Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent  (Read 23333 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Stubborn

  • Supporter
Re: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent
« Reply #95 on: May 31, 2018, 12:09:02 PM »
Which quote do you believe is incorrect?
Section V, item #1. Read what Fr. Cekada said the pope said, then read what the pope actually taught, and you will see the blatant misquote which in my opinion, was intentional.

With that misquote, Fr. Cekada is accusing the pope of preaching a NO doctrine.

Re: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent
« Reply #96 on: May 31, 2018, 12:14:10 PM »
Section V, item #1. Read what Fr. Cekada said the pope said, then read what the pope actually taught, and you will see the blatant misquote which in my opinion, was intentional.

With that misquote, Fr. Cekada is accusing the pope of preaching a NO doctrine.

Section V, item #1 is a summary of Section I:II-III

Quote
II. You must believe those teachings of the universal ordinary magisterium held by theologians to belong to the faith (Pius IX).
• “For even if it were a matter concerning that subjection which is to be manifested by an act of divine faith, nevertheless, it would not have to be limited to those matters which have been defined by express decrees of the ecuмenical Councils, or of the Roman Pontiffs and of this See, but would have to be extended also to those matters which are handed down as divinely revealed by the ordinary teaching power of the whole Church spread throughout the world, and therefore, by universal and common consent are held by Catholic theologians to belong to faith.” Tuas Libenter (1863), DZ 1683.

Quote
III. You must also subject yourself to the Holy See’s doctrinal decisions and to other forms of doctrine commonly held as theological truths and conclusions. (Pius IX).  
• “But, since it is a matter of that subjection by which in conscience all those Catholics are bound who work in the speculative sciences, in order that they may bring new advantage to the Church by their writings, on that account, then, the men of that same convention should realize that it is not sufficient for learned Catholics to accept and revere the aforesaid dogmas of the Church, but that it is also necessary to subject themselves to the decisions pertaining to doctrine which are issued by the Pontifical Congregations, and also to those forms of doctrine which are held by the common and constant consent of Catholics as theological truths and conclusions, so certain that opinions opposed to these same forms of doctrine, although they cannot be called heretical, nevertheless deserve some theological censure.” Tuas Libenter (1863), DZ 1684.
Which of these quotes are you saying is incorrect?


Re: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent
« Reply #97 on: May 31, 2018, 12:20:49 PM »
Both quotes match exactly that which is provided in my hard copy of Denzinger THE SOURCES OF CATHOLIC DOGMA.  So I am going to conclude that your objection is unfounded.


Offline Stubborn

  • Supporter
Re: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent
« Reply #99 on: May 31, 2018, 12:55:45 PM »
Section V, item #1 is a summary of Section I:II-III
Which of these quotes are you saying is incorrect?
Section V, item #1, attributed to Pope Pius IX  as quoted from the link: "All Catholics are obliged to adhere to a teaching if Catholic theologians hold it by a common consent, or hold it as de fide, or Catholic Doctrine, or theologically certain."

^^^^^ This quote is a NO doctrine that even Fr. Cekada has zero faith in - if he had any faith in this at all, he would be 100% NO. Needless to say, this is not the teaching of Pope Pius IX.

Pope Pius IX actually taught:

"Even when it is only a question of the submission owed to divine faith, this cannot be limited merely to points defined by the express decrees of the Ecuмenical Councils, or of the Roman Pontiffs and of this Apostolic See; this submission must also be extended to all that has been handed down as divinely revealed by the ordinary teaching authority of the entire Church spread over the whole world, and which, for this reason, Catholic theologians, with a universal and constant consent, regard as being of the faith....."

Fr. Cekada eliminates the need for the theologians to have a "universal [or common] and constant consent" - which means nearly every theologian since the time of the Apostles have agreed that we owe our submission of faith to certain points of doctrine . That is what "universal [or common] and constant consent" means. Fr. Cekada intentionally(?) leaves this requirement of being universal or constant, completely out of the equation, preferring to use only the "common consent" of theologians - which means what? - the current or recent moral unanimity? or just certain theologians, or what? - the phrase "common consent" itself is actually meaningless here, but the NO made it into a doctrine all it's own.  

A BOD does not enjoy the common and constant consent of theologians, that dignity is reserved to the sacrament of baptism.