I walked away from this church, emotionally long before physically. I kept going because I was threatened, by my mother, with being 'disowned' if I left the church. Now we are in a 'don't ask, don't tell' situation.

I sense a massive explosion happening within that church. If it's the banking issue, or the pedophile issue, or something equally as evil, I don't know. I just really feel it's coming.

I know my post may upset some Catholics, others will understand what we're talking about. Those who aren't Catholic probably won't understand. The Pope is IT. Even though I walked away years ago, the news hit me like a ton of bricks.

We were talking about the death penalty, which she supports. I asked her if it was the Catholic belief that what the Pope says comes from God's mouth, and the Pope is against the death penalty, how could she be for it?

Because, she said (and she was dead serious) this is the one thing the Pope has wrong.

That's when I reached the conclusion there was no point in continuing the conversation.

I have never, in my life, heard of a Pope speaking ex-cathedra. If you were born before 1950, neither have you. Pope Pious XII was the last Pope to do that in 1950 about the ascension of the Virgin Mary.

The other time a Pope spoke ex-cathedra was in 1854 about the Immaculate conception.

Yes, there are only two instances of "papal infallibility" on record and both concerned the Virgin Mary. If you really attended like you stated, you would have known that.

I don't mean to sandbag you, but people deserve to know the truth and form their own opinions based upon them.

But trust me - this is what I was taught in school, and I was born after 1950. I was also taught that none of my non-catholic friends could go to heaven. Hard burdon for a kid, since I was the only catholic in the neighborhood. My father, who was baptised as a Baptist, was re-baptised a catholic, before my mother would marry him.

There is nothing else to argue here. Pope's generally do not speak ex-cathedra which means "from the chair" and is the only time a Pope's words are considered directly from the mouth of God. Otherwise, they are just men prone to human error like all of us. It has happened 2 times in 2000 years.

You are correct that Catholicsm teaches, extra ecceslium nulla salus, which means, "outside of the Church, there is no salvation".

They do however teach in a second judgement for those who have not had the chance to reform, thus their judgement is different.

Your father did not have to convert to be married by a Catholic Priest. All that would have been required was a dispensation from the Bishop, so that statement is not correct. Now, your mother PARENTS may have demanded that, but the Church did not.

Look, I am not saying you do not have a right to your opinions, but if you are going to state things as factual, they should to that end, be factual. What you are perpetuating here is not the dogma nor is it the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

I think you misinterpreted, or I was clumsy in my writing. It was just retelling of a silly conversation between me and my Mom, and my putting back at her when she had always said to us - I really wasn't trying to push any agenda. And, it's irrelevant what was required - it was what they did and it's LONG in the past.

I do appreciate your information, it's interesting even if it has no relevance to my life. I always like to learn.

Men in positions of authority and power using it for the propagation of sexual deviancy on children, it just does not get worse than that.

Regardless, while religion here on DU is taboo, some of the very best people I know are devout, be they Catholics, Muslims, or Jews. I hate to see misinformation spread for their sake. It makes them look silly when we state that Catholics believe that the Pope is always infallible, so I try to correct it when I see it.

My Mom's family is kind of a Byzantine/Roman hybred so I suspect there were a whole LOT of rules that probably don't apply, and probably haven't for decades. Not to mention traditional stuff my grandfather might have brought with him from Europe.

I lead a much simpler spiritual life.

Lent is still strictly observed and lowly priests enforce it.

Whether rules have changed at the upper levels or not, at the level of the local church, the Priest has a lot of authority, especially in rural areas.

As a Jew, coming from a large city, I did a lot of learning, and hard. It should not...matter, but religion and religious belief is actually part of medical care...

Of course there are also the divisions between the conservative orders. (Dominicans come to mind) and the Liberal types (Jesuits). The tension also involves Liberation Theology (a form of it has entered Judaism too) and the social justice movements, vis a vis the Curia.

This whole thing tells me there is a bit of palace intrigue.

Either way, maybe a dozen tops in the last two thousand years. (There's some argument over whether canonizations count, which would obviously affect the numbers some..) Heck, a few twentieth-century popes have been on record saying that none of their statements should be considered infallible because they didn't trust themselves with that kind of authority.

I'm thoroughly not Catholic but seeing people continuously bringing up the infallibility doctrine in objectively false ways to make some kind of point still drives me up the wall. I don't like it when people make a point of lying in an argument, or are on the receiving end of that enough that they start relaying the same falsehoods.

It just Isn't A Cool Thing.

(edited to add none of that rant's directed at Siwsan, who definitely falls under 'deceived' and not 'making the claim up'!)

And I am not Catholic.

Watch the conclave for signs.

Pope Alexander VI -- the Borgia Pope.

However, possibly 21st century technology is catching up with the Vatican's power to sweep scandal under the papal throne.

After all, he is old and feeble. But then, there's the precedent this sets. So maybe these speculations have some merit.