The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom

[Lee Freeman]

Well, not quite the same.  The pope does speak for the RCC.  Campbell spoke for Campbell.  By that standard, it would be a waste of time for Robert to look up the Vatican II documents, because calling them normative for the whole RCC would be like...see your example.

My point is that a pronuncement of a Pope in 1864 is not necessarily binding upon the faithful of 2007. The Church has changed its opinion on many topics since that time. For example, in 1864 the Vatican was against the concept of democractic government in favor of the God-given, time-tested system of the monarchy. Yet I know of no leader in the Catholic Church nowadays who thinks democarcy is inherently evil or against God's designs. As further examples I thought of at random, the mass is now heard in the vernacular and the Catholic Church since Vatican II has been actively engaged in ecumenical efforts with other Christian confessions. So Robert's quoting 60-100 year-old Catholic documents really only speaks to the Catholic Churchs position on those subjects at the time those documents were written. Like all churches, the Catholic Church doesn't exist in a historical or social vacuum. It changes along with the rest of us. Sure the Vatican's views on fundamental issues has remained fairly constant, however its views on other matters do change; as one final example,  the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary became official dogma only in the 1850s whereas before it was not. So quoting the Catholic Churchs position on the Immaculate Conception from 1840 as if it were normative today would be a mistake.

mlleveleur made some good pts.

Pax vobiscum.

[mistergus]

Lee,

I'll concede the point that Catholic doctrine has evolved over the years.  But did you read the numerous quotes in my last post?  Here are just a couple, both consistent with the others...



     "Nothing ever changes in the eternal Catholic doctrine." Pope John Paul II, LOR, #49, December 9, 1992, (quoted in The Apostolic Digest, by Michael Malone, Book 6: "The Book of Sentimental Excuses", Chapter 4: "The Dogmas of Faith Admit No Alteration Whatsoever").
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Troy/6480/catholics/apostolic6chp4.html



     "The Catholic Faith is such that nothing can be added to it, nothing taken away. Either it is held in its entirety, or rejected totally. This is the Catholic faith, which, unless a man believes faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved." Pope Benedict XV, Ad Beatissimi, PTC:761, (quoted in The Apostolic Digest, by Michael Malone, Book 6: "The Book of Sentimental Excuses", Chapter 4: "The Dogmas of Faith Admit No Alteration Whatsoever").
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Troy/6480/catholics/apostolic6chp4.html


Obviously the fact of changing Catholic doctrine and beliefs makes a joke out of the Roman Church's claim to infalliability, as well as the Pope.  So what are we to believe are the true beliefs of the Roman Catholic Church?

This leads me back to the Catholic "Doctrine of Mental Reservation".  In essence, this is the teaching that the Roman Catholic Church has the right to lie (strong word, but accurate) to protect itself and it's secrets.  This doctrine deserves a lot of light to be cast on it.

So what do you think...In light of the Roman Catholic "Doctrine of Mental Reservation", why should anyone believe anything the Roman Catholic Church says?

Robert G

[Its Alive]

On the off chance that anybody wants to know the truth about the doctrine of mental reservation,  check here:http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10195b.htm

[zoonance]

On the off chance that anybody wants to know the truth about the doctrine of mental reservation,  check here:http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10195b.htm

Truth Shmuth.     We have our minds already made up.....?

[mistergus]

On the off chance that anybody wants to know the truth about the doctrine of mental reservation,  check here:http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10195b.htm

I'm sure you like this site, or you wouldn't have posted it.  But do a Google search, and a whole lot more comes up.

I found this interesting...


Over seven hundred years ago the idea of "mental reservation" was created to protect the Catholic Church in civil court. The doctrine of "mental reservation" claims that it is morally justifiable to lie in order to protect the reputation of the institutionalized Catholic Church. The doctrine has been used quite extensively in modern times to protect the Catholic Church from civil allegations that the institution of the Catholic Church allowed recognized pedophiles to continue to work with children.

When a priest or nun is questioned about acts of clergy that would be considered heinous, such as pedophila, the priest or nuns are counseled by the institutionalized Catholic Church that lying is morally justifible, not a sin, under the doctrine of "mental reservation."


My point here is that there is ample cause to doubt anything the Roman Catholic Church says.

Robert G

[marc]

Please source this.

[marc]

I will, then.

http://www.unique-design.net/library/quote/luther.html

Another page on this site:


http://www.unique-design.net/library/sacred/christ.html

Scroll down to "the truth" and note the quotes from The Gospel of Thomas.

'nuff said.

[Nevertheless]

i agree, no one seems to want to answer the question of how the RCC will take over the world or america directly, wonder why?

I still think it'll be Swiss Guard commandos.

Pax.

You're wrong there, Lee.  It's clowns. The world will be taken over by Catholic clowns.

[marc]

The Knights Templar!!!

Or maybe the Spanish inquisition, because, you know, no one....

[spurly]

I think Jesus will one day set up his kingdom on earth in all its fulness and he will completely suppress all other religions.  Praise God.

[mllevaleur]

Lee,

I'll concede the point that Catholic doctrine has evolved over the years.  But did you read the numerous quotes in my last post?  Here are just a couple, both consistent with the others...



     "Nothing ever changes in the eternal Catholic doctrine." Pope John Paul II, LOR, #49, December 9, 1992, (quoted in The Apostolic Digest, by Michael Malone, Book 6: "The Book of Sentimental Excuses", Chapter 4: "The Dogmas of Faith Admit No Alteration Whatsoever").
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Troy/6480/catholics/apostolic6chp4.html



     "The Catholic Faith is such that nothing can be added to it, nothing taken away. Either it is held in its entirety, or rejected totally. This is the Catholic faith, which, unless a man believes faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved." Pope Benedict XV, Ad Beatissimi, PTC:761, (quoted in The Apostolic Digest, by Michael Malone, Book 6: "The Book of Sentimental Excuses", Chapter 4: "The Dogmas of Faith Admit No Alteration Whatsoever").
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Troy/6480/catholics/apostolic6chp4.html


Obviously the fact of changing Catholic doctrine and beliefs makes a joke out of the Roman Church's claim to infalliability, as well as the Pope.  So what are we to believe are the true beliefs of the Roman Catholic Church?

I have to slightly disagree (no surprise there I'm sure) with Lee (although I greatly appreciate his fair and balanced views, as always) because I do indeed believe that the teachings of the Church in essence remain the same. (The quotes used above are not the best encapsulation of what that means. As always, a sound bite does not convey the entirety of the message.)

The thing is, we believe doctrines do not change, but as the world changes the applications of the doctrines may change. A simple example of that would be if there were a doctrine that said "Be generous in your alms giving," depending on the time and place and person, the amount given may vary widely, but may be equally generous.

I believe the article I posted above does a good job of explaining how, when all of the points in the syllabus of errors are taken in their time and historical context, the principals (doctrines) behind them can still be considered valid and even supported and expounded upon by our most recent council (Vatican II). Some of the particulars (the way the doctrines are applied) have changed as is normal, but actual doctrine has not. The syllabus of errors pointed out many problems but didn't offer solutions to them. A document from Vatican II entitled Gaudium et Spes, "outlined a positive agenda while the Syllabus of Errors (and Quanta Cura which accompanied it) merely condemned errors and outlined no actual agenda." The old and the new complement each other and build on each other. We are always learning as we go...the doctrines remain the same, it is our understanding of them that develops, and our application of them that adapts as cultures and times change.

I thought this was a pretty absurd statement when I first heard it, honestly, and thought it would take absolutely no time to refute. But when I looked at things from the other side and stopped using anti-Catholic sources that kept ripping things out of context, I quite surprised myself.

[kamakaz]

I think Jesus will one day set up his kingdom on earth in all its fulness and he will completely suppress all other religions.  Praise God.

yes, but He already set up His kingdom on Earth, but one day He will be here again as King of all Kings and Lord of all Lords and we will be one body worshiping Him, our head. And He will rule the nations with an iron scepter.


so all of you that are claiming that the RCC will take over the world (apparently by RCCC -RCC Clowns) are you living in fear? What is the big deal? Or have you forgot that God is in control of everything, and the RCCC will not take over nothing unless it is in the will of God, He knows how to run His Kingdom, or do you question that? maybe He will have the RCC take over to wake us up and make our worship and salvation mean more than a hour or two once a week.....to be continued...(unless the RCCC's take over) 

[billinjackson]

Not to be disrespectful to a senior member, but this entire post is silly...

[billinjackson]

If you believe that the Catholic Church condones lying and secretly wants to rule the world, how can you stand posting on a message board that not only welcomes Catholics as Christian, but (like the Early Church) uses a Creed developed by the Roman Catholic Church to determine who is Christian and who is not Christian?

Isn't a bit hypocritical for you to post here if you do not agree with the rules of this board?

blessings

Well said, young bird of prey... 

[antiaging]

I already know about this sort of threat from the RCC. There was a former Jesuit priest named Alberto Rivera that exposed worse things then this.
You can research him at protestant websites on Google. The catholic websites, of course, will deny it. Of Course!!!
It seems to me that the situation is a lot worse then what is in that tract.