Author Topic: 1949 Letter from Holy Office Correcting Feeneyite Error (Read 14782 times)

CM · « **Reply #15 on:** October 03, 2009, 06:28:05 AM »

St. Thomas was wrong. His doctrine is now quite heretical in light of the Councils of Vienne, Florence, et alli.

clare · « **Reply #16 on:** October 03, 2009, 10:20:27 AM »

Quote from: Catholic Martyr

St. Thomas was wrong. His doctrine is now quite heretical in light of the Councils of Vienne, Florence, et alli.

Florence, eh?

What is the matter for ordination? The Council of Florence (and Aquinas - who was wrong and heretical on some things apparently) said one thing, but Pius XII (a heretic so some say) said something else.

Who was correct? Is it the handing over of the instruments, or the laying on of hands?

[/ Just trying to confuse things further and off topic!]

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #17 on:** October 03, 2009, 10:32:53 AM »

Quote from: clare

Just trying to confuse things further and off topic!

Hey, thanks! LOL!! :cheers:

As you likely know, some of Sacraments were determined in a very specific manner, whether as to matter and/or form, while others were left (to a limited degree) more to the Church's prerogatives. The wording of my explanation may be off, but I think/hope/trust you get my drift.

Classiccom · « **Reply #18 on:** October 03, 2009, 11:17:00 AM »

Quote

"The proof is that Pius IX's statement not only gave birth to the numerous heresies we see in VII about invincible ignorance, but that even some of the traditional clergy have taken it in that sense, that you can be saved as a "good person" outside the Church. "

=============

Quote

"He may have been an occult heretic, but the objective sense of his words does not admit to public heresy. On those grounds, we cannot call him an antipope.

He may have been a Mason, but membership in a secret society is too hard to prove, and Masons would gladly claim him as their own even if he was not."

======================

I leave you guys & gals alone for a few months and look how you change your tune. Turning the Church into a Spiritual Dictatorship in 1870 was a great idea for the Devil and the Masons. I think Pope Pius IX was duped by the Jesuits. After 1958 they revealed this Satanic Dictatorship (formerly known as the Catholic Church) to the public.

Matthew 16:23

Who turning, said to Peter: Go behind me, Satan, thou art a scandal unto me: because thou savourest not the things that are of God, but the things that are of men.

================================================

Catholics
Resisting
Spiritual
Tyranny

===========================================

Too bad the truckers have the CRST acronym. I find it amusing that the CRST.com website would find the slogan "in it for the long haul"

Caraffa · « **Reply #19 on:** October 03, 2009, 03:37:17 PM »

An "implicit" desire does not mean implicit faith. A situation in which an implicit desire would occur would be if a pagan came to true explicit faith in Christ in his dying days perhaps by divine intervention but did not have access to make a vow for baptism before they died.

stevusmagnus · « **Reply #20 on:** October 03, 2009, 03:46:58 PM »

Quote from: Catholic Martyr

St. Thomas was wrong. His doctrine is now quite heretical in light of the Councils of Vienne, Florence, et alli.

Yes it couldn't be that Vienne and Florence understood Aquinas' teaching on the matter (representing the mind of the Church) and meant their narrowly defined statements to be read in the context of Aquinas and other Fathers.

It must mean that the Popes and Bishops of these Councils simply did a 180, threw Aquinas and the Fathers in the trash can and ripped off an entirely new meaning to EENS condemning absolutely all non water Baptized Catholics to Hellfire for eternity.

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #21 on:** October 03, 2009, 04:35:36 PM »

Thanks for screwing up the thread in more ways than one, roscoe. :cheers: :whistleblower:

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #22 on:** October 03, 2009, 04:36:23 PM »

Quote from: gladius_veritatis

Thanks for screwing up the thread in more ways than one, roscoe. :cheers: :whistleblower:

Sorry. This is addressed to Classicom, not roscoe.

CM · « **Reply #23 on:** October 03, 2009, 05:30:14 PM »

Quote from: stevusmagnus

Quote from: Catholic Martyr
St. Thomas was wrong. His doctrine is now quite heretical in light of the Councils of Vienne, Florence, et alli.

Yes it couldn't be that Vienne and Florence understood Aquinas' teaching on the matter (representing the mind of the Church) and meant their narrowly defined statements to be read in the context of Aquinas and other Fathers.

It must mean that the Popes and Bishops of these Councils simply did a 180, threw Aquinas and the Fathers in the trash can and ripped off an entirely new meaning to EENS condemning absolutely all non water Baptized Catholics to Hellfire for eternity.

You think that the Council Fathers intentions are what matter? No. The declaration of the decree itself is all that matters, since it came out exactly as God intended it to, being infallible.

stevusmagnus · « **Reply #24 on:** October 05, 2009, 07:10:09 PM »

You don't take the text of the Council in a vacuum and then plaster whatever meaning you want to it.

This is Luther's approach to the Bible,

Rather you have to look at the mindset of the Church and Council Fathers to see what they intended in the text and it is CLEAR that they in no way meant absolute necessity of water baptism for salvation.

CM · « **Reply #25 on:** October 05, 2009, 07:48:50 PM »

You don't limit the scope of an infallible dogmatic definition by presuming to say that God allows us to recede from it in some degree.

You know that's forbidden. Hmmm... maybe you don't.

Here you go:

Quote from: Pope Leo XIII

The practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, who were wont to hold as outside Catholic communion, and alien to the Church, whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of doctrine proposed by her authoritative Magisterium. Epiphanius, Augustine, Theodoret, drew up a long list of the heresies of their times. St. Augustine notes that other heresies may spring up, to a single one of which, should any one give his assent, he is by the very fact cut off from Catholic unity. "No one who merely disbelieves in all (these heresies) can for that reason regard himself as a Catholic or call himself one. For there may be or may arise some other heresies, which are not set out in this work of ours, and, if any one holds to one single one of these he is not a Catholic" (S. Augustinus, De Haeresibus, n. 88).

The part in bold should show you that just because BoD has not been explicitly condemned by name, that doesn't mean it is not heresy. It posits a recession from a whole whack of dogmatic decrees, which I am getting tired of posting.

stevusmagnus · « **Reply #26 on:** October 07, 2009, 01:43:55 AM »

It wasn't condemned by name because it is not a heresy.

CM · « **Reply #27 on:** October 07, 2009, 11:06:23 PM »

So you keep saying. It doesn't matter that the proposition objectively contradicts the words of irreformable definitions of the Holy See, I guess.

Needless to say, we shall continue to disagree on this point, unless YOU change your mind. I, however, will not turn my back on God's revealed truth.

Jehanne · « **Reply #28 on:** October 08, 2009, 07:26:17 AM »

Quote from: stevusmagnus

It wasn't condemned by name because it is not a heresy.

It was only applied to catechumens, that is, to those individuals who had made an explicit faith commitment to Jesus Christ, as Lord and Redeemer of all mankind, and had made the vow for Sacramental Baptism; BOD was never, ever applied to non-catechumens, that is, to Jews, infidels, or pagans. This is the modernist heresy of "implicit faith" and hence, "implicit membership" in the Mystical Body of Christ, which is the Most Holy and Apostolic Roman Catholic Church, "outside of which no one at all will be saved." This is de fide, and given the infallible pronouncements at the First Vatican Council, we are obliged, as loyal and obedient sons and daughters of the Church, to reject, as heresy, the 1949 modernist docuмent of the Holy Office against Father Feeney and instead accept the unambiguous and clear language that Holy Mother Church has provided us in her infallible Magesterium.

Belloc · « **Reply #29 on:** October 08, 2009, 07:49:45 AM »

Quote from: Catholic Martyr

Needless to say, we shall continue to disagree on this point, unless YOU change your mind. I, however, will not turn my back on God's revealed truth.

Pompous as usual.....you have turned your back-have yet to hear when/where/how you received water baptism, where you fulfill your duties in regards to confession, Eucharist,etc...

Functional Protestant........you have your own truth and interpretation.....all others are wrong and have to change...

I do not always agree w/Stevus, but on this one......

ALso, Feeney is long dead and molding in the grave.....how about we pray for him, ourselves,our neighbors and move along......... :jumping2:

CM, I offer prayers for you a lot BTW......