Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: magisterium
If it is no longer valid, what would it hurt to say we have rescinded the teaching?

Other "doctrines" have been tossed out, why is that still on the books?
163 posted on 10/06/2005 7:04:16 AM PDT by Gamecock (Crystal meth is not a fruit of the Spirit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies ]


To: Gamecock

What would be the need? Anyone sufficiently interested in feeling persecuted by the Catholic Church to dig-up the verbiage of a 440-year-old Ecumenical Council can certainly dig-up more modern slants on the same themes.

There have been 21 Ecumenical Councils in Church history. Every one of them has disciplinary canons that have been superseded once, twice or more. The only aspects of these councils that the Church considers infallible involve doctrine. The doctrines cited in the canons you bring-up are infallible. Those doctrines are still in force. But the canons you cite, while mentioning a doctrinal point in each, are actually disciplinary, since their whole purpose is to anathematize. But those circumstances active in 1563 no longer apply in the same way today. The Church does not rewrite history and edit Council documents. The Church's teaching is clear enough through subsequent pronouncements that revisionist history is not needed.


165 posted on 10/06/2005 7:17:34 AM PDT by magisterium
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson