Author Topic: John 3:5 defined as Dogma at Trent, Theologian admits (video) (Read 42103 times)

Stubborn · « **Reply #75 on:** August 23, 2022, 09:32:50 AM »

Quote from: forlorn on August 23, 2022, 08:39:34 AM

So which is it? Is it a very clear-cut case of heresy easily disproven even to laymen, lest they be sick jokes of ill will, in which case we all need to condemn the SSPX, the Resistance, the CMRI, anyone you can think of, right this instant, or is it not?

This is the great mystery that follows this whole issue of a BOD and the EENS dogma around like an annoying little gnat.

It seems clear enough to me as I explained it in my post above yours, but although what it all means is actually comprehended, something inside of people (their will?) makes them choose to disbelieve it because of the demands that these particular divine truths place upon every human creature, and that it's all is too much for their conscience to bear.

They choose to disbelieve them because if they believed them, they know there is no way out, no other avenue, no other instrumentality - in a word, no hope whatsoever for all those who die unbaptized, hence outside of the Church. Fr. Cekada admitted this was the reason he disbelieved in EENS and why he believed in a BOD.

That's what I think.

DigitalLogos · « **Reply #76 on:** August 23, 2022, 10:04:45 AM »

Quote from: Pax Vobis on August 23, 2022, 09:14:46 AM

I personally know a gentlemen who lived in St Marys for years and he often talked to +W about the BOD issue. I think +W is open to both sides of the debate, as is his personality.

As for +Lefebvre, he was French, and the French/German churches were the earliest to modernize, going back to the early 1800s (post French Revolution). The point is, this is a centuries-old problem. It's not all his fault.

No way. This has been a debated issue and orthodox problem going back centuries. Orestes Brownson was debating it back in the 1800s. The emotional/sentimentality problem which led to BOD has it roots (in my opinion) in 3 areas, going back to the 1500s:

1. Discovery/Missionary activity in America - "How can these poor, ignorant indians be damned?"
a. Answer - Most indian tribes were blood-thirsty, war-making, devil-worshipping pagans who didn't follow the natural law. They damned themselves.

2. Protestantism in 1571 divided countries, communities and families - "How can my protestant family/friends be damned? They're good people."
a. Answer - Those who left the Faith, or grew up in protestantism were well aware of Catholic Truth and rejected it.

3. Modernism started in the 1600s inside the Church. Protestanism, Heliocentrism, Democracy, Suppression of the Jesuits, attacks on the papacy, etc. All this stuff started long, long ago and it's bearing horrible poisonous fruit right now.

I know that, I did not say it came from +Lefebvre. I said that it came through his line to the modern trad priests because it was believed and taught by him as if it were doctrine and therefore all of them believe it is doctrine as well, including +Williamson and +Sanborn, et al.

Obviously it was widespread before then, otherwise no one would've gone along with Vatican II's religious liberty heresy, and +Feeney wouldn't have been "condemned" for the true doctrine.

ServusInutilisDomini · « **Reply #77 on:** August 23, 2022, 10:46:47 AM »

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH

I found the Feeneyite side too compelling, I can't believe I'm going to have to research yet another thing.

Last time I said this I became a flat earther shortly after. I didn't want to be a flat earther, yet here I am.

I don't want to be a Feeneyite

Please pray that the light of truth guides me.

DigitalLogos · « **Reply #78 on:** August 23, 2022, 11:00:31 AM »

Quote from: ServusInutilisDomini on August 23, 2022, 10:46:47 AM

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH

I found the Feeneyite side too compelling, I can't believe I'm going to have to research yet another thing.

Last time I said this I became a flat earther shortly after. I didn't want to be a flat earther, yet here I am.

I don't want to be a Feeneyite

Please pray that the light of truth guides me.

There is absolutely no such thing as a Feeneyite. EENS is a Catholic dogma. And what happens when people deny Catholic dogma? They become heretics, not Catholics

Pax Vobis · « **Reply #79 on:** August 23, 2022, 12:28:57 PM »

Quote

I know that, I did not say it came from +Lefebvre. I said that it came through his line to the modern trad priests because it was believed and taught by him as if it were doctrine and therefore all of them believe it is doctrine as well, including +Williamson and +Sanborn, et al.

I see what you're saying but I think it was way more widespread than +Lefebvre. He was not the only influence on Trad priests. The entire American hierarchy scorched +Feeney in the 50s; people were believing in BOD long, long before +Lefebvre. Again, Orestes Brownson, one of the greatest American writers, was debating american clerics against BOD in the 1800s. Then you have the liberal re-translation of the american Baltimore Catechism too. I'm sure Europe was far, far more liberal.

CathInfo.com

Author Topic: John 3:5 defined as Dogma at Trent, Theologian admits (video) (Read 42103 times)

Stubborn

Re: John 3:5 defined as Dogma at Trent, Theologian admits (video)

DigitalLogos

Re: John 3:5 defined as Dogma at Trent, Theologian admits (video)

ServusInutilisDomini

Re: John 3:5 defined as Dogma at Trent, Theologian admits (video)

DigitalLogos

Re: John 3:5 defined as Dogma at Trent, Theologian admits (video)

Pax Vobis

Re: John 3:5 defined as Dogma at Trent, Theologian admits (video)