Hey Pilgrim

This world is not my home. I am a spiritual being having a spiritual experience. I gotta put up my dukes padnuh, cause I'm in the Church Militant and the Church Triumphant is watching and cheering from wherever and I haven't joined them yet.

Wolfhart Pannenberg, a theologian jb would like
since he is very much concerned with physics and the time/space continue-uhm believes that any systematic theology is purely best guess and the only infallible viewpoint is from Omega and the eschaton and we believe we know who that may be

fallible.com <*)))><

quote:

Originally posted by mysticalmichael9:
[qb] I am a spiritual being having a spiritual experience. [/qb]

Dear Duke, the Shalomplace Magisterium, PSR, will be stopping in, sooner or later, to help you nuance what type of being you really are in terms that are no so dualistic (even though you didn't exactly say you weren't a human being having a spiritual experience but a spiritual being having a human experience, which is a tad dualistic).

Just messing wit' ya,
jb

Oh, btw, although I did a lot of brainstorming --outloud, so to speak-- re: the sensus fidelium, the one part of that that I'd like to study more or be instructed on more is "who's in? and who's out?". I don' feel competent re: that issue. For instance, I proposed mining the Christian traditions that were closest to Catholicism, possibly leaving out fundamentalists. That doesn't sound right to me anymore. I think I would err toward inclusivism and away from exclusivism, moreso corresponding to ALL people of explicit and implicit faith, kind of like the Mystical Body. Although we have a visible and invisible church, still ... the spiritual intuitions of humankind, with or without theological reflection, are very important to me. At any rate, I just want to back off a tad insofar as I may have sounded a lot more dogmatic and self-assured on this issue than I really am. I like to play the devil's advocate and tease out nuances, by nature. I remain conflicted in assent on certain narrowly defined points but fully committed in obsequium, and I know you get my drift.

Great Pax, great thread
jb

JB, I don't think the Magisterium considers Protestant traditions when evaluating the sense of the faithful. If they did, then the significance of the Magisterium would be greatly diluted, as Protestants have no real use for the charism. Their foresaking of sacred Tradition in forming their views also weakens their sense of the faith in the eyes of the Magisterium. So, to respond to your point about where Protestants might fit in with regard to a sense of the faithful, I think the official answer is that they don't.

Unofficially, however, the lived experiences of Protestants are influencing Catholics' views of the Christian life -- e.g., women and ministry, married pastors, the discernment process by means of which ministers are called to a community, just to name a few. Protestants have also accepted non-abortive birth control as an ethically acceptable option for decades, with no more evidence of harm to the institution of marriage than has been observed in the Catholic community (granted, most Catholic couples use birth control, so the comparison might not be a good one). Although virtually all Protestant groups consider abortion wrong, the more liberal mainline groups place the right of the mother to choose on the same level as the right of the unborn to live, making it a matter of conscience for the mother. Protestant traditions are now venturing into the strange new territory of blessing homosexual unions, although this is still very controversial in most of their denominations.

All of this influences Catholics' thinking, and, hence, Catholics' sense of what a lived-out response to the Gospel can be -- and actually is! Making a connection with sacred Tradition and influencing the Magisterium in the light of these experiences is another matter, however.

quote:

Originally posted by Phil:
[qb] JB, I don't think the Magisterium considers Protestant traditions when evaluating the sense of the faithful. [jb snipped]I think the official answer is that they don't. [and snipped again]

Unofficially, however, the lived experiences of Protestants are influencing Catholics' views of the Christian life -- e.g., women and ministry, married pastors, the discernment process by means of which ministers are called to a community, just to name a few. Protestants have also accepted non-abortive birth control as an ethically acceptable option for decades, with no more evidence of harm to the institution of marriage than has been observed in the Catholic community (granted, most Catholic couples use birth control, so the comparison might not be a good one). Although virtually all Protestant groups consider abortion wrong, the more liberal mainline groups place the right of the mother to choose on the same level as the right of the unborn to live, making it a matter of conscience for the mother. Protestant traditions are now venturing into the strange new territory of blessing homosexual unions, although this is still very controversial in most of their denominations.

All of this influences Catholics' thinking, and, hence, Catholics' sense of what a lived-out response to the Gospel can be -- and actually is! Making a connection with sacred Tradition and influencing the Magisterium in the light of these experiences is another matter, however. [/qb]

Phil, a great article on infallibility can be found here: NOTES ON PAPAL INFALLIBILITY by Fr. Patrick Gaffney at cin.org

Look at these excerpts:

quote:

[C]oncerning the line of thought based on the teaching of Vatican II that the Church of Christ extends beyond but subsists in the Roman Catholic Church, Roman Catholics will be forced to reassess whether councils of the Church can be fully accepted when Christians representing the whole Church have not been present.

quote:

FIDELIUM: the entire People of God, presuming truly sincere, practising Christians who are imbued with the faith founded upon the Word of God as lived, prayed, proclaimed within the Christian community.

It may be that your unofficial take is, shall we say, orthodox enough?

Bravo on a great response re: the lived out response to the Gospel! Bravo!

pax,
jb