But there is nothing in Shi'a doctrine saying that you are the Imam
There is nothing in Catholic doctrine that says you are the Pope. One just gets selected (by whatever criteria a Pope is selected.) Then, his title comes with infallibility.
Seems like the same method for an Imam in the Shi'a doctrine. They are waiting for the 12th one to show up, and, by whatever criteria is used, it will then be determined if you are the 12th Imam. Which, in the case of Khomeini, it was. Then, his title comes with infallibility.
Not that anyone has to believe that crap though, that I agree with.
Oh, that was your point?
What a strange way you have of making it.
Yes, well, Rahvin got my point just fine, back when I was still making that point. Then you jumped in and said Shi'a Imams aren't considered infallible, and here we are. You have since conceded that they are, so
quote:For a teaching by a pope or ecumenical council to be recognized as infallible, the teaching must make it clear that the Church is to consider it definitive and binding. There is not any specific phrasing required for this, but it is usually indicated by one or both of the following:
a verbal formula indicating that this teaching is definitive (such as "We declare, decree and define..."), or
an accompanying anathema stating that anyone who deliberately dissents is outside the Catholic Church.
For example, in 1950, with Munificentissimus Deus, Pope Pius XII's infallible definition regarding the Assumption of Mary, there are attached these words:
Hence if anyone, which God forbid, should dare willfully to deny or to call into doubt that which We have defined, let him know that he has fallen away completely from the divine and Catholic Faith.
Pop quiz: When was the last time those circumstances happened?
Pop quiz: When was the last time those circumstances happened?
Not counting canonizations, about which there is a controversy, it was John Paul II in 1994, Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, reserving the office of the priesthood to men. I was unaware of this one until researching, as it's an exception to the "extraordinary magisteria" rule which confirms teachings ex cathedra. The last unarguable instance of which I had been aware was 1950, Pius XII, on the Assumption of Mary.
There is nothing in Catholic doctrine that says you are the Pope.
But there is, of coursse, something in Catholic doctrine that says that someone is the Pope.
Yes, well, Rahvin got my point just fine, back when I was still making that point. Then you jumped in and said Shi'a Imams aren't considered infallible, and here we are. You have since conceded that they are, so ...
Y'know, if you're going to misrepresent my posts you could be way more creative.
No, it was finished as that. You are wrong to claim that "Catholicism says that the Pope is infallible". Its more correct that he can be infallible, under certain specific circumstances.
Only when he is in his "chair" as you said. But that means when he is in the official "Pope" position.
I was refering to Ex Cathedra. Its one of the those specifc circumstances:
quote:infallibility is not attributed to every doctrinal act of the pope, but only to his ex cathedra teaching; and the conditions required for ex cathedra teaching are mentioned in the Vatican decree:
The pontiff must teach in his public and official capacity as pastor and doctor of all Christians, not merely in his private capacity as a theologian, preacher or allocutionist, nor in his capacity as a temporal prince or as a mere ordinary of the Diocese of Rome. It must be clear that he speaks as spiritual head of the Church universal.
Then it is only when, in this capacity, he teaches some doctrine of faith or morals that he is infallible (see below, IV).
Further it must be sufficiently evident that he intends to teach with all the fullness and finality of his supreme Apostolic authority, in other words that he wishes to determine some point of doctrine in an absolutely final and irrevocable way, or to define it in the technical sense (see DEFINITION). These are well-recognized formulas by means of which the defining intention may be manifested.
Finally for an ex cathedra decision it must be clear that the pope intends to bind the whole Church. To demand internal assent from all the faithful to his teaching under pain of incurring spiritual shipwreck (naufragium fidei) according to the expression used by Pius IX in defining the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin. Theoretically, this intention might be made sufficiently clear in a papal decision which is addressed only to a particular Church; but in present day conditions, when it is so easy to communicate with the most distant parts of the earth and to secure a literally universal promulgation of papal acts, the presumption is that unless the pope formally addresses the whole Church in the recognized official way, he does not intend his doctrinal teaching to be held by all the faithful as ex cathedra and infallible. sauce
Pop quiz: When was the last time those circumstances happened?
When he said you were ghey.
No homo?
Your source has the instances of papal infallibility:
quote:
"Tome to Flavian", Pope Leo I, 449, on the two natures in Christ, received by the Council of Chalcedon;
Letter of Pope Agatho, 680, on the two wills of Christ, received by the Third Council of Constantinople;
Benedictus Deus, Pope Benedict XII, 1336, on the beatific vision of the just prior to final judgment;
Cum occasione, Pope Innocent X, 1653, condemning five propositions of Jansen as heretical;
Auctorem fidei, Pope Pius VI, 1794, condemning seven Jansenist propositions of the Synod of Pistoia as heretical;
Ineffabilis Deus, Pope Pius IX, 1854, defining the Immaculate Conception;
Munificentissimus Deus, Pope Pius XII, 1950, defining the Assumption of Mary.
So, really, the Pope is only infallible about 0.00001% of the time.
The ONLY religion where true, infallible authority is found (currently, and ignoring Catholicism for this example) is in the Muslim faith. These infallible men DO define what Islam believes. They CAN make new laws. They DO have actual, unquestionable authority over Islamic doctrine and interpretation.
So...
If Obama comes out and says the US hates Muslims, that cares absolutely no weight. In fact, he would be fired as president. His opinion would have no bearing on US politics.
If a Christian minister came out and said that Christianity does not accept homosexuals, that does NOT mean Christianity as a whole does not accept homosexuals. The minister's opinion would be just that, his opinion, and would have no bearing on Christianity itself.
However... If an Imam says women are not allowed to show their face in public, that DOES mean it is Islamic law that women should not show their faces in public. The Imam's interpretation of scripture would have bearing on the Muslim faith since the Imam is infallible and their word is like that of Allah.
In these three cases, only one has real authority. So it does matter which religion we are discussing. And when those Imam's call for violence as a resolution, it is like the word of Allah, and as such, it can be said that Islam is a religion that currently promotes violence as a resolution.
The reason this is not said for any other religion is because no other religion has infallible, authoritative rule.
I think you do have a decent point here, and it actually is on topic unlike me correcting you on Catholic dogma.
You are wrong to claim that "Catholicism says that the Pope is infallible". Its more correct that he can be infallible, under certain specific circumstances.
Ah ok, cool. Correction noted.
But reading the ex cathedra, the church places the decision on the Pope as to when he decides to be infallible.
So, really, the Pope is only infallible about 0.00001% of the time.
The Pope's have only decided to be infallible about 0.00001% of the time.
No, it was finished as that. You are wrong to claim that "Catholicism says that the Pope is infallible". Its more correct that he can be infallible, under certain specific circumstances.
A, so he is basically like me infallible when im right and not infallible when im wrong .
Pop quiz: When was the last time those circumstances happened?
Pope Pius the XII 1950. It has been 60 years since a pope was infalliable.
its hilarious to listen to people who think they know what they are taking about when it come to the pope, cause most of the time, like this issue they are clueless.
I have stopped explaining infalliability, if someone want to be an idiot I just laugh and let them.
Pop quiz: When was the last time those circumstances happened?
Pope Pius the XII 1950. It has been 60 years since a pope was infalliable.
Not technically correct. According to wiki, Pope John Paull II was infallible in 1994 when he deemed that only men could be priest. This was not ex cathedra, but was considered infallible anyways.
quote:For modern-day Church documents, there is no need for speculation as to which are officially ex cathedra, because the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith can be consulted directly on this question. For example, after Pope John Paul II's apostolic letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis (On Reserving Priestly Ordination to Men Alone) was released in 1994, a few commentators speculated that this might be an exercise of papal infallibility. In response to this confusion, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has unambiguously stated, on at least three separate occasions, that Ordinatio Sacerdotalis although not an ex cathedra teaching (i.e., although not a teaching of the extraordinary magisterium), is indeed infallible, clarifying that the content of this letter has been taught infallibly by the ordinary and universal magisterium. SOURCE
many if not most Muslims are as ignorant of the actual history of their religion as most Christians.
But the problem is NOT Islam or Christianity, it is the ignorance of the people that allows the leaders to use quote mined passages.
I would think that for either "side" having a good public relations strategy is important. Whats on my mind right now is that tragic helicopter attack in Afghanistan that killed many of the U.S. special forces. It seemed to be bad P.R. for the Taliban.
™ Version 4.0 Beta
(1)
(1)
