Replies

This is a cereal which Catholics eat in like manner.

Actually, historically those who held to SS overall did not reject any all tradition, history, commentary, and rules of exegesis, etc. in making informed exegesis and providing parameters, but recognized that only Scripture is assuredly infallible and supreme. And while RCs hold that their magisterium is assuredly infallible and supreme, they lack an infallible interpreter of it, and engage in much personal interpretation, even though they also have some basic parameters (which is also subject to interpretation), as they

1. make their own personal interpretation of information in seeking warrant to submit to Rome, and which itself is a fallible human decision.

2. they often must make their own personal interpretation of what parts of larger proclamations fulfills the criteria for infallible pronouncements, judging btwn opinions, and it is undecided on how many there are.

3. they often make their own personal interpretation of what such fully means, judging between varying interpretations by non-infallible interpreters of the supreme magisterium.

4 they even more so often make their own personal interpretation of what scripture means, even if it means differing with their compatriots, as long as it supports Rome, and must judge whether it does or not.

5. likewise, having personally judged what class teachings fall into, and what exactly is an official teaching, they must personally judge how much they can differ with non-fallible teachings of the Ordinary magisterium,, which is held to constitute the majority of what RCS believe and practice.

6. they must also engage in personal interpretation in the many things which Rome has not taught on.

7 finally, RCs can engage in personal interpretation which most apparently extends beyond what may be allowed, without any real or consistent censure from Rome, and even defense from interpretive bishops against such*, as our liberal RC politicians regularly have shown.

Thus despite its much vaunted assuredly infallible magisterium, relative little is thus infallibly defined, and Catholics have need of much use of fallible human reasoning (which they condemn Protestants for) in deciding what class things are in and what they mean, etc., and can and do disagree extensively with each other, even among those of the magisterium.

I should be back tomorrow God willing.

*"...there's a question about whether this canon'' – the relevant church law – "was ever intended to be used'' to bring politicians to heel. He thinks not. "I stand with the great majority of American bishops and bishops around the world in saying this canon was never intended to be used this way.'' -- from the thread [Archbishop] Wuerl: Why I Won't Deny Pelosi Communion

Albany Bishop Howard Hubbard says it is "unfair and imprudent" to conclude that Gov. Andrew Cuomo and his girlfriend, Sandra Lee, shouldn't receive Communion simply because they're living together. -- from the thread Bishop: None of your business (Hubbard rejects Catholic expert's criticism of Gov. Cuomo)

[Archbishop Timothy Dolan] also does not outright deny the sacrament to dissenting Catholic lawmakers, yet he is seen as an outspoken defender of church orthodoxy in a style favored by many theological conservatives.
-- from the thread US bishops elect NYC archbishop as head in upset (Catholic bloggers blamed) http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2711746/posts?page=289#289