Author Topic: John Lane on the Real Cause of the Crisis (Read 10582 times)

Stubborn · « **Reply #15 on:** January 18, 2014, 01:56:50 PM »

Quote from: Ambrose

Quote from: Alcuin
Quote from: SJB
you still have no concept of what membership means nor are you able to make proper distinctions.

What does membership mean?

Have you ever read Mystici Corporis of Pope Pius XII?

Do you ever answer a question without another question?

Matto · « **Reply #16 on:** January 18, 2014, 02:02:47 PM »

Quote from: Ambrose

Vatican II theology makes the Church like an onion, with the center being the Catholic Church, the closest layer to the center, the eastern schismatics, followed by Protestants, then by the Muslims and Jєωs, and then all "believers." All within the onion can be saved, but those not within the center lack the fullness of the truth.

I would like to suggest an alteration to your onion. I think that according to the actions of the Vatican II sect, they believe the "Jєωs" are the closest.

Ambrose · « **Reply #17 on:** January 18, 2014, 03:34:22 PM »

Quote from: Stubborn

Quote from: Ambrose
Quote from: Alcuin
Quote from: SJB
you still have no concept of what membership means nor are you able to make proper distinctions.

What does membership mean?

Have you ever read Mystici Corporis of Pope Pius XII?

Do you ever answer a question without another question?

The implication of why I asked you the question should be obvious. Pope Pius XII brilliantly and clearly answered this question in the encyclical. If you have read the encyclical, the matter should be clear.

Ambrose · « **Reply #18 on:** January 18, 2014, 03:36:49 PM »

Quote from: Matto

Quote from: Ambrose

Vatican II theology makes the Church like an onion, with the center being the Catholic Church, the closest layer to the center, the eastern schismatics, followed by Protestants, then by the Muslims and Jєωs, and then all "believers." All within the onion can be saved, but those not within the center lack the fullness of the truth.

I would like to suggest an alteration to your onion. I think that according to the actions of the Vatican II sect, they believe the "Jєωs" are the closest.

You may be right that some think this, but in their official docuмents and works of post Vatican II theologians, the schismatics are closer, as they have the agreement in Faith and valid sacraments.

Alcuin · « **Reply #19 on:** January 18, 2014, 06:59:16 PM »

Quote from: Ambrose

Quote from: Alcuin
Quote from: SJB
you still have no concept of what membership means nor are you able to make proper distinctions.

What does membership mean?

Have you ever read Mystici Corporis of Pope Pius XII?

Yes, in particular para.30:

Quote

On the Cross then the Old Law died, soon to be buried and to be a bearer of death, [36] in order to give way to the New Testament of which Christ had chosen the Apostles as qualified ministers; [37] and although He had been constituted the Head of the whole human family in the womb of the Blessed Virgin, it is by the power of the Cross that our Savior exercises fully the office itself of Head of His Church. "For it was through His triumph on the Cross," according to the teaching of the Angelic and Common Doctor, "that He won power and dominion over the gentiles";[38] by that same victory He increased the immense treasure of graces, which, as He reigns in glory in heaven, He lavishes continually on His mortal members; it was by His blood shed on the Cross that God's anger was averted and that all the heavenly gifts, especially the spiritual graces of the New and Eternal Testament, could then flow from the fountains of our Savior for the salvation of men, of the faithful above all; it was on the tree of the Cross, finally, that He entered into possession of His Church, that is, of all the members of His Mystical Body; for they would not have been untied to this Mystical Body through the waters of Baptism except by the salutary virtue of the Cross, by which they had been already brought under the complete sway of Christ.

36. Jerome and Augustine, Epist. CXII, 14 and CXVI, 16: Migne, P.L., XXII, 924 and 943; St. Thos., I-II, q. 103, a. 3, ad 2; a. 4; ad 1; Council of Flor. pro Jacob.: Mansi, XXXI, 1738.

37. Cf. II Cor., III, 6.

38. Cf. St. Thos. III, q. 42, a. 1.

Christ's Church are the members of His Mystical Body.

The word member is from the Latin membrum meaning limb or part.

Capt McQuigg · « **Reply #20 on:** January 18, 2014, 07:09:21 PM »

When the novus ordo publicly denied Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, that is the cause of this crisis.

When did they do that, you ask? Simple. When they declared other religions as having salvific nature and when the popes (you know which ones) publicly expressed their belief that Jєωs do not need to convert to be saved.

However, I think Fr. Feeney was WAY WAY WAY ahead of the curve on this issue because denying any portion of EENS is just like saying Our Lord was just using dramatic hyperbole when He said He was the Way, the Truth and the Light and that no one comes to the Father except thru Him.

Alcuin · « **Reply #21 on:** January 18, 2014, 07:27:57 PM »

Quote from: Alcuin

Quote from: Ambrose
Quote from: Alcuin
Quote from: SJB
you still have no concept of what membership means nor are you able to make proper distinctions.

What does membership mean?

Have you ever read Mystici Corporis of Pope Pius XII?

Yes, in particular para.30:

Quote
On the Cross then the Old Law died, soon to be buried and to be a bearer of death, [36] in order to give way to the New Testament of which Christ had chosen the Apostles as qualified ministers; [37] and although He had been constituted the Head of the whole human family in the womb of the Blessed Virgin, it is by the power of the Cross that our Savior exercises fully the office itself of Head of His Church. "For it was through His triumph on the Cross," according to the teaching of the Angelic and Common Doctor, "that He won power and dominion over the gentiles";[38] by that same victory He increased the immense treasure of graces, which, as He reigns in glory in heaven, He lavishes continually on His mortal members; it was by His blood shed on the Cross that God's anger was averted and that all the heavenly gifts, especially the spiritual graces of the New and Eternal Testament, could then flow from the fountains of our Savior for the salvation of men, of the faithful above all; it was on the tree of the Cross, finally, that He entered into possession of His Church, that is, of all the members of His Mystical Body; for they would not have been untied to this Mystical Body through the waters of Baptism except by the salutary virtue of the Cross, by which they had been already brought under the complete sway of Christ.

36. Jerome and Augustine, Epist. CXII, 14 and CXVI, 16: Migne, P.L., XXII, 924 and 943; St. Thos., I-II, q. 103, a. 3, ad 2; a. 4; ad 1; Council of Flor. pro Jacob.: Mansi, XXXI, 1738.

37. Cf. II Cor., III, 6.

38. Cf. St. Thos. III, q. 42, a. 1.

Christ's Church are the members of His Mystical Body.

The word member is from the Latin membrum meaning limb or part.

And if you can be inside the Church without being a member than the Church can no longer be referred to as a body.

Quote

One wondered if the image of the Mystical Body might be too narrow a starting point to define the many forms of belonging to the Church now found in the tangle of human history. If we use the image of a body to describe "belonging" we are limited only to the form of representation as "member". Either one is or one is not a member, there are no other possibilities. One can then ask if the image of the body was too restrictive, since there manifestly existed in reality intermediate degrees of belonging.

The Ecclesiology of Vatican II
Ratzinger 2001

Ambrose · « **Reply #22 on:** January 18, 2014, 11:44:51 PM »

Quote from: Alcuin

Quote from: Alcuin
Quote from: Ambrose
Quote from: Alcuin
Quote from: SJB
you still have no concept of what membership means nor are you able to make proper distinctions.

What does membership mean?

Have you ever read Mystici Corporis of Pope Pius XII?

Yes, in particular para.30:

Quote
On the Cross then the Old Law died, soon to be buried and to be a bearer of death, [36] in order to give way to the New Testament of which Christ had chosen the Apostles as qualified ministers; [37] and although He had been constituted the Head of the whole human family in the womb of the Blessed Virgin, it is by the power of the Cross that our Savior exercises fully the office itself of Head of His Church. "For it was through His triumph on the Cross," according to the teaching of the Angelic and Common Doctor, "that He won power and dominion over the gentiles";[38] by that same victory He increased the immense treasure of graces, which, as He reigns in glory in heaven, He lavishes continually on His mortal members; it was by His blood shed on the Cross that God's anger was averted and that all the heavenly gifts, especially the spiritual graces of the New and Eternal Testament, could then flow from the fountains of our Savior for the salvation of men, of the faithful above all; it was on the tree of the Cross, finally, that He entered into possession of His Church, that is, of all the members of His Mystical Body; for they would not have been untied to this Mystical Body through the waters of Baptism except by the salutary virtue of the Cross, by which they had been already brought under the complete sway of Christ.

36. Jerome and Augustine, Epist. CXII, 14 and CXVI, 16: Migne, P.L., XXII, 924 and 943; St. Thos., I-II, q. 103, a. 3, ad 2; a. 4; ad 1; Council of Flor. pro Jacob.: Mansi, XXXI, 1738.

37. Cf. II Cor., III, 6.

38. Cf. St. Thos. III, q. 42, a. 1.

Christ's Church are the members of His Mystical Body.

The word member is from the Latin membrum meaning limb or part.

And if you can be inside the Church without being a member than the Church can no longer be referred to as a body.

Quote
One wondered if the image of the Mystical Body might be too narrow a starting point to define the many forms of belonging to the Church now found in the tangle of human history. If we use the image of a body to describe "belonging" we are limited only to the form of representation as "member". Either one is or one is not a member, there are no other possibilities. One can then ask if the image of the body was too restrictive, since there manifestly existed in reality intermediate degrees of belonging.

The Ecclesiology of Vatican II
Ratzinger 2001

The Church is a body, it is a visible society of those who are baptized and profess the true Faith. Only those who meet this definition are members.

SJB · « **Reply #23 on:** January 19, 2014, 08:08:33 AM »

Bellarmine's teaching on visibility, the basis for The teaching in Mystici Corporis, also states that occult or secret heretics are still members, joined by external union only, while catechumens are not members yet joined by internal union.

Mystici Corporis was correcting those who wrongly imagined a church with an invisible membership. This was later deviously exploited by the super-intelligent modernists, and misunderstood by the idiots who do their own theology and are simply looking for some proof texts for their own self-taught theories.

JPaul · « **Reply #24 on:** January 19, 2014, 10:09:51 AM »

It is all Father Feeney's fault! The whole of it!... How could I have missed that!

The Novus Ordoites have been right all along......everyone can be saved by the Catholic Church.... no money down and no payments forever.......

Where have we foolish rigorists been all this time???

Ambrose · « **Reply #25 on:** January 19, 2014, 10:24:30 AM »

Quote from: J.Paul

It is all Father Feeney's fault! The whole of it!... How could I have missed that!

The Novus Ordoites have been right all along......everyone can be saved by the Catholic Church.... no money down and no payments forever.......

Where have we foolish rigorists been all this time???

In the 1940's and 50's there was no Novus Ordo. There was Pope Pius XII ruling the Church, and he through the Holy Office taught the Saint Benedict Center what they needed to believe. They refused, and to this day, the movement of rejecting the teaching of the Church continues.

The Feeneyites are expert propagandists, and are good at portraying the teaching of the Holy Office under Pope Pius XII inaccurately. Some heretics swing to laxism, others such as the Calvinists, Jansenists and Feeneyites swing to rigorism.

SJB · « **Reply #26 on:** January 19, 2014, 11:20:44 AM »

Quote from: J.Paul

It is all Father Feeney's fault! The whole of it!... How could I have missed that!

The Novus Ordoites have been right all along......everyone can be saved by the Catholic Church.... no money down and no payments forever.......

Where have we foolish rigorists been all this time???

Nobody said it was Fr. Feeney's fault nor have I ever said this. Fr. Feeney was absolutely correct about exposing what the liberals were saying and teaching, which in many cases was heretical. I think Cushing was just a good politician, and exposed the weakness of Feeney, which were his erroneous ideas that were corrected by the Holy Office. Cushing and the liberals were devious, and as true liberals, they pretended they were not being corrected by the Holy Office, when in fact they were. Cushing was a Bishop, so he obviously had the upper hand on Feeney as a simple priest.

bowler · « **Reply #27 on:** January 19, 2014, 08:12:36 PM »

Quote from: Ambrose

Quote from: J.Paul
It is all Father Feeney's fault! The whole of it!... How could I have missed that!

The Novus Ordoites have been right all along......everyone can be saved by the Catholic Church.... no money down and no payments forever.......

Where have we foolish rigorists been all this time???

In the 1940's and 50's there was no Novus Ordo. There was Pope Pius XII ruling the Church, ...

Yeah, right, and Bugnini did not exist till the 1960's, and all the bishops turned progressivists in 1963.

Ambrose · « **Reply #28 on:** January 19, 2014, 11:24:10 PM »

Quote from: bowler

Quote from: Ambrose
Quote from: J.Paul
It is all Father Feeney's fault! The whole of it!... How could I have missed that!

The Novus Ordoites have been right all along......everyone can be saved by the Catholic Church.... no money down and no payments forever.......

Where have we foolish rigorists been all this time???

In the 1940's and 50's there was no Novus Ordo. There was Pope Pius XII ruling the Church, ...

Yeah, right, and Bugnini did not exist till the 1960's, and all the bishops turned progressivists in 1963.

Was Bugnini Pope in the 50's? Last I checked Pius XII ruled the Church, and he through the Holy Office told Catholics what to believe.

Why is it that so many exalt Bugnini and make him into this all powerful boogeyman? He was a nobody underling in the 50's. His importance grew when the antipope Paul VI allowed heresy and evil to run wild.

Alcuin · « **Reply #29 on:** January 20, 2014, 12:04:43 AM »

Quote from: Ambrose

Quote from: Alcuin
Quote from: Alcuin
Quote from: Ambrose
Quote from: Alcuin
Quote from: SJB
you still have no concept of what membership means nor are you able to make proper distinctions.

What does membership mean?

Have you ever read Mystici Corporis of Pope Pius XII?

Yes, in particular para.30:

Quote
On the Cross then the Old Law died, soon to be buried and to be a bearer of death, [36] in order to give way to the New Testament of which Christ had chosen the Apostles as qualified ministers; [37] and although He had been constituted the Head of the whole human family in the womb of the Blessed Virgin, it is by the power of the Cross that our Savior exercises fully the office itself of Head of His Church. "For it was through His triumph on the Cross," according to the teaching of the Angelic and Common Doctor, "that He won power and dominion over the gentiles";[38] by that same victory He increased the immense treasure of graces, which, as He reigns in glory in heaven, He lavishes continually on His mortal members; it was by His blood shed on the Cross that God's anger was averted and that all the heavenly gifts, especially the spiritual graces of the New and Eternal Testament, could then flow from the fountains of our Savior for the salvation of men, of the faithful above all; it was on the tree of the Cross, finally, that He entered into possession of His Church, that is, of all the members of His Mystical Body; for they would not have been untied to this Mystical Body through the waters of Baptism except by the salutary virtue of the Cross, by which they had been already brought under the complete sway of Christ.

36. Jerome and Augustine, Epist. CXII, 14 and CXVI, 16: Migne, P.L., XXII, 924 and 943; St. Thos., I-II, q. 103, a. 3, ad 2; a. 4; ad 1; Council of Flor. pro Jacob.: Mansi, XXXI, 1738.

37. Cf. II Cor., III, 6.

38. Cf. St. Thos. III, q. 42, a. 1.

Christ's Church are the members of His Mystical Body.

The word member is from the Latin membrum meaning limb or part.

And if you can be inside the Church without being a member than the Church can no longer be referred to as a body.

Quote
One wondered if the image of the Mystical Body might be too narrow a starting point to define the many forms of belonging to the Church now found in the tangle of human history. If we use the image of a body to describe "belonging" we are limited only to the form of representation as "member". Either one is or one is not a member, there are no other possibilities. One can then ask if the image of the body was too restrictive, since there manifestly existed in reality intermediate degrees of belonging.

The Ecclesiology of Vatican II
Ratzinger 2001

The Church is a body, it is a visible society of those who are baptized and profess the true Faith. Only those who meet this definition are members.

Yes, the Church is a body and only her members are parts of it. There's no other way of being inside the Church. If there is then the concept of a body is found wanting as Ratzinger pointed out.