h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Bouncy
More on the Assumption can be seen in the same encyclopedia, in the entry on the Assumption at http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02006b.htm - this one is interesting, as it was written some forty years before the doctrine was infallibly proclaimed (this is noted in an end-note).

Whether Heaven is a place, state or condition, it still makes sense for the body to participate in it. Jesus ascended into Heaven: you can find that in Scripture, in most detail at the start of the Acts of the Apostles.

The Catholic teaching on Purgatory, Heaven and Hell can be found in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, nos. 988-1060.

Greatly compressed, the belief is that after death the soul of the dead person encounters God in a private judgment based on his or her life, and goes either to Heaven, preceded perhaps by Purgatory - which is a place of preparation by purification - or Hell. Then, at the end of the world there will be a public judgment when everything will be made clear to all, and the re-made body of each will rejoin the soul, wherever the soul is.

The existence of Limbo as a place where unbaptised children go has always been subject to discussion, as the 1910 encyclopedia makes clear: see the entry at http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09256a.htm which gives the history.

<>

Well, I was careful to say these are Catholic beliefs. We also read the Bible differently, I think.

Andrew, I checked that link and discovered if I read it correctly that the doctrine of faith and morals is where the infallability is.
Presumably the Pope's famous pronouncement that a potential priest must refrain from homosexual activity for 3 years must come under this 'infallable' heading for example?

I don't think it can be. Infallibility is conferred by the form, not by the content. The content of a statement, including the one you mention, can be true or false - hopefully true, of course - and people may even agree that it is undeniably true; but to be infallible (i.e. to exclude the possibility of a mistake) it has to be flagged as such, as Pedro stated earlier, by the way of doing it.

How is that done? Well, there are two ways in which an ecclesiastical statement could be made with extra solemnity. One is by the Pope declaring that he is speaking 'ex cathedra', which happens very rarely. The other is by a solemn statement in a general council of the Church, by the Pope and all the bishops present.

All other kinds of statement, i.e. Papal letters (known as encyclicals), addresses to groups of the faithful, statements by Vatican departments, etc., fall under what is called the 'ordinary magisterium' and these are not infallible. Actually, some statements are probably not even at that level, e.g. books written in a personal capacity and academic lectures, not to mention media interviews.

The encyclopedia entry I referenced earlier states near the end that the ordinary magisterium would not be appropriate for an infallible statement.

Infallible statements are flagged, so it shouldn't be difficult to find one if you want to test the system, e.g. use a search engine to find ex cathedra statements (though both were cited earlier) or the texts of a general council.

A refinement to the above post: the content *is* actually relevant, because it has to be a matter of faith and morals. But the way of making the statement on such a matter is what indicates that infallibility is being invoked. I hope that's clear, sort of.

Should note that the online Catholic Encyclopedia at newadvent.org is an early 20th century version, although still fine for most purposes. Just don't look up other religions in it .

True! It dates from Edwardian times, so don't expect recent developments to be reflected there, such as the twentieth century.

But it does give a full presentation on most Catholic doctrines, without pulling its punches - that's why it's an honest resource. There were later developments in some areas, notably in attitudes towards people of other beliefs (and none).

Which pope was it who said, shortly after his apointment, "I am not infallible. I would be infallible only if I spoke ex cathedra, and I do not intend to do so"?

TRiG.

Pope John XXIII, who held the office from 1958-63. Considered to be one of the great popes, he convened the Second Vatican Council.

I'm sure you knew that though, TRiG!

"I am not infallible. I would be infallible only if I spoke ex cathedra, and I do not intend to do so"

I like statements like that. Cos it means that he is fallible and thus that statement could be wrong. In which case he would be infallible. In which case the statement is right. In which case...

Sorry, not having a go (for once) I just like illogical statements!

No, I didn't know that. I'm lousy at remembering the proginators of great quotations. I came on that one in Peter de Rosa's book Vicars of Christ.

Next question: Who said "Well, how was I supposed to know the Pope was a Catholic? I mean, no one's infallible!"?

TRiG.

Hello Ictoan! Quite a few bon mots are attributed to John XXIII. Someone asked him how many people worked at the Vatican, and he is said to have responded 'about half of them...'

I enjoyed your recent quote TRiG, but I can't find the originator, not even on Google!

<>

It wasn't Dave Allen was it? Nah, course not...

VL

Hi Vicky!
I thought of another Allen, Woody Allen, but I can't find the quote...

It sounds more like a Pete and Dud comment to me.

I got it out of some book of humorous quotations. But it was before I started collecting the things, so it's not from one I own. It's from one I got out of the library about three or four years ago. I may be remembering the wording slightly wrong.

I remember only two other lines from that book:

"The war situation has developed not entirely to Japan's advantage."

and

"My father wanted me to have all the opportunities he never had, so he sent me to a girls' school."

They were not said by the same person.

TRiG.

"May YOUR GOD go with you"

wasn't that Dave Allen?

I prefer:

"...and take your damn god with you when you go...".

It's about time all the foreign gods and their churches/temples were sent packing from Britain. Most have long overstayed their visa's.

Also the country would be so much roomier, and calmer without all those argumentative christians, muslims, jews, sikhs, bahai, jedi and hindus . The middle-east might get a bit crowded though...

Blessings,
Matholwch .

You left out the 'Johnny-cum-latley' druids, they're not much older than the pesky Christians.