is one the most misunderstood concepts in the world. It's up there with "immaculate conception".

From
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_infallibility

That the Pope is infallible on doctrine they agree with?

My first thought when I read this.

It's a common dilemma for all religions:

Do you say that you can only find enlightenment/nirvana/redemption through our religion?

Or do you say that enlightenment/nirvana/redemption is possible (or even inevitable) for everyone?

I prefer the latter, but some people prefer to be part of an exclusive superior club.

think how one is/does/acts matters, i.e. makes somekind of fundamental difference to others somehow.

I think a lot of mistakes come from thinking this is something that is given, simply by institutionalized forms of authority, instead of something that individuals come to (like we see in the whole New Testament) despite authority (remember the boy Jesus teaching in the temple?) - and - because individuals come to these types of understandings they tend to coalesce into various bodies, one common form of which are religions and churches.

and hence can be redeemed.

That's what I meant by universal.

For instance, what's the difference between a muslim, christian and atheist who give generously to charity, always have a kind word to say to everyone, helps their family etc?

IMO none. I think that's what the Pope was getting at. AFAIK the Dalai Lama has a similar opinion. Religion should be a vehicle to make you a good person, not an end in itself.

people are redeemed (saved, enter eternal life) through good works is why Martin Luther split from the Catholic Church 496 years ago.

that people are redeemed through "grace" alone?

(I can understand that Protestants were probably annoyed that some of those "good works" included giving money to the Catholic Church).

point. Good works WITHOUT faith will not earn redemption according to most Christian teachings.

In fact, some seem to enjoy providing evidence to the contrary.

but a non-child molesting buddhist can't?

Ted Bundy can be saved, but Ghandi is screwed.

I JUST reserved my tickets too!

A Christkiller. . .I think I'm at the front of line for the Hellfire Express. I think we Jews are given a special line for that!

Yes, I am being extremely tongue in cheek.

I still think that question as important as who burns in a lake of fire eternally, the Pope and the Church need a more cohesive message.


That's just my humble hellbound opinion.

that the doctrine is rational, makes sense, and has some grounding in reality to begin with, before it can be "understood" in any meaningful way (as opposed to just being regurgitated and parroted).

Yeah, I know...it's one of those Mysteries.

Pope John 23 nailed it: "I am only infallible if I speak infallibly but I shall never do that, so I am not infallible". But then again he seemed a bit out of place.

have to declare that his declaration of an infallible utterance is also infallible?

Amazing that there are people who pretend to be intelligent, but actually take this seriously.

As it was in the beginning, is now and ever shall be, words without end, amen.

I gather he likes to be interviewed.

Wellll...shit.

Check it out on Mapquest....

since the beginning of the Catholic Church... there's nothing that can't be changed with a nice donation.

One of my sisters divorced a guy who couldn't keep his fists off her. My father had her marriage annulled by the church for more than a few thousand dollars. All gone. Start anew.

My wife 1st husband was like you described this guy. She got an annulment and I can testify no money was involved. We had nothing extra at the time as all we had went to feeding and housing 4 boys. He didn't believe in child support either.

I knew a married man with several children who decided he wanted to become a priest. The church annulled his marriage so he could enter the seminary! Yes, that really happened! Could not make that one up!
Unfrigging believable!

We just want to be left alone but it is not allowed.

You WILL be converted or (burned at the stake), some colorful punishment will ensue.

It is beyond these hypocrites that there could possibly be people who don't want to be ruled by their magic book.

We see to this day how it applies only as a fund raising and people control tool and does not apply to the ruling class of the church.

This is different from Scientology how?

Keep your religious belief personal and unto yourself and stop pissing people off.

That applies to everyone.

The world will thank you.

Oh yeah, and pay your taxes!

They tell you what each procedure costs.

Catholics just pretend its a donation.

Thank you.

I think every atheist (and agnostic such as myself) would make that deal.

you were talking about my penis... weren't you?

Jesus died to redeem all of humanity but those of us who choose to reject The Church have rejected salvation.

See ya in Hell.

If I get there first I will try to save you a good spot. I don't think it would be so bad so long as I can watch someone like Rush or Cheney suffer for all eternity along with the rest of us. At least there will be entertainment.

The pope is infallible so anything he says is infallible including saying that hes not infalllible thus the Pope is fallible and this is proven by the fact that the pope is infallible.

This makes complete and total sense in all ways except in the ways that it doesn't, and we ignore those ways because they don't support our position and therefore don't make sense; and it only make sense to pay attention to the matters that make sense in making sense of the statement that makes sense except for the fact it makes no sense at all.

I hope that helps everyone make sense of everything that does not make sense in that the infallibility of the popes fallibility proves his utter infallibility.

until you so logically and succinctly stated it.

he doesn't understand the concept of papal infallibility.

beliefs that there is a very specific definition of papal infallibility. I have tried to look at it and it has become more than I really want to devote because it is very involved. I think that is why papal infallibility is a source of humor or incredibility. This from a person who was raised Presbyterian and now believes in a supreme being that we all in the world should try "to reach".

I am an atheist, I don't request nor seek "redemption" from you or your god. My good works, come from MY heart and from MY sense of virtues and values, not from some Bronze Age deity or a fear of a mythical "hell" if don't do it's bidding . I think you have enough problems with the officials in your church than you have with me so I'd stick to my knitting if I were you, your Holiness.

I am a man, a human being. I am not an object to be "redeemed" as if I were "lost" in the first place. Who are you to tell me whether or not I am "worthy" or "unworthy"? Just because you put on your "magical helmet" or "special underwear" or call yourself "Imam", "bishop", or "Grand High Exalted Mystic Ruler", for that matter, means absolutely nothing in the scheme of things. You are affected the same way by all the laws of physics that everyone else on this Earth and in this universe, YOU ARE NOBODY SPECIAL IN THIS UNIVERSE. You will die just as everyone on this Earth will and your body will ultimately decompose and disappear like every else's. What makes the difference is not what superstition one adheres to but what one does with his/her life while they are here. What makes the difference is who we love, what we love, how much we love and what we seek in return. Reciprocity makes redemption unnecessary. Isn't that what your church is supposed to teach? How about the Beatitudes, your Holiness? Rather than to focus on MY actions why not focus on yours? Maybe you're in need of "redemption".

romney

seems to be closer to the teachings of Christ and so far from the teachings of the Vatican. I wonder how long he will be around. A good cup of poison from one of the Vaticaners will take of this. Especially when he starts messing with their bank.

I'm an atheist, but once almost became a catholic and have read quite a bit.

According to Church teachings, Jesus died for all of our sins and redeemed us. However, in order to get that, you have to believe in Jesus as your savior.

So, the Pope gave a speech reaching out to everyone and pointed out that yes, Jesus died for all of you. It gets a lot of press, so the Vatican points out that "yeah, you still have to believe though"

It's pretty straight forward for anyone who wants to know the underlying issue.

There's a difference between "redeemed" and "saved" and in Catholic doctrine the purpose of Jesus' sacrifice and resurrection was many fold.

Francis is correct - Jesus died to redeem all humankind from original sin whether they accept it or not. Once Jesus was resurrected, original sin no longer applies to anyone ever.

Rosica is correct - According to Catholic doctrine God the Father requires a blood sacrifice for atonement of our personal disobedience to him. Much of the old testament is filled with rules on what sacrifice is required for what individual sin. Once Jesus (the lamb of God) died on the cross, we now have the individual right to claim his blood price rather than go sacrifice an animal to make nice with God. Those who choose not to accept the blood price Jesus paid would still be required to make atonement with God in blood.

All of this pertains only to our personal spiritual relationship with God according to Catholic doctrine.

malarkey, made up to keep the common man down and enrich the church's pockets.

Only ReTHUGs are redeemed

When you unplug your computer and remove the battery, does the software still run?

When the brain no longer functions, the mind ceases to exist.

you are assuming about it.

Little high.. little low..

Whoops.. got distracted.

word "only", but let's go with it anyway:

And the body is/does what?

Those that believe there is more to us than the body and mind are making a lot of assumptions based on stuff they don't know.

Just sayin'

It sounds like he's ruffling traditionalist feathers.

I remember being told in second grade. by an old school nun who was substituting for my regular teacher, that anyone who was not Catholic was going to hell.

Needless to say I was very upset. While my mom and her family were Catholic, my father was a non-practicing Episcopalian and my closest friends ranged from Lutheran to Syrian Orthodox to Jewish.

This being shortly after Vatican II, my mother (who did not like the idea of my father going to hell any more than I did) went to the priest who affirmed that according to the Ecumenical Council, non-Catholics who had lived a decent life, were not headed for the flames. Whew!

My regular teacher, who was enthusiastic about the reforms, returned to class. The elderly sister was sent to Catholic re-education camp or something like that. She was never allowed to teach religion again.

It sounds like the old school has made a resurgence in recent years. Not surprising really. I left the church long ago thanks to these guys. I've been watching Pope Francis with some interest and I really hope he takes care and watches his back. Those guys are dangerous. Maybe I've watched a few too many episodes of "The Borgias" but it seems to me that the cassock crowd can be deadly.

The concept of hell is ridiculous.

... made me think in new ways and explore new and different spiritual paths.

However, there are certain aspects of Catholicism that I have retained a
fondness for: the symbolism, the art, the mysticism, the outreach to the
poor, the work for peace, and some of the more interesting ventures into
intellectual and mystical pursuits such as those of Thomas More,Teilhard
de Chardin, Thomas Merton, and some of the saints like Teresa of Avila and
John of the Cross.

I found myself fortunate to have been a teen in the sixties when some of
the nuns in my high school, who were extremely liberal and intelligent, took
us down some amazing literary avenues, particularly those of Dostoevsky,
Existentialism, and the Theater of the Absurd. One of them had a special
affinity for Sartre, so I made sure to quote Sartre in one of my last papers
(on Ionesco I think) and got an A+. Those were the days!

has it been 90 days?

And their harps are probably a little bit out of tune.