Is ninenot's assertion in post 276 true that the Catholic church regards Paul as a mere "trusted advisor" to Peter that Pope and that it logically follows that the New Testament (save for what Peter wrote, I suppose) is inferior to the authority of the Pope and the Magisterium?
I've read some bizarre things on this thread from both Catholics and Protestants, but this one takes the cake. Any thoughts on the article that inspired this whole thread?
Does my scriptural synopsis of the issue in post 182 cover things or am I just completely off base in assuming that they have anything to do with priestly celibacy?
What about the writings of Eusebius and Clement of Alexandria that I cited in post 226 . Do they accurately represent the belief of the church during the first few centuries of its existence?
I'm not having a lot of success on this thread in actually getting people to address facts, as you might notice. But apparently I am a very bad person....
You may pick off the uncatechized stragglers but we still bring in the Robert Borks, the Senator Brownbacks, the Lew Lehrmans, the Bernard Nathansons and a lot of other converts, famed and modest. Seminary training, in most American seminaries claiming Catholicism without evident cause means little or nothing in the credentialing of students who will exercise authority. They are cesspools of heterodoxy.
Your late and great Rev. Dr. Criswell of Dallas, though certainly reformed, was more of a Catholic in many ways than the half vast little army of anti-Catholic Catholics in anti-Catholic AmChurch who are forever seeking to undermine doctrine in favor of novelty for its own nefarious sake.
As I recall, Rev. Dr. Criswell was the truly brilliant and admirable teacher at Dallas Theological Seminary who said something to the effect that: "A church begins to die when its throat is grasped by the palsied hand of liberalism."
If he is still alive, the AmChurch "Catholic" Dallas "Pink Palace" Seminary which raised such AmChurch molestation exemplars as Fr. Rudy "Jailbird" Kos, now cosmetically defrocked in a vain attempt to protect the rest of the guilty, would do well to hear that principle of the Rev. Dr. Criswell from his own lips and, after he passes, from the lips of those of his faith thouroughly knowlegdable as to and loyal to the prudential principles of Rev. Dr. Criswell.
I might add that, if Sinkspur comes to your assistance, as you have requested, you will be in even more trouble with the Catholics at FR. He reliably posts articles from the various AmChurchian publications like the National "Catholic" Reporter, America and Commonweal. What he posts are reliably the speculations of the usual , aging and dying religious revolutionaries of yesteryear and their handful of youthful sycophants, each and every one praying to "God if there is a God" to send a "progressive" pope before it is too late and the revolution is entirely lost. Just a bit of whistling past their own graveyard, so to speak.
You should be familiar with his bishop: Bishop Joseph Delaney of Fort Worth who imported a lavender priest, his "old pal'", already thoroughly discredited in Rhode Island for buying a car for a teenaged boy and taking other teenaged boys on Caribbean vacations without other adults, to be, voila, the Fort Worth diocesan Boy Scout director. What else? Maybe next time, Fort Worth will get an actual Catholic and prudent bishop to restore the Faith in that sad diocese.
Itchy, restless "Catholic" liberals would find authority in a Mickey Mouse Comic book if it supportwed the trend du jour in opposition to Vatican authority.