Pope’s Foot-Wash a Final Straw for Traditionalist Catholics

[caseymoz]

92. Thank you for the correction,

on what Catholics are required to believe. I'll paraphrase from my previous post: how many Catholics actually know that? How many of the flock make adoration decisions about the Pope without knowing that? What does it matter when they're taught first to believe at all cost anyway? There's an inordinate amount of reverence the Pope receives from qualified infallibility and other claims.

You can't narrow down when anybody is infallible based on power that's totally material and social, but declared divine. Saying the Pope is infallible at any time is like saying there are limited situations where he could break the light-barrier. That applies to all the other processes of creating error-free dogma which are concocted or retroactively cited by the Church.

That's the way it looks to me, an unbeliever, an ex-Catholic, who faithfully tried to follow the church teachings for twenty-two years, and who was disillusioned when he reread the catechism saw how regressive, repressive and deceptive the faith was.

Remember, the details in the process of declaring dogma and doctrine matter only to Catholics, that is, only if you're feel required to believe in them. It doesn't matter to me, because it's the difference between bullshit and oxshit.

Therefore, I try to describe how I believe these dogmas and doctrines are actually understood, how they work in practice, and what the social consequences of them really are. I think those are far more important than the particular processes used in declaring dogma. Because again, the processes don't matter unless you believe in them.