Do you see by being on this thread and declaring your adherence to Catholicism (in some personal form, it would appear) that it is easy to misinterpret your intent?
BTW, you may not be advancing :
... the thesis that the Catholic religion has all the answers or is the One True Way.
but you do realize that the Pope is advancing this (just recently I might add).
By having an affiliation with him (indirectly through you church) you unfortunately bear the stigma (no pun intended) of actively supporting this affiliation and all the tenets espoused by it. If you were a Neo-Nazi, but not one of THOSE Neo-Nazi's, would you claim that you were exempt from being questioned about unsavory tenets held by the organization you profess membership to?
If you are here, you are here presumably to debate Solon's proposition. It is disingenuous to say, in effect, "I'm Catholic, yet not promoting Catholicism, and still I want to post on a thread that exists to debate the interpretation of the Almighty that has come down through the works of man, but leave my Catholicism out of it." The Catholic Church, the last time I checked, was one of the institutions that takes the works of man and presents them as the works of God.
If you are willing to debate this, how do you personally reconcile the fact that the Pope is put into a position ( by the tenets of the Church )of "infallibility" (dictionary:Incapable of error in expounding doctrine on faith or morals ) with the fact that numerous Popes (including this one, no doubt ) have been wrong and sometimes, egregiously wrong? I'm curious what kind of rational model one would have to construct to coordinate any personal questions of the infallibility of the Pope with your highly likely, assuming you are rational, judgement as a human that he MUST be wrong sometimes and such errors can have grievous consequences. |
