Catholic Chain of Command

I was having a discussion with Rick DeLano (a Catholic) on a different platform regarding an article at CatholicAnswers.com about the Galileo affair which states the following:

"Galileo was right in asserting the mobility of the earth"

The entire article can be read here.

Now usually I would assume that a random Catholic website that declares a certain thing as fact would not be in any way binding on your average Catholic. But this particular article is footnoted with the following:





To give an article endorsement as a very high ranking member of the Catholic Church on an issue like saying it's free of any doctrinal or moral errors is a very serious issue I would say.

My question is, why is a Bishop allowed to do this? And why isn't this endorsement also an endorsement by the Pope himself (Rick claims it isn't) when their dogmatic constitution, the "Lumen Gentium" says that the Bishops are...

"maintaining the bond of communion among themselves and with the successor of Peter, and authentically teaching matters of faith and morals, they are in agreement on one position as definitively to be held."

So this implies an unbreakable chain of command. Meaning whatever the Bishop says comes straight from the Pope doesn't it? It means they are all in agreement on an issue.

Is Robert H. Brom, Bishop of San Diego "authentically teaching matters of faith and morals" when he gives his official approval to CatholAnswers article which claims the Earth moves? Is this a position in which he AND the Pope are "in agreement on" and which should be "definitively held to"?

If not, why not?

Why isn't a Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur binding on Catholics?

As I already addressed five times on the other thread, Strange, nihil obstat is simply a determination by a theologian or bishop that a given article does not contain heresy.

An imprimatur is simply a permission to publish.

Neither constitute any form of magisterial authority; that is, neither binds a Catholic to any assent of any kind.

It simply allows the work to be published.

Hope this is, finally, clear.

Rick, the wiki article on nihil obstat says:

...the phrase is used more particularly to mean an "attestation by a church censor that a book contains nothing damaging to faith or morals

and...

....it merely confirms "that it contains nothing contrary to faith or morals."

Do you agree with this?

Strangelove wrote:Rick, the wiki article on nihil obstat says:

...the phrase is used more particularly to mean an "attestation by a church censor that a book contains nothing damaging to faith or morals

and...

....it merely confirms "that it contains nothing contrary to faith or morals."

Do you agree with this?

I think you know it's moot.

The Romish hierarchy is a nullity anyway. There is nothing "catholic," universal, about the Romish church.

The foundation of the Romish hierarchy is a conversation between Jesus and Peter, Matt 16:

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

That a bunch of blaspheming, power mad perverts should extend Matt 16 to claim temporal authority for themselves over the whole world in perpetuity is cringey from multiple angles.

First, where were Jesus and His disciples when the exchange in Matthew took place? They were in Caesarea Philippi, at the foot of Mount Hermon, where the sons of God had descended from heaven and corrupted mankind (Gen 6:1–4). This was the eons-old headquarters of polytheism. Proto-Canaanites in the area called this place the entryway to the underworld, the "gates of Hell." In the 1st century it was a place dedicated to the god Pan, and a cave there produced a spring thought to emit from the Hades.

Yes, Jesus called Simon Bar-Jonah Peter, a rock. But when he said he would build His church on "this rock," he didn't mean that every reprobate enthroned thereafter by a gaggle of Italian sociopaths would be God's worldwide vassal. He meant that he would conquer the empire begun on that rock, the one they were standing on.

Second, it is jaw-droppingly ironic that an organization which holds their judgements to supersede scripture should base their whole hierarchical authority on a single -- misapplied -- scripture.

Third, by the Romish Church's own rules it is not in the church. Consider: Usury, the charging of any interest for loans, is grounds for excommunication, and unless a usurer repents, he cannot be reinstated into the Church. This is from on high, supposedly, ex cathedera. But the Vatican bank charges interest.

No Romish official challenges the Vatican Bank on this. So do Romish officials really hold office? If the postman doesn't deliver mail, it follows by law and logic that he's not the postman. They do not hold office. Therefore the Romish hierarchy does not exist.

And are those who run the bank in the body of Christ? I doubt it, but ejection from the Romish Church is the decision of Romish officials, men, not God. One can be guilty of a mortal sin and still be a Romish member, so long as one is not challenged about it by the men of the hierarchy.

In other words, in Romish doctrine it is not God who determines whether one is a Christian; it is human beings: Mens' authority supersedes God's.

We as believers can eject others from association, but we cannot decide who is forgiven and who is not. That is proof Romish Church officers are would-be usurpers claiming authority they do not have.

Fourth, Romish doctrine holds that people earn salvation, so the whole she-bang is out the window right there and to be accursed.

None of this means DeLaney and Sungenis are wrong about everything. Hitler fixed the roads. The inventor of the WWW is a sodomite. Anyone who can't see the geocentric model simply fails to grasp the concept of inertial reference frame.

But just as logically indisputable is the manifest fact that the Roman Catholicism is the Devil's work. Therefore minutia about Romish hierarchy is minutia.