[ultima ratio]

How have I proved him right? Do you believe we are obliged to obey absolutely everything coming out of Rome, even when it contradicts past teachings? I hardly think so. Rome has the obligation to show where it is in line with past Catholic doctrines whenever it introduces novelties. If it cannot do this, it must be disobeyed--especially in the present crisis. For example, it is making odd noises about the Jews not needing the same redemption as other men. This is novel--and found nowhere in either Scripture nor in Tradition. It must be rejected.

[Desdemona]

Do you believe we are obliged to obey absolutely everything coming out of Rome, even when it contradicts past teachings?

That's part of the deal. It's not like it hasn't happened before.

I hardly think so.

Personal opinion again.

Rome has the obligation to show where it is in line with past Catholic doctrines whenever it introduces novelties. If it cannot do this, it must be disobeyed--especially in the present crisis.

[big sigh] The church moves at glacial speed, you know that. Actually, in the end, in the current context, this is the biggest obstacle. The fixes and repairs aren't happening fast enough for various people. The dissent didn't set in overnight and it's going to take a while to repair the damage. Rather than drastic quick fixes, the church has opted to take the long deliberate route, which is a lot more work, takes ten times longer and lasts far better. Kind of like using carved granite for a facade rather than aluminum siding.

For example, it is making odd noises about the Jews not needing the same redemption as other men. This is novel--and found nowhere in either Scripture nor in Tradition. It must be rejected.

Last I heard, this wasn't official as you've stated it. I thought the talk was on eccumenism. That probably means that there's some discussion going on behind closed doors. We won't know till it's all over.