[fortes fortuna juvat]

Daniel1212, everything you’ve stated may be accurate in terms of the information sources you’ve cited, but every point you’ve alluded to has also been contradicted countless times by countless Catholics for countless centuries. That is because, in the final analysis, the faithful will believe and do what their conscience, informed or otherwise, compels them to believe and do. And this is as it should be, thus the pastors of the Church throughout history have themselves, by their words and actions, contradicted one another innumerable times. And of course the informed laity has always been, to one degree or another, influenced by that undeniable fact.

[daniel1212]

Daniel1212, everything you’ve stated may be accurate in terms of the information sources you’ve cited, but every point you’ve alluded to has also been contradicted countless times by countless Catholics for countless centuries. That is because, in the final analysis, the faithful will believe and do what their conscience, informed or otherwise, compels them to believe and do. And this is as it should be, thus the pastors of the Church throughout history have themselves, by their words and actions, contradicted one another innumerable times. And of course the informed laity has always been, to one degree or another, influenced by that undeniable fact.

I am aware of the contradictions, and am not even saying dissent is necessarily wrong, which is how the church began, but I am pointing out the double standard of those who condemn us (conservative evangelicals) to ascertaining the validity of Catholic teaching by examining them in the light of wholly inspired Scripture and dissenting from such when it is not (as is the case with basic Cath. distinctives) , while they essentially do the same in principle, judging modern teaching as invalid in the light of their understanding of historical RC teaching.

[BlueDragon]

You said;

Daniel1212, everything you’ve stated may be accurate in terms of the information sources you’ve cited, but every point you’ve alluded to has also been contradicted countless times by countless Catholics for countless centuries. That is because, in the final analysis, the faithful will believe and do what their conscience, informed or otherwise, compels them to believe and do. And this is as it should be, thus the pastors of the Church throughout history have themselves, by their words and actions, contradicted one another innumerable times. And of course the informed laity has always been, to one degree or another, influenced by that undeniable fact.

Who said;

"...Unless I am convicted by scripture and plain reason--I do not accept the authority of popes and councils for they have contradicted each other--my conscience is captive to the Word of God. I cannot and I will not recant anything, for to go against conscience is neither right nor safe. Here I stand, I cannot do otherwise, God help me. Amen."

[Elsie]

That is because, in the final analysis, the faithful will believe and do what their conscience, informed or otherwise, compels them to believe and do.

Isn't this what Dan is doing?

He; also; has the freedom to speak HIS mind; to contradict what the monolith of Catholicism puts forth.

If the 'church' has the freedom to put forth it's view; then I; likewise; want the freedom to put forth mine.

It's only fair.