-
Infallible Interpretations of Matthew 16:18 vs. Each Other
As I recently discussed over at the Greenbaggins blog, Rome is not a trustworthy infallible interpreter of Scripture. For example, Trent stated: For which cause, this council has thought good, that the Symbol of faith which the holy Roman Church makes use of,–as being that principle wherein all who profess the faith of Christ necessarily…
-
Waltz, Nicaea and Shea
David Waltz (no great fan of mine, if memory serves correctly) has nevertheless provided a helpful two-part post in response to my rebuttal to Shea’s post on Nicaea. Mr. Waltz has, I suspect, read more about the Nicene and early post-Nicene period than most people ever will. So, I appreciate that he took the time…
-
Nicaea Was Local Council, Arianism Not Settled Controversy, Implies Shea
I admit that I’ve never had a high view of Mark Shea’s scholarship, yet a mixture of surprise and amusement washed over me as I took in Shea’s breathtakingly ignorant response to a reader’s question regarding Augustine and Sola Scriptura. A reader had pointed out to Shea that Augustine, in responding to the Arian heretic…
-
Reginald Tries Again
I was glad to see that Reginald took another shot at the issue of important Roman Catholic bishops publicly going wildly wrong on doctrine (link). Unfortunately, he still doesn’t quite get it. First, he argues that fallibility of bishops does indeed explain why they sometimes get doctrine wildly wrong. No doubt. Again, no one suggested…
-
Bellisario on Contraception (Again!)
Contraception seems to be a very hot topic for Mr. Bellisario, as he has yet another post on it on his blog (link). Let’s examine what he says: Turretin Fan has posted an audio response to my earlier article on contraception. He claims that since there are not any anathemas attached to the statements by…