, you cannot even technically define 'schism'."<br /><br />So what?<br /><br />"(2) You seemed to concede there is no way to tell if a given practice, in this case Turretinfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01802277110253897379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-79535825879791763002011-06-17T23:29:29.352+01:002011-06-17T23:29:29.352+01:00The only two issues of significance are these:
(...The only two issues of significance are these: <br /><br />(1) Your claim that ecclesiology is a non-essential. I just cannot imagine how you can say this, since in Protestantism there have been bitter disputes over ecclesiology among Protestants. Without ecclesiology, you cannot even technically define 'schism'. <br /><br /><br />(2) You seemed to concede there is no way to tell if a Nickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01453168437883536663noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-30183823972235274162011-06-17T21:15:31.563+01:002011-06-17T21:15:31.563+01:00Not every appeal to credentials is a fallacious ap...<i>Not every appeal to credentials is a fallacious appeal.</i><br /><br />Especially when it’s Rome herself that sets up the system where priestly credentials matter so much. As opposed to the priesthood of the believer doctrine. It’s as if Nick forgets that he’s Roman Catholic sometimes. Conveniently.Rhologyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14245825667079220242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-41638529536747691562011-06-17T20:12:46.538+01:002011-06-17T20:12:46.538+01:00"Improper ecclesiology will end up causing si..."Improper ecclesiology will end up causing significant errors down the line, yet you're claiming it's independent of preaching an orthodox gospel."<br /><br />You are claiming it will end up causing the errors. But, as I noted, the ECFs weren't papalist. So, if you are right about the importance of ecclesiology, it could explain why you are wrong on so many other things.<Turretinfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01802277110253897379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-68756155852092640252011-06-17T20:12:41.468+01:002011-06-17T20:12:41.468+01:00"I asked for some examples because I don'..."I asked for some examples because I don't believe 'conservative' Catholics play fast and loose with Church documents, especially not in an analogous way as liberals. To make the charge, it's only fair you have some solid examples in mind."<br /><br />I can understand your reason for asking, but hopefully you can also understand my reason for not providing examples (I Turretinfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01802277110253897379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-78497343747889804942011-06-17T19:03:38.102+01:002011-06-17T19:03:38.102+01:00A priest can be faithful or unfaithful to church t...<i>A priest can be faithful or unfaithful to church teaching; they are not automatically right in virtue of their office. You're well aware of how often liberal scholars push anti-Christian agendas simply on the basis they have credentials while their objectors do not. </i><br /><br />The problem is not that that's not true, but on what basis you tell us it's the case. <br />You tell Rhologyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14245825667079220242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-73716941244567479622011-06-17T18:52:49.811+01:002011-06-17T18:52:49.811+01:00Hi TF,
I asked for some examples because I don&#...Hi TF, <br /><br />I asked for some examples because I don't believe 'conservative' Catholics play fast and loose with Church documents, especially not in an analogous way as liberals. To make the charge, it's only fair you have some solid examples in mind. <br /><br />You said: "McBrien is a priest. I take it you are not. His credentials for orthodoxy are as good as "FrNickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01453168437883536663noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-82367568998526434322011-06-16T16:28:19.328+01:002011-06-16T16:28:19.328+01:00The CDF nor O.S. nor any document has to be infall...<i>The CDF nor O.S. nor any document has to be infallible to point out a certain doctrine is Dogma; the Catechism does it all the time.</i><br /><br />Fallibly.Rhologyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14245825667079220242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-30434623775586625272011-06-16T04:37:19.540+01:002011-06-16T04:37:19.540+01:00"Could you show me some examples 'conserv..."Could you show me some examples 'conservative' Catholics play that are equivalent to McBrien's liberalism twisting church doctrines?"<br /><br />What point exactly would that serve? So you could defend your pals? I'm sure McBrien wouldn't admit to your accusation any more than your pals would admit to his accusations.<br /><br />"(Note: I put the term Turretinfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01802277110253897379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-27495821699254112832011-06-16T02:14:35.333+01:002011-06-16T02:14:35.333+01:00Hi TF,
Could you show me some examples 'cons...Hi TF, <br /><br />Could you show me some examples 'conservative' Catholics play that are equivalent to McBrien's liberalism twisting church doctrines? (Note: I put the term conservative in quotes because such isn't accurate nomenclature for Catholicism: you're either orthodox Catholic or not) <br /><br />The CDF nor O.S. nor any document has to be infallible to point out a Nickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01453168437883536663noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-84285643169120022202011-06-15T17:58:22.771+01:002011-06-15T17:58:22.771+01:00"The Perspicuity of the Magisterium"
Th...<b>"The Perspicuity of the Magisterium"</b><br /><br />This title whetted my hunger to see what the post was about.<br /><br />Then I got to this part:<br /><br />"<b>§3. No doctrine is understood as defined infallibly unless this is manifestly evident.</b><br /><br /><i>This is the "death by a thousand qualifications" clause in terms of Roman dogma. Is there really Truth Unites... and Divideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08891402278361538353noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-66884289924738321862011-06-15T17:37:14.785+01:002011-06-15T17:37:14.785+01:00I noticed when reading the Scriptures that after e...I noticed when reading the Scriptures that after every command given by God<br />man began doing the opposite.<br /><br />This idea of liberalism among men about women is nothing new and here is where it began to be enacted by principalities and powers of spiritual wickedness in high places:<br /><br /><b>Gen 3:16 To the woman he said, "I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing; in Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-19266340753652897402011-06-15T14:11:31.345+01:002011-06-15T14:11:31.345+01:00"Richard McBrien is a notorious liberal and t..."Richard McBrien is a notorious liberal and thus would try to twist or make any hole he could to push a liberal agenda - the very type of individual you point out in your concluding paragraph."<br /><br />Yes. He plays the same political games within his church that the conservatives play, only from the other side.<br /><br />"The point is: O.S. didn't need to be formally Turretinfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01802277110253897379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-81846788604383302132011-06-15T03:35:50.902+01:002011-06-15T03:35:50.902+01:00Richard McBrien is a notorious liberal and thus wo...Richard McBrien is a notorious liberal and thus would try to twist or make any hole he could to push a liberal agenda - the very type of individual you point out in your concluding paragraph. <br /><br />The point is: O.S. didn't need to be formally defining a dogma, though it was reiterating dogma; the CDF pointed out it is dogma in virtue of the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium.<br /><br Nickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01453168437883536663noreply@blogger.com