Author Topic: Fr. James Wathen on the Doctrine of Exclusive Savlation (Video) (Read 14998 times)

Stubborn · « **Reply #15 on:** January 15, 2015, 04:43:59 AM »

Quote from: obertray imondday

Quote from: Stubborn
It is as I said, Fr. Wathen never said "that heretics, atheist... are united to the Catholic Church.

Read the Chapter (Ch 17) on Popolatry, seems you missed that entire chapter except for your first quote which you selectively had to take out of context to fit your false accusation.

The sad thing is, now we know you are selling half lies on purpose - not by mistake.

False, he clearly stated that the Conciliar Church (Vatican II) was wicked, not Catholic, and if you belong to it you could not be saved. However, at the same time he stated that this false Church was inside the Catholic Church, like a fifth column.

Again, light with darkness, justice with injustice, Christ with Belial.

Since the judgments of God are unsearchable, it is inconceivable how God allows some to fall away(as this man talks about in part 1).

Again, you take what he wrote completely out of context, I believe the reason you do this is because your religion revolves around a vacant Chair. Everything about your lex credendi diametrically points too and is dependent upon a Chair, in these days that Chair for you, is vacant.

Since Nado started flooding the forums, VCS ("Vacant Chair Syndrome") has become more and more obvious every day. It is painfully obvious that the faith as taught by the Catholic Church is not the same faith that the VCSers on this site profess.

The fact is that your first paragraph in your quote above is verifiable fact, not opinion, not an illusion and not a lie, it is fact. You cannot accept this fact because if you did, your VCS would ultimately disintegrate into thin air and you know it, and you don't like this because it would mean you've been wrong all this time and your pride won't allow that.

You make your VCS more evident when you even deny Fr. the respect due to him by addressing him as "James Wathen" - do you think he is not a true priest or is that the way you refer to all priests?

JPaul · « **Reply #16 on:** January 15, 2015, 06:59:31 PM »

OI,

Quote

And for God sake quit calling Protestants Christians (if you do this) they are Protestants not Catholics.

Can you please point out where I said that a Protestant is a Christian?

You position must be weak when you have to resort to creative fantasy and fabrication to argue it. I believe that Stubborn has you pegged correctly.

A Dead member of the Church, that is to say, a lapsed or fallen away Catholic is still a member, to whom, reconciliation is possible until death.

obertray imondday · « **Reply #17 on:** January 16, 2015, 05:47:41 PM »

Quote from: J.Paul

OI,
Quote

And for God sake quit calling Protestants Christians (if you do this) they are Protestants not Catholics.

Can you please point out where I said that a Protestant is a Christian?

You position must be weak when you have to resort to creative fantasy and fabrication to argue it. I believe that Stubborn has you pegged correctly.

A Dead member of the Church, that is to say, a lapsed or fallen away Catholic is still a member, to whom, reconciliation is possible until death.

Re-read the comment, "if you do this". Did not say you call Protestants Christian, but since you believe that everyone that is baptized is Catholic, it would not surprise me if you did not call a Protestant a Christian.

It is true that a moral sin such as drunkenness, fornication, theft, etc.... does not separate a Catholic from the Church. However heresy, schism, and apostasy does. (see Pius XII)

Martin Luther was not a Catholic, he was a heretic. He is not recognized by the Catholic Church as Fr. Luther and does not deserve the title even though he was validly ordained, and is no different then the heretics spreading poison today. It is "itching ears" (see 2 Tim.) that is the cause of your confusion.

obertray imondday · « **Reply #18 on:** January 16, 2015, 05:49:54 PM »

Quote from: Stubborn

Again, you take what he wrote completely out of context

Would you mind explaining so I may understand you better?

Stubborn · « **Reply #19 on:** January 17, 2015, 02:10:51 AM »

Quote from: obertray imondday

Quote from: Stubborn
Again, you take what he wrote completely out of context

Would you mind explaining so I may understand you better?

You said:

Quote

False, he clearly stated that the Conciliar Church (Vatican II) was wicked, not Catholic, and if you belong to it you could not be saved. However, at the same time he stated that this false Church was inside the Catholic Church, like a fifth column.

Everything you accuse Fr. Wathen of saying in your above quote, is true. He did say these things and what he said is true, yet you seem to be saying he is somehow wrong or lying because you falsely accuse Fr. Wathen of saying "that heretics, atheist... are united to the Catholic Church".

He never said heretics are united to anything.

He refuted examples of other writers who said the Church taught that heretics having some desire to do God's will, is equivalent to being united to the Church implicitly, but he never said they were united to the Church for heaven's sake. The thing he refutes, you accuse him of teaching.

Of heretics he said many things, one thing he has to say is:
"Other offenders are judged and cast out of the church by the sentence of the pastors of the same church; but heretics more unhappy than they, run out of the church of their own accord, and, by so doing, give judgement and sentence against their own souls." And he doesn't flip flop on that anywhere.

JPaul · « **Reply #20 on:** January 18, 2015, 06:12:37 PM »

Quote from: Stubborn

Quote from: obertray imondday
Quote from: Stubborn
Again, you take what he wrote completely out of context

Would you mind explaining so I may understand you better?

You said:
Quote
False, he clearly stated that the Conciliar Church (Vatican II) was wicked, not Catholic, and if you belong to it you could not be saved. However, at the same time he stated that this false Church was inside the Catholic Church, like a fifth column.

Everything you accuse Fr. Wathen of saying in your above quote, is true. He did say these things and what he said is true, yet you seem to be saying he is somehow wrong or lying because you falsely accuse Fr. Wathen of saying "that heretics, atheist... are united to the Catholic Church".

He never said heretics are united to anything.

He refuted examples of other writers who said the Church taught that heretics having some desire to do God's will, is equivalent to being united to the Church implicitly, but he never said they were united to the Church for heaven's sake. The thing he refutes, you accuse him of teaching.

Of heretics he said many things, one thing he has to say is:
"Other offenders are judged and cast out of the church by the sentence of the pastors of the same church; but heretics more unhappy than they, run out of the church of their own accord, and, by so doing, give judgement and sentence against their own souls." And he doesn't flip flop on that anywhere.

That is exactly what he did, and did not, teach.

obertray imondday · « **Reply #21 on:** January 19, 2015, 06:47:38 AM »

Quote from: Stubborn

Everything you accuse Fr. Wathen of saying in your above quote, is true. He did say these things and what he said is true, yet you seem to be saying he is somehow wrong or lying because you falsely accuse Fr. Wathen of saying "that heretics, atheist... are united to the Catholic Church".

He never said heretics are united to anything.

Lying or falsely accusing??

Fr. James Wathen, Who Shall Ascend?, p. 414: “The reader is implored to believe that as it is in the spirit of Christian charity that we have been compelled to proclaim the Catholic Church to be the sole and exclusive instrument of salvation for men on earth, it is in the same spirit that we assert the major thesis of this third part, namely, the Conciliar Church is not the Catholic Church, though it is within it, like a fifth column. Hence, no one who maintains membership within it can be saved.”

Now it is clear that, according to this man, Wojtyla was a great heretic and enemy of the True Church, destroyer, atheist, and leader of a church that is not Catholic, but at the same time is in union (inside) the True Church.

This is a tricky way of asserting salvation outside of the Catholic Church as the leader of the SSPX taught. If baptized heretics, atheists, etc.... could be inside the Catholic Church, but not in the way of salvation because they belong to the Conciliar Church which is not Catholic, guess what happens?

There is salvation for the ignorant, which is exactly what the SSPX leaders promote starting from the top Marcel Lefebvre.

Stubborn · « **Reply #22 on:** January 19, 2015, 07:28:20 AM »

Quote from: obertray imondday

Quote from: Stubborn
Everything you accuse Fr. Wathen of saying in your above quote, is true. He did say these things and what he said is true, yet you seem to be saying he is somehow wrong or lying because you falsely accuse Fr. Wathen of saying "that heretics, atheist... are united to the Catholic Church".

He never said heretics are united to anything.

Lying or falsely accusing??

Fr. James Wathen, Who Shall Ascend?, p. 414: “The reader is implored to believe that as it is in the spirit of Christian charity that we have been compelled to proclaim the Catholic Church to be the sole and exclusive instrument of salvation for men on earth, it is in the same spirit that we assert the major thesis of this third part, namely, the Conciliar Church is not the Catholic Church, though it is within it, like a fifth column. Hence, no one who maintains membership within it can be saved.”

Now it is clear that, according to this man, Wojtyla was a great heretic and enemy of the True Church, destroyer, atheist, and leader of a church that is not Catholic, but at the same time is in union (inside) the True Church.

This is a tricky way of asserting salvation outside of the Catholic Church as the leader of the SSPX taught. If baptized heretics, atheists, etc.... could be inside the Catholic Church, but not in the way of salvation because they belong to the Conciliar Church which is not Catholic, guess what happens?

There is salvation for the ignorant, which is exactly what the SSPX leaders promote starting from the top Marcel Lefebvre.

All I can tell you is that if you insist on making such an assertion based on that snip from a +600 page book which thoroughly and exhaustively explains the whole situation, to say nothing of the videos posted in this thread, then there is no amount of explaining that anyone can offer you that will get you to actually comprehend what Fr. actually wrote.

obertray imondday · « **Reply #23 on:** January 20, 2015, 06:10:56 PM »

Quote from: Stubborn

Quote from: obertray imondday
Quote from: Stubborn
Everything you accuse Fr. Wathen of saying in your above quote, is true. He did say these things and what he said is true, yet you seem to be saying he is somehow wrong or lying because you falsely accuse Fr. Wathen of saying "that heretics, atheist... are united to the Catholic Church".

He never said heretics are united to anything.

Lying or falsely accusing??

Fr. James Wathen, Who Shall Ascend?, p. 414: “The reader is implored to believe that as it is in the spirit of Christian charity that we have been compelled to proclaim the Catholic Church to be the sole and exclusive instrument of salvation for men on earth, it is in the same spirit that we assert the major thesis of this third part, namely, the Conciliar Church is not the Catholic Church, though it is within it, like a fifth column. Hence, no one who maintains membership within it can be saved.”

Now it is clear that, according to this man, Wojtyla was a great heretic and enemy of the True Church, destroyer, atheist, and leader of a church that is not Catholic, but at the same time is in union (inside) the True Church.

This is a tricky way of asserting salvation outside of the Catholic Church as the leader of the SSPX taught. If baptized heretics, atheists, etc.... could be inside the Catholic Church, but not in the way of salvation because they belong to the Conciliar Church which is not Catholic, guess what happens?

There is salvation for the ignorant, which is exactly what the SSPX leaders promote starting from the top Marcel Lefebvre.

All I can tell you is that if you insist on making such an assertion based on that snip from a +600 page book which thoroughly and exhaustively explains the whole situation, to say nothing of the videos posted in this thread, then there is no amount of explaining that anyone can offer you that will get you to actually comprehend what Fr. actually wrote.

That is a two way street. You seems like a pretty smart "layologian" what you don't seem to comprehend is this man is promoting the subsistit ecclesiology of the Vatican II.

What do you not understand here? "the Conciliar Church is not the Catholic Church, though it is within it, like a fifth column.

Now he does say that anyone who maintains membership within it cannot be saved, but does he really mean that? I would say no, simply because the SSPX believes in salvation outside of the Catholic Church (invincible ignorance) and this man instead of denouncing the leader of the SSPX for preaching salvation in false religions actually praised him.

If this man would not have said that darkness and error are within the Catholic Church as he clearly stated, and denounced the ignorance heresy the SSPX promotes I would have no problem calling him Fr. Wathen.

FYI, I did watch the videos and thought wow those are some nice things he is saying. In part two however, he does contradict himself by saying that God does not save men individually and that He saves the Church as a whole, but turns right around and claims God saves men individually if He foresees that they would co-operate with grace provided. This confusion probably stems from the Pelagian/Molinist point of view he holds on Predestination which ultimately makes God an Avenger of uncommitted sins.

JPaul · « **Reply #24 on:** January 20, 2015, 07:59:33 PM »

You know, you are having to do a great deal of basket weaving to come up with such conclusions and assumptions about Father Wathen's intent and meanings.

You are continually building your case around your pre-conceived notions of him, and wedging the facts this way and that, to arrive where you want to be.

Stubborn · « **Reply #25 on:** January 21, 2015, 04:59:17 AM »

Quote from: J.Paul

You know, you are having to do a great deal of basket weaving to come up with such conclusions and assumptions about Father Wathen's intent and meanings.

You are continually building your case around your pre-conceived notions of him, and wedging the facts this way and that, to arrive where you want to be.

Yes, this is what he is doing.

Who Shall Ascend? is probably the best book I ever read about the doctrine of Exclusive Salvation and imo, it is impossible to misunderstand what he wrote unless you do it on purpose.

Quote from: obertray imondday

What do you not understand here? "the Conciliar Church is not the Catholic Church, though it is within it, like a fifth column.

Do you know what he means by a fifth column?

What he is saying is that the Catholic Church has been all but completely taken over from within, which, if you know anything about the crisis, then you know that this is fact. Because the conciliar church is not the Catholic Church, conciliar Catholics are outside the Church. How else would you like him to say it?

Quote from: obertray imondday

Now he does say that anyone who maintains membership within it cannot be saved, but does he really mean that? I would say no, simply because the SSPX believes in salvation outside of the Catholic Church (invincible ignorance) and this man instead of denouncing the leader of the SSPX for preaching salvation in false religions actually praised him.

If this man would not have said that darkness and error are within the Catholic Church as he clearly stated, and denounced the ignorance heresy the SSPX promotes I would have no problem calling him Fr. Wathen.

First off, he was an ordained priest, that alone warrants the respect of his office to address him as Father Wathen. Whether you agree or disagree with him does not matter in this respect.

He praised +ABL for what he did and criticized him for they way he did it, and devotes about 20 pages of criticizing SSPX specifically for their liberal theology on the doctrine, starting at page 81. In there he states: "One is compelled to wonder why the Society of St. Pius X exists, if all its priests hold this theology, and why they are expending so much energy for Traditionalists, who toil under the notion that they must be Traditionalist Catholics in order to save their souls."

obertray imondday · « **Reply #26 on:** January 22, 2015, 07:03:17 PM »

Quote from: Stubborn

Quote from: obertray imondday
What do you not understand here? "the Conciliar Church is not the Catholic Church, though it is within it, like a fifth column.

Do you know what he means by a fifth column?

What he is saying is that the Catholic Church has been all but completely taken over from within, which, if you know anything about the crisis, then you know that this is fact. Because the conciliar church is not the Catholic Church, conciliar Catholics are outside the Church. How else would you like him to say it?

How about, The Conciliar Church is not the Catholic Church, and though it acts and looks like Her, it is nothing other than a withered branch cut off from the unity of the Catholic Church.

Are you kidding me? The Catholic Church has been all but completely taken over from within?

The Catholic Church has never been or never will be taken over! THE GATES OF HELL SHALL NEVER PREVAIL! What is the matter with you? You are teetering on pure insanity making that kind of comment and that is a shame because you are parroting what this man teaches.

This priest clearly says that this fifth column (support post by definition) exists in the Catholic Church.

Wake up already, there is no such thing as a Catholic outside of the Catholic Church. If the Catholic's soul is dead due to mortal sin other than heresy, schism,or apostasy they remain in the Catholic Church and are called Catholic.

You are completely disregarding the voice of the Church:

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. Satis cognitum #9

Do you see now? The Conciliar church (Vatician II) is not Catholic, it is no different than a Jєωιѕн ѕуηαgσgυє, it is of the devil. So one gives assent to it by belonging to it, and sins more grievously that recognizes that there is something wrong(as most Novus Ordoites) , but do nothing about it. Those who see no problems are most certainly the blindest, and are in need of the most earnest prayers.

The Catholic Church has spoke, anyone who assents to any heresy is cut of from the Catholic Church and is disregarded as Catholic and should not be called one, regardless of the baptismal character, that has nothing to do with it.

Stubborn · « **Reply #27 on:** January 23, 2015, 05:44:45 AM »

Quote from: obertray imondday

How about, The Conciliar Church is not the Catholic Church, and though it acts and looks like Her, it is nothing other than a withered branch cut off from the unity of the Catholic Church.

Are you kidding me? The Catholic Church has been all but completely taken over from within?

Yes. That is exactly what has happened.
If you cannot accept that because you cannot understand that, then that's your own problem. I suggest you read Pope St. Pius X's Pascendi Dominici Gregis where he himself states that the danger is not from outside the Church, the real danger comes from within: For as We have said, they put their designs for her ruin into operation not from without but from within; hence, the danger is present almost in the very veins and heart of the Church, whose injury is the more certain, the more intimate is their knowledge of her...

Quote from: obertray imondday

The Catholic Church has never been or never will be taken over! THE GATES OF HELL SHALL NEVER PREVAIL! What is the matter with you? You are teetering on pure insanity making that kind of comment and that is a shame because you are parroting what this man teaches.

This priest clearly says that this fifth column (support post by definition) exists in the Catholic Church.

Ok, so you prove that you do not know what he meant by a fifth column, I suggest you google it.

You also demonstrate that you have no faith in the words of Our Lord, that the gates of hell shall not prevail. Again, that is your own problem.

Stubborn · « **Reply #28 on:** January 23, 2015, 01:19:34 PM »

Quote from: Bellator Dei

"Once a Catholic, always a Catholic" is a false premise.

The Church has taught that heresy, schism, and apostasy sever a man from the Church. There is no sense in arguing back and forth about it. The Eastern Orthodox are schismatics, therefore they are not Catholic. Martin Luther is a heretic, therefore he is not Catholic. One who worships false idols is an apostate, therefore he is not Catholic.

Father Wathen did a lot of good things, but he was simply wrong about this assertion.

No, you are completely wrong. Your reasoning is the reasoning sedevacantists wrongfully embrace.

Fr. Wathen does not simply blurt it out in the unthinking manner you do, he explains it:

Quote

"Once a Catholic, always a Catholic," is just as surely true as "once a priest, always a priest," even for all eternity. The mark of the Sacrament of Baptism is just as ineradicable as that of Holy Orders. One who is not a Catholic cannot receive the Sacraments. The excommunicated Catholic can receive the Sacrament of Penance, whereby the censure can be removed, and the sin be forgiven.
The Church first removes the censure, then forgives the sin. The excommunicated Catholic is in a more serious moral depression than the Catholic who is in the state of sin only. But neither is in the woeful condition of those who are outside the Church. Again, this is one of the reasons why the Catholic should "rejoice always," (Phil. 4:4)., for no matter how terrible his sins, by the "power of the keys," he can be freed of them."

This means that Martin Luther died, was judged and entered his eternity as a Catholic priest, his punishments, as well as the punishments of all schismatics, heretics and condemned Catholics will be worse than the punishments of non-Catholics. Meditate on this truth, if you still cannot understand this, let us know and I or someone better able to explain it will attempt to explain it to you.

I once heard in a sermon that the consecrated fingers of priests burn white hot for all eternity in hell. If the priest were not Catholic, he could not be a priest - and whether in hell for schism or heresy, apostacy or whatever sin he died with, hell is hell and he will suffer the punishments of "a priest forever according the order of Melchizedek".

If your reasoning were the correct reasoning, then the best way to lessen eternal sufferings in hell would be to apostatize now, become a person outside the Church before you die - but that is not the way it works.

Stubborn · « **Reply #29 on:** January 23, 2015, 03:28:48 PM »

Quote from: Bellator Dei

Quote from: Bellator Dei
"Once a Catholic, always a Catholic" is a false premise.

The Church has taught that heresy, schism, and apostasy sever a man from the Church. There is no sense in arguing back and forth about it.

Quote from: Stubborn
No, you are completely wrong. Your reasoning is the reasoning sedevacantists wrongfully embrace.

Tell that to the Popes...

“The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the Church before the end of their lives…” (Pope Eugene IV Cantate Domino)

OUTSIDE the Church means NOT Catholic. It's not hard to see that Pope Eugene IV lumps together pagans, Jews, heretics AND schismatics; that's because they are all the same - they aren't Catholic.

He also makes it perfectly clear that they are no longer Catholics by stating that they must JOIN the Church in order to work out their salvation. What is it that you don't understand? Why does a heretic, schismatic, or apostate need to JOIN the Church if he is ALWAYS Catholic?

“For not every sin, however grave it may be, is such as of its own nature to sever a man from the Body of the Church, as does schism or heresy or apostasy.” (Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis Christi)

Sever = put an end to, cut off.

How is it possible for a heretic to be considered Catholic?? A Catholic heretic? Catholic Schismatic? Catholic Apostate? This is absolutely absurd.

Pope Leo XIII quoting Saint Augustine:

“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 arise some other heresies, which are not set out in this work of ours, and, if any one holds to a single one of these he is not a Catholic.” (Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum)

Saint Augustine - A heretic IS NOT A CATHOLIC

Is Saint Augustine wrong?

No, *you* are wrong.

When an infidel wishes to enter the Church, that person must first be sacramentally baptized - if you do not agree then I understand why you are wrong.

When a heretical, apostate and schismatic wish to return to the Church, they do not get re-baptized now do they? Why not? It is the indelible character of baptism that makes them Catholic forever same as it is the indelible character of Orders that makes them priests forever.

“The floor of hell is paved with the skulls of bishops and the bones of priests.” - St. Athanasius was one among other saints and Doctors who taught this.

“Augustine says in his Rule: ‘Show mercy not only to yourselves, but also to him who, being in the higher position among you, is therefore in greater danger.’ But fraternal correction is a work of mercy. Therefore even prelates ought to be corrected.” Summa II, II, q. 33, a. 4