Author Topic: Fr. James Wathen on the Doctrine of Exclusive Savlation (Video) (Read 15176 times)

Ladislaus · « **Reply #60 on:** January 26, 2015, 03:11:18 PM »

Quote from: Bellator Dei

Quote from: Ladislaus
Quote from: Bellator Dei
Quote from: Ladislaus
Many sedevacantists struggle with necessary distinctions. They make everything binary and do not allow for "in some ways yes, in some ways no".

"But let your speech be yea, yea: no, no: and that which is over and above these, is of evil." (Matthew 5:37)

So you're denouncing the "distinction" now, a tool which formed the backbone of scholastic theology? This attitude right epitomizes precisely what's wrong with the sedevacantists.

My friend, the backbone of scholastic theology is faith and reason; fides quaerens intelligentiam - faith seeking understanding.

But their core tool in the quest for truth was nothing other than the distinction.

If you reject the very notion of distinctions, then there's no further point of discussing anything with you. You are deeply misguided.

Cantarella · « **Reply #61 on:** January 26, 2015, 03:30:19 PM »

Quote from: Bellator Dei

Quote from: Ladislaus
Quote from: Bellator Dei

No. Material heretics are not considered formal heretics,

Fixed it for you. Many sedevacantists struggle with necessary distinctions. They make everything binary and do not allow for "in some ways yes, in some ways no".

“Finally some of these misguided people attempt to persuade themselves and others that men are not saved only in the Catholic religion, but that even heretics may attain eternal life.” (Pope Gregory XVI, Summo Iugiter Studio)

In the quote above, is Pope Gregory speaking of "material heretics" or formal heretics?

It must be formal heresy, given that only formal heresy in the external forum actually separates a person from the body of the Church. Formal heresy in the external forum is a declared heresy by competent authority or it also happens when the person himself willingly and pertinaciously publicly departs from the Faith. Material heretics can be ignorant of the fact that they have become heretics and more importantly, material heretics are not separated from the Church, the Body of Christ.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #62 on:** January 26, 2015, 05:30:09 PM »

Quote from: Bellator Dei

Quote from: Cantarella
It must be formal heresy... it also happens when the person himself willingly and pertinaciously publicly departs from the Faith.

Yes, and this is often overlooked by many...

By way of profession, BD. I already expressed this above. See my previous post ... where I listed #1, #2, and #3.

With the V2 Popes we are clearly in situation #3.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #63 on:** January 26, 2015, 05:34:38 PM »

Quote from: Bellator Dei

Quote from: Ladislaus
If you reject the very notion of distinctions, then there's no further point of discussing anything with you. You are deeply misguided.

Ladislaus, please define for us the distinction between a "material Catholic" and a "formal Catholic." Please back it up with references and Church teaching in regards to the character imprinted on the soul after Baptism.

I will illustrate this point once you admit that your categorical statement that heretics cannot be Catholics is not correct and that what you mean is "Manifest formal heretics cannot be Catholics."

Ladislaus · « **Reply #64 on:** January 26, 2015, 07:32:32 PM »

You give a 25-sentence disjointed rambling non-answer to avoid admitting that you are wrong, and you have the audacity to accuse me for being too proud to admit that I am wrong.

I am not wrong; you are wrong. Yes, the Church in its definitions assumes formal heresy (not necessarily manifest).

I am still waiting for you to amend your statement to say that "Manifest formal heretics are not Catholic."

St. Robert Bellarmine, for instance, teaches that occult heretics are NOT outside the Church. No theologian teaches that material heretics are outside the Church. If you want to say that when you say "Heretics are not Catholic" then you mean it to be understood "Manifest formal heretics", then do so, but stop this stupid rambling.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #65 on:** January 26, 2015, 07:35:18 PM »

I will illustrate the point this way.

Are formal heretics Catholic?

obertray imondday · « **Reply #66 on:** January 26, 2015, 07:44:17 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus

Are material heretics Catholic?

Absolutely not!

Let Fr. Michael Muller help you out. Excerpt taken from Part II, Chapter 6, The Catholic Dogma

“Being unfortunately brought up a Protestant," continues the Rev. A. Young, "I was like an ignorant Catholic in good faith who failed to learn all that the Catholic Church, the visible, authorized teacher of all divine truth, does teach."

Now it is wholly untrue that the Rev. A. Young as a Protestant, “was like an ignorant Catholic who failed to learn all that the Catholic Church, the visible authorized teacher of all divine truth, does teach."

An ignorant Catholic is not a material heretic; he is a member of the Body of Christ; if he is a dead member of it, being in the state of mortal sin, he as such is able still to make acts of divine faith, though not meritorious, because he believes all that God teaches him through his infallible teacher--the Catholic Church; if he is in the state of sanctifying grace, his acts of faith will be meritorious to eternal life. Nothing of the kind is true of a material heretic, because he is out of the Church and therefore no member of Christ's body.

“As only those members," says St. Augustine, "are vivified by the soul which are united with the body, so, in like manner, only those are vivified by the Spirit of Christ, who remain members of his Body--the Church.. He who is separated from Christ's Body is not a member of Christ; and if he is not a member of Christ, he cannot be vivified by Christ's Spirit. But any one who has not Christ's Spirit does not belong to Christ. Hence a Christian must fear nothing so much as separation from Christ's Body, which is the Church." (Tract. 27, in Joan.)

“So long,” continues the Rev. A. Young, as one’s faith is a willing oblation, or spiritual sacrifice of self authority, by referring his reason for believing to what he thinks (according to his lights and opportunities) to be a divinely authorized source of instruction by which he is directly taught, or through which he honestly believes God wills him to learn divine truth, that man is a Catholic in the sight of God, and he is a Catholic in the sight of the Church, no matter what he calls himself, and though such a one dies piously as an Episcopalian, Presbyterian, Methodist, Baptist, or what not, St. Peter will let him into heaven as a Catholic. And many a one rejoices to find himself so recognized after death, in spite of his earthly name and ignorance. That such a baptized Protestant is a Catholic in the sight of the Church is proved by the fact that he is treated as one when he becomes a convert and applies to be received into the Church, for he is absolved as one who has been, or, as the ritual wisely adds, ‘if perchance he has been' an excommunicated Catholic, on account of professed heresy."

Was the Rev. A. Young quite honest in believing what he has just said? How then could he write: “They (material heretics) openly refuse to hear the divine authority of the Church, and so they are heretics “in foro externo” (of the Church).

As the Rev. A. Young was unfortunate in explaining the doctrine of St. Thomas on faith, so, in like manner, he is again unfortunate in the explanation of the formula of absolution from heresy, which the Church has prescribed for the priest to use in absolving heretics from heresy when they are about to be received into the Church.

Before giving the true, genuine explanation of that formula of absolution, we must remark that this formula of absolution is never used by the Church when an excommunicated Catholic is to be absolved from the censure of excommunication, nor does the Church look upon an excommunicated heretic as an excommunicated Catholic. By what right, therefore, does the Rev. A. Young call an excommunicated heretic an excommunicated Catholic?

The more you talk, the more you sound like Rev. Alfred Young. It is a shame, the same things they were promoting in circa 1880, are being parroted on this web site today.

Remember, Bergoglio (and he predecessors)completely deny EENS PERIOD, and you know it. He is an excommunicated heretic plain and simple and not a Catholic.

No declaration has to be made, as the misguided believe, if a declaration were needed then it could be possible that the flock could be lead by a hireling (antichrist), this is why Pope Paul IV issued the Bull. WAKE UP!!!

Ladislaus · « **Reply #67 on:** January 26, 2015, 07:50:24 PM »

Father Mueller, like most theologians of the past 200 years or so, misuses the term material heretic as synonymous with "sincerely mistaken" heretic.

That is incorrect. Protestants are FORMAL heretics because they do not have the formal motive of faith.

That thinking is one fruit of the growing subjectivism since the Renaissance.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #68 on:** January 26, 2015, 08:00:52 PM »

Quote from: Bellator Dei

Quote from: Ladislaus
I will illustrate this point.

Please do so, and please provide references to back up your statement.

Waiting....

1) I am still waiting for you to admit your error.

and

2) Answer my question: Are formal heretics Catholics?

Ladislaus · « **Reply #69 on:** January 26, 2015, 08:16:15 PM »

Quote from: Bellator Dei

Look Mate, YOU introduced the terms "materially" and "formally" Catholic... Back it up with references and Church teaching!

It should not be this difficult....back it up.

I am going to back it up. It should not be difficult for you to answer a simple question.

Are formal heretics Catholics?

Yes, you refuse to answer, because you're going to get cornered. I'm doing it this way to force you to follow the logic. If I spell it all out, you'll just blow it off as you always do, because you are of bad will.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #70 on:** January 26, 2015, 08:23:25 PM »

Quote from: Bellator Dei

Back it up Ladislaus......

No, you are of bad will. You will find the answer in St. Robert Bellarmine and the Council of Trent.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #71 on:** January 26, 2015, 08:45:20 PM »

Quote from: Bellator Dei

Obvioulsy you cannot.

I most certainly can. I just won't, not to the likes of someone like you who are of bad will. I called you out right out of the gate. You refused to answer my questions, so as a consequence, I am not going to explain to you how this works.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #72 on:** January 26, 2015, 08:46:23 PM »

Quote from: Bellator Dei

You have an obligation to back up your statements...

I have no obligation to do anything other than my duties of state. I will not cast the pearls of truth before swine.

Cantarella · « **Reply #73 on:** January 26, 2015, 11:49:50 PM »

Quote from: Bellarmine

Occult heretics are still of the Church, they are parts and members… therefore the Pope who is an occult heretic is still Pope. This is also the opinion of the other authors whom we cite in book De Ecclesia. …the occult heretics are united and are members although only by external union”.

Quote from: Suarez

If the external but occult heretic can still remain the true Pope, with equal right he can continue to be so in the event that the offense became known, as long as sentence were not passed on him. And this for two reasons: because no one suffers a penalty if it is not “ipso facto” or by sentence, and because in this way would arise even greater evils. In effect, there would arise doubt about the degree of infamy necessary for him to lose his charge; there would rise schisms because of this, and everything would become uncertain, above all if, after being known as a heretic, the Pope should have maintained himself in possession of his charge by force or by other.

Cantarella · « **Reply #74 on:** January 27, 2015, 01:23:11 AM »

Only formal heresy separates a soul from the Church.

Heresy defined as:

Quote from: Canon 1325, 1917 Code of Canon Law

“After the reception of baptism, if anyone, retaining the name Christian, pertinaciously denies or doubts something to be believed from the truth of divine and Catholic faith, [such a one] is a heretic.”

Now, it gets even more complex: there are 4 degrees of Heresy, each one with a distinct censure:

1. Heresy (defined in the canon above: persistent denial of an infallible dogma)

2. Approaching heresy: Opinion opposed to a doctrine that is not expressly de fide or clearly proposed as an article of Faith.

3. Erroneous in theology: A proposition that does not directly contradict a received dogma, but may logically lead to such a contradiction.

4. Suspected of heresy: An opinion whose contradiction of an article of faith is not able to be definitively proven, but can be reached with a certain degree of probability.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03532a.htm

Again, only the Formal Heretic (#1 above) ceases to be inside the Church.

From Catholic Encyclopedia:

Quote

The guiding principles in the Church's treatment of heretics are the following: Distinguishing between formal and material heretics, she applies to the former the canon, "Most firmly hold and in no way doubt that every heretic or schismatic is to have part with the Devil and his angels in the flames of eternal fire, unless before the end of his life he be incorporated with, and restored to the Catholic Church." No one is forced to enter the Church, but having once entered it through baptism, he is bound to keep the promises he freely made. To restrain and bring back her rebellious sons the Church uses both her own spiritual power and the secular power at her command.

Towards material heretics her conduct is ruled by the saying of St. Augustine: "Those are by no means to be accounted heretics who do not defend their false and perverse opinions with pertinacious zeal (animositas), especially when their error is not the fruit of audacious presumption but has been communicated to them by seduced and lapsed parents, and when they are seeking the truth with cautious solicitude and ready to be corrected" (P.L., XXXIII, ep. xliii, 160).