EnglishClub
Home Learn English Teach English MyEnglishClub Home Learn English Teach English MyEnglishClub

Please note that these ESL Forums are NOT part of MyEnglishClub. To post at these ESL Forums please register ↑ first.

Pope Benedict in Germany

Let others know the latest news, or discuss it with them.

Moderators: Vega, EC

Postby MissLT » Tue Sep 19, 2006 7:12 am

Yeah, too many people get caught up with it. But when something is gone, something else would be created and bring us problems. It's like now we're having a lot more new species because a lot of our old ones are extinct. That's how life is. Isn't that sad?
User avatar
MissLT
Ethereal Member
 
Posts: 5911
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2005 3:05 pm
Status: Other

Postby andes » Tue Sep 19, 2006 7:59 am

there so many religions in this world. each of those teach alot of good stuff.. however,it couldn't make this live better.
why? does it means that religions are useless?
does it means that world without religions will be better?
i guess not. the source of the problem is human being itself (as i said in other posting)..
So we couldn't either blame religion or God.
about offends and being offended, i think thats not a big deal if we could practice what we have-or should have-learned from our religion :!:
User avatar
andes
Silver Member
 
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2006 5:56 am
Location: Indonesia

Postby Rach » Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:25 am

Perhaps the world would be better without religions, but they are here and obviously mean a big deal to a lot of people. Yeah I agree with you, religions can teach also a lot of could stuff, perhaps it's always the misinterpretations that cause so much trouble.
Rach
Silver Member
 
Posts: 82
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Switzerland

Postby Rach » Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:57 am

But I'm still thinking about that bumper sticker anyway, I really like that "no religions, no problems"... hm, but I don't think my boyfriend wants to have that bumper sticker on his new car :roll: Image
Rach
Silver Member
 
Posts: 82
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Switzerland

Postby Danyet » Wed Sep 20, 2006 9:35 pm

LennyeTran wrote:
That news is wrong because there is no rule a Pope can't apologize.


Actually it is historically accurate that the Pope or Vatican has considered herself "Infallible". They consider themselves the "last word" and supposedely speak for God on Earth.

Just Google "Infallible Pope" and see what you get.
User avatar
Danyet
Keeper of the Board
Keeper of the Board
 
Posts: 1756
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 2:29 am
Location: USA
Status: English Teacher

Postby MissLT » Thu Sep 21, 2006 12:53 am

User avatar
MissLT
Ethereal Member
 
Posts: 5911
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2005 3:05 pm
Status: Other

Postby Danyet » Thu Sep 21, 2006 11:27 pm

Yeah that will do!
User avatar
Danyet
Keeper of the Board
Keeper of the Board
 
Posts: 1756
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 2:29 am
Location: USA
Status: English Teacher

Postby MissLT » Fri Sep 22, 2006 12:02 am

Statements by a pope that exercise papal infallibility are referred to as solemn papal definitions or ex cathedra teachings. These should not be confused with teachings that are infallible because of a solemn definition by an ecumenical council, or with teachings that are infallible in virtue of being taught by the ordinary and universal magisterium. For details on these other kinds of infallible teachings, see Infallibility of the Church.

According to the teaching of the First Vatican Council and Catholic tradition, the conditions required for ex cathedra teaching are as follows:

1. "the Roman Pontiff"
2. "speaks ex cathedra" ("that is, when in the discharge of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, and by virtue of his supreme apostolic authority….")
3. "he defines"
4. "that a doctrine concerning faith or morals"
5. "must be held by the whole Church" (Pastor Aeternus, chap. 4.)
For a teaching by a pope or ecumenical council to be recognized as infallible, the teaching must make it clear that it is definitive and binding. There is not any specific phrasing required for this, but it is usually indicated by one or both of the following: (1) a verbal formula indicating that this teaching is definitive (such as "We declare, decree and define..."), or (2) an accompanying anathema stating that anyone who deliberately dissents is outside the Catholic Church.
(copied)

I don't see how Benedict couldn't apologize, according to this rule. He quoted the ancient King's opinion (non-related to Christian texts or Christianity) to make his point.
User avatar
MissLT
Ethereal Member
 
Posts: 5911
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2005 3:05 pm
Status: Other

Postby Shazzam » Fri Sep 22, 2006 12:51 am

That was actually really interesting Lenny.
User avatar
Shazzam
Rough Diamond Member
 
Posts: 1826
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 4:40 am
Location: Australia

Postby Tora » Fri Sep 22, 2006 3:36 am

similar article in bbc:
...According to the Roman Catholic Church, the Bishop of Rome IS infallible - but only in specific cases. The current furore over remarks made by the pontiff about Islam does not fall into this category.

Papal infallibility only comes into play with issues of faith that concern the whole Church. It doesn't apply when the Pope is expressing a personal opinion or, in this case, quoting from a historical text...


the whole story
User avatar
Tora
Rough Diamond Member
 
Posts: 1611
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 8:57 pm
Location: Moscow
Status: Other

PreviousNext

Return to Current News

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest