Man, if only I studied Latin for religious studies. Oh wait! I did! Speaking with Papal Infallibility is only done in specific vircumstances. Anything else can be considered possibly infallible. Fuck, y’all are dumb.
Edit: It’s the same fucking reason Michael Scott isn’t bankrupt when he says, “I declare bankruptcy” there’s a process you have to go through to speak from the chair. Same reason it hasn’t been done since 1950. You clearly know how to read and research, so just do it.
Edit: The church has rejected multiple declarations from Popes over the years. It means nothing!
It’s the same fucking reason Michael Scott isn’t bankrupt when he says, “I declare bankruptcy”
Which is funny to the audience because everyone knows that’s not how banking works. It took me a while to find out what exactly was missing because the definition - which is a translation of the original - is full of “term of art” hidden jargon. Easy traps for outsiders. I’m not trying to get out of being wrong btw, just saying that there is probably a reason this is a common misunderstanding and not a matter of being dumb.
Edit: I am a supercilious fool.
Man, if only I studied Latin for religious studies. Oh wait! I did! Speaking with Papal Infallibility is only done in specific vircumstances. Anything else can be considered possibly infallible. Fuck, y’all are dumb.
Edit: It’s the same fucking reason Michael Scott isn’t bankrupt when he says, “I declare bankruptcy” there’s a process you have to go through to speak from the chair. Same reason it hasn’t been done since 1950. You clearly know how to read and research, so just do it.
Edit: The church has rejected multiple declarations from Popes over the years. It means nothing!
Which is funny to the audience because everyone knows that’s not how banking works. It took me a while to find out what exactly was missing because the definition - which is a translation of the original - is full of “term of art” hidden jargon. Easy traps for outsiders. I’m not trying to get out of being wrong btw, just saying that there is probably a reason this is a common misunderstanding and not a matter of being dumb.
Again, I am sorry. I would delete my comment, but I feel it is worthwhile to see our mistakes and be reminded, so we can further grow.
I was the supercilious one, not you. I am the dumb one. Knowledge is power and should shared in a pleasant way, not hatefully like I have.
Again, my sincerest apologies for my candour. It was detestable.