To: saradippity; PapaBear3625
The Patriarch was speaking for himself. He can’t speak for The Church as a whole, that only the Pope can do — and even then it would be a solemn pronouncement. So, yeah, PapaBear is correct that he knows that the Patriarch was speaking for himself.
59 posted on
03/22/2012 2:49:21 AM PDT by
Cronos
(Party like it's 12 20, 2012)
To: Cronos; Petronius
I am not interested in a nitpicky back and forth;however,neither you,nor Papa Bear,nor I know whether the Patriarch was speaking in accord with a known magisterial teaching which then of course would be in sync with the Pope regards the position on the Church v. Israel. I think he was but can't be positive.
Again,read Petronius's explanation of Church teaching on the post I pointed out in my last response to you.
To: Cronos; Petronius
I am not interested in a nitpicky back and forth;however,neither you,nor Papa Bear,nor I know whether the Patriarch was speaking in accord with a known magisterial teaching which then of course would be in sync with the Pope regards the position on the Church v. Israel. I think he was but can't be positive.
Again,read Petronius's explanation of Church teaching on the post I pointed out in my last response to you.
To: Cronos; Petronius
I am not interested in a nitpicky back and forth;however,neither you,nor Papa Bear,nor I know whether the Patriarch was speaking in accord with a known magisterial teaching which then of course would be in sync with the Pope regards the position on the Church v. Israel. I think he was but can't be positive.
Again,read Petronius's explanation of Church teaching on the post I pointed out in my last response to you.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson