[Pyro7480]

LOL! You’re shameless. The key word in that is “authentic magisterium.” Moral theologians have long stated that even the clerics don’t have absolute authority. They are bound to perennial teachings of the Catholic faith. If the bishops teach something contrary to this, they are not to be followed. Even St. Paul says in Galatians, “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema.”

[adiaireton8]

The key word in that is “authentic magisterium.”

I would hope that for you JPII counts as "authentic magisterium".

-A8

[armydoc]

LOL! You’re shameless. The key word in that is “authentic magisterium.” Moral theologians have long stated that even the clerics don’t have absolute authority. They are bound to perennial teachings of the Catholic faith. If the bishops teach something contrary to this, they are not to be followed. Even St. Paul says in Galatians, “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema.”

If I can remind you, your initial point is that you didn't have to agree with a non-dogmatic papal statement. The reference I provided from V2 refutes that. Nice argument shift, by the way!

Let's address your new argument- if a Bishop's or Pope's teaching is not part of the "authentic magisterium", then you don't have to agree with it. And who gets to decide if that is the case? YOU, of course! You know better than Popes and Councils. You supercede the CCC. And to think we prots are criticized for our "private interpretations". I propose a new term- YOPIOC. Your Own Personal Interpretation of Catholicism. The Cafeteria is open for business!