Author Topic: The Holy Office Letter Suprema Haec Sacra  (Read 865 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11054
  • Reputation: +5911/-813
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Holy Office Letter Suprema Haec Sacra
« Reply #30 on: September 13, 2017, 08:48:00 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • LoT now loves Cushing, whereas he would condemn him as a manifest heretic were he alive today.

    In fact, LoT, why wasn't the Episcopal See of Boston vacant due to manifest heresy?

    This guy was an early promoter of ecumenism and religious indifferentism.

    Offline Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8480
    • Reputation: +1085/-820
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Holy Office Letter Suprema Haec Sacra
    « Reply #31 on: September 13, 2017, 08:48:37 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • Quote
    This letter, known as the Suprema haec sacra, from the first three words of the Latin text, is of unique importance for the study of this section of sacred theology. It is an instruction of the Holy Office, sent out with the approval and at the bidding of the Sovereign Pontiff himself. As such, it is an authoritative, though obviously not an infallible, document. That is to say, the teachings contained in the Suprema haec sacra are not to be accepted as infallibly true on the authority of this particular document. Nevertheless, the fact remains that much of its teaching - indeed, what we may call the substance of its teaching - is material which has appeared in previous documents emanating from the Sovereign Pontiff himself and from Oecumenical Councils of the Catholic Church. Fenton
    "I receive Thee, redeeming Prince of my soul. Out of love for Thee have I studied, watched through many nights, and exerted myself: Thee did I preach and teach. I have never said aught against Thee. Nor do I persist stubbornly in my views. If I have ever expressed myself erroneously on this Sacrament, I submit to the judgement of the Holy Roman Church, in obedience of which I now part from this world." Saint Thomas Aquinas the greatest Doctor of the Church


    Offline Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8480
    • Reputation: +1085/-820
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Holy Office Letter Suprema Haec Sacra
    « Reply #32 on: September 13, 2017, 08:49:03 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • LoT now loves Cushing, whereas he would condemn him as a manifest heretic were he alive today.

    In fact, LoT, why wasn't the Episcopal See of Boston vacant due to manifest heresy?

    This guy was an early promoter of ecumenism and religious indifferentism.
    Here comes yuck.
    "I receive Thee, redeeming Prince of my soul. Out of love for Thee have I studied, watched through many nights, and exerted myself: Thee did I preach and teach. I have never said aught against Thee. Nor do I persist stubbornly in my views. If I have ever expressed myself erroneously on this Sacrament, I submit to the judgement of the Holy Roman Church, in obedience of which I now part from this world." Saint Thomas Aquinas the greatest Doctor of the Church

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11054
    • Reputation: +5911/-813
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Holy Office Letter Suprema Haec Sacra
    « Reply #33 on: September 13, 2017, 08:50:35 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • But when this thing was published, Card. Ottaviani was I think prefect of the Holy Office - definitely alive and a vital force in the Church.

    Yeah, but his was a secondary signature (if it was indeed legitimate) in the role of "Assessor", whatever that meant.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11054
    • Reputation: +5911/-813
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Holy Office Letter Suprema Haec Sacra
    « Reply #34 on: September 13, 2017, 08:51:21 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Here comes yuck.

    Very mature of you.  Now answer the question:

    Why wasn't the Episcopal See of Boston vacant due to manifest heresy?


    Offline JPaul

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3329
    • Reputation: +3372/-178
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Holy Office Letter Suprema Haec Sacra
    « Reply #35 on: September 13, 2017, 08:52:22 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Oh! how soon they forget. Fr. Feeney was making record numbers of inconvenient converts and preaching publicly against the Jews.  The eccumenist Cushing could not abide that,or Father Feeney exposing the heresy throughout the diocese which were the documented activities which prompted retaliation and suppression.

    This followed the silencing and supression of the great Father Coughlin, by the prior politically sensitive pope and using Pacelli as the instrument of that injustice. They were both afraid of the Jews. 

    There were much bigger issues were at play here than liberal pet heresies. Opposition resistance were being systematically eliminated, as well as the masonic operatives at work laying the groundwork for Vatican II and the revolution.

    Offline Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8480
    • Reputation: +1085/-820
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Holy Office Letter Suprema Haec Sacra
    « Reply #36 on: September 13, 2017, 08:53:29 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • Quote
    Now, in the first place, the Church teaches us that in this matter we are dealing with a most strict precept of Jesus Christ. For He explicitly ordered His apostles to teach all nations to observe all things whatsoever He Himself had commanded.

    Now, not the least important among the commandments of Christ is that one by which we are commanded to be incorporated by baptism into the Mystical Body of Christ, which is the Church, and to remain united to Christ and to His Vicar, through whom He Himself governs the Church on earth in a visible manner.
    "I receive Thee, redeeming Prince of my soul. Out of love for Thee have I studied, watched through many nights, and exerted myself: Thee did I preach and teach. I have never said aught against Thee. Nor do I persist stubbornly in my views. If I have ever expressed myself erroneously on this Sacrament, I submit to the judgement of the Holy Roman Church, in obedience of which I now part from this world." Saint Thomas Aquinas the greatest Doctor of the Church

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11054
    • Reputation: +5911/-813
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Holy Office Letter Suprema Haec Sacra
    « Reply #37 on: September 13, 2017, 08:54:55 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Also, the incompetent and ignorant LoT claims that assent must be given to any "authoritative" document.  We've discussed this before, but the ignoramus doesn't understand the notion of "assent" to these documents, and departs from his own hero Fenton's explanation for what this means.

    There's no mortal sin (or sin at all, but rather virtue) in respectfully disagreeing with even an authoritative non-infallible document if it happens to contradict Catholic principles.  But, then, LoT claims that these are all effectively infallible.

    Problem is that, by virtue of its not having appeared in AAS, this document isn't even guaranteed "authentic" by the Church.



    Offline Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8480
    • Reputation: +1085/-820
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Holy Office Letter Suprema Haec Sacra
    « Reply #38 on: September 13, 2017, 08:55:14 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • Oh! how soon they forget. Fr. Feeney was making record numbers of inconvenient converts and preaching publicly against the Jews.  The eccumenist Cushing could not abide that,or Father Feeney exposing the heresy throughout the diocese which were the documented activities which prompted retaliation and suppression.

    This followed the silencing and supression of the great Father Coughlin, by the prior politically sensitive pope and using Pacelli as the instrument of that injustice. They were both afraid of the Jews.

    There were much bigger issues were at play here than liberal pet heresies. Opposition resistance were being systematically eliminated, as well as the masonic operatives at work laying the groundwork for Vatican II and the revolution.
    Feeney right.
    Augustine, Ambrose, Aquinas, Bellarmine, Innocent II, Innocent III, Alphonsus, Pius IX, Pius X, Pius XI, Pius XII wrong. :facepalm:
    Bye bye Feeneyites.  
    "I receive Thee, redeeming Prince of my soul. Out of love for Thee have I studied, watched through many nights, and exerted myself: Thee did I preach and teach. I have never said aught against Thee. Nor do I persist stubbornly in my views. If I have ever expressed myself erroneously on this Sacrament, I submit to the judgement of the Holy Roman Church, in obedience of which I now part from this world." Saint Thomas Aquinas the greatest Doctor of the Church

    Offline Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8480
    • Reputation: +1085/-820
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Holy Office Letter Suprema Haec Sacra
    « Reply #39 on: September 13, 2017, 08:56:32 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • Also, the incompetent and ignorant LoT claims that assent must be given to any "authoritative" document.  We've discussed this before, but the ignoramus doesn't understand the notion of "assent" to these documents, and departs from his own hero Fenton's explanation for what this means.

    There's no mortal sin (or sin at all, but rather virtue) in respectfully disagreeing with even an authoritative non-infallible document if it happens to contradict Catholic principles.  But, then, LoT claims that these are all effectively infallible.

    Problem is that, by virtue of its not having appeared in AAS, this document isn't even guaranteed "authentic" by the Church.
    Suprema haec.  LoT's fault.  Bad boy.  
    "I receive Thee, redeeming Prince of my soul. Out of love for Thee have I studied, watched through many nights, and exerted myself: Thee did I preach and teach. I have never said aught against Thee. Nor do I persist stubbornly in my views. If I have ever expressed myself erroneously on this Sacrament, I submit to the judgement of the Holy Roman Church, in obedience of which I now part from this world." Saint Thomas Aquinas the greatest Doctor of the Church

    Offline Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8480
    • Reputation: +1085/-820
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Holy Office Letter Suprema Haec Sacra
    « Reply #40 on: September 13, 2017, 08:58:50 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • No he didn't. Prove it.
    :facepalm:
    Again the burden of proof is being unreasonably shifted. The letter came from the Holy Office to the Abp. of Boston. It was made public in 1953 and appeared in several periodicals. It was included in Denzinger. The document says His Holiness approved the doctrine set forth therein. The Pope is the head of the Holy Office. We have met our burden of proof. If anyone believes that Pius XII did NOT approve this, the burden of proof is now on him to prove it. Not on us.
    "I receive Thee, redeeming Prince of my soul. Out of love for Thee have I studied, watched through many nights, and exerted myself: Thee did I preach and teach. I have never said aught against Thee. Nor do I persist stubbornly in my views. If I have ever expressed myself erroneously on this Sacrament, I submit to the judgement of the Holy Roman Church, in obedience of which I now part from this world." Saint Thomas Aquinas the greatest Doctor of the Church


    Online DZ PLEASE

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1351
    • Reputation: +227/-211
    • Gender: Male
    • PM to convo. (No females w/out due cause.)
    Re: The Holy Office Letter Suprema Haec Sacra
    « Reply #41 on: September 13, 2017, 09:04:30 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • "As regards the doctrinal value of Decrees of the Holy Office it should be observed that canonists distinguish two kinds of approbation of an act of an inferior by a superior: first, approbation in common form (in forma communi), as it is sometimes called, which does not take from the act its nature and quality as an act of the inferior. Thus, for example, the decrees of a provincial council, although approved by the Congregation of the Council or by the Holy See, always remain provincial conciliar decrees. Secondly, specific approbation (in forma specifica), which takes from the act approved its character of an act of the inferior and makes it the act of the superior who approves it. This approbation is understood when, for example, the pope approves a Decree of the Holy Office ex certa scientia, motu proprio, or plenitudine suâ potestatis. Even when specifically approved by the pope, decrees of the Holy Office are not infallible. They call for a true assent, internal and sincere, but they do not impose an absolute assent, like the dogmatic definitions given by the pope as infallible teacher of the Faith. The reason is that, although an act of this congregation, when approved by the pope specifically, becomes an act of the sovereign pontiff, that act is not necessarily clothed with the infallible authority inherent in the Holy See, since the pope is free to make the act of an inferior his own without applying his pontifical prerogative to its performance. Similarly, when he acts of his own volition, he may teach ex cathedra or he may teach in a less decisive and solemn way. Examples of specific approbation of the Decrees of the Holy Office which yet lack the force of ex cathedra definitions are given by Choupin ("Valeur des décisions doctrinales et disciplinaires du Saint-Siège", Paris, 1907, ch. ix, sect. 9). The disciplinary Decrees of the Holy Office have the same force as those of the other congregations, that is, they are binding upon all the faithful if they be formally universal; and they are binding only upon the parties interested if they be merely personal, e.g., judicial sentences, which are law for the parties in the case. If, however, they be personal and at the same time equivalently universal, canonists are not fully agreed as to their force. For a discussion of this point see Choupin, op. cit., ch. iv, sect. 33, and the authors cited by him."

    via "newadvent.org"

    Offline An even Seven

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1032
    • Reputation: +312/-206
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Holy Office Letter Suprema Haec Sacra
    « Reply #42 on: September 13, 2017, 09:06:39 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • :facepalm:
    Again the burden of proof is being unreasonably shifted. The letter came from the Holy Office to the Abp. of Boston. It was made public in 1953 and appeared in several periodicals. It was included in Denzinger. The document says His Holiness approved the doctrine set forth therein. The Pope is the head of the Holy Office. We have met our burden of proof. If anyone believes that Pius XII did NOT approve this, the burden of proof is now on him to prove it. Not on us.
    The Pope didn't sign it.
    It's not in the AAS.
    It's a letter from two cardinals (who went along with V2) to a Bishop (assuming he still legitimately held his see as he was a heretic)
    The Pope never mentioned it in a speech
    The Pope never wrote about it
    The Pope, most importantly, never gave even the slightest hint that he shared the same belief as the contents of the Letter. In fact, quite the opposite.
    John 12:[42] However, many of the chief men also believed in him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess him, that they might not be cast out of the synagogue. [43] For they loved the glory of men more than the glory of God.

    Offline Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8480
    • Reputation: +1085/-820
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Holy Office Letter Suprema Haec Sacra
    « Reply #43 on: September 13, 2017, 09:07:00 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • "As regards the doctrinal value of Decrees of the Holy Office it should be observed that canonists distinguish two kinds of approbation of an act of an inferior by a superior: first, approbation in common form (in forma communi), as it is sometimes called, which does not take from the act its nature and quality as an act of the inferior. Thus, for example, the decrees of a provincial council, although approved by the Congregation of the Council or by the Holy See, always remain provincial conciliar decrees. Secondly, specific approbation (in forma specifica), which takes from the act approved its character of an act of the inferior and makes it the act of the superior who approves it. This approbation is understood when, for example, the pope approves a Decree of the Holy Office ex certa scientia, motu proprio, or plenitudine suâ potestatis. Even when specifically approved by the pope, decrees of the Holy Office are not infallible. They call for a true assent, internal and sincere, but they do not impose an absolute assent, like the dogmatic definitions given by the pope as infallible teacher of the Faith. The reason is that, although an act of this congregation, when approved by the pope specifically, becomes an act of the sovereign pontiff, that act is not necessarily clothed with the infallible authority inherent in the Holy See, since the pope is free to make the act of an inferior his own without applying his pontifical prerogative to its performance. Similarly, when he acts of his own volition, he may teach ex cathedra or he may teach in a less decisive and solemn way. Examples of specific approbation of the Decrees of the Holy Office which yet lack the force of ex cathedra definitions are given by Choupin ("Valeur des décisions doctrinales et disciplinaires du Saint-Siège", Paris, 1907, ch. ix, sect. 9). The disciplinary Decrees of the Holy Office have the same force as those of the other congregations, that is, they are binding upon all the faithful if they be formally universal; and they are binding only upon the parties interested if they be merely personal, e.g., judicial sentences, which are law for the parties in the case. If, however, they be personal and at the same time equivalently universal, canonists are not fully agreed as to their force. For a discussion of this point see Choupin, op. cit., ch. iv, sect. 33, and the authors cited by him."

    via "newadvent.org"
    Good post.  Thank you.
    "I receive Thee, redeeming Prince of my soul. Out of love for Thee have I studied, watched through many nights, and exerted myself: Thee did I preach and teach. I have never said aught against Thee. Nor do I persist stubbornly in my views. If I have ever expressed myself erroneously on this Sacrament, I submit to the judgement of the Holy Roman Church, in obedience of which I now part from this world." Saint Thomas Aquinas the greatest Doctor of the Church

    Offline tornpage

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 209
    • Reputation: +52/-28
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Holy Office Letter Suprema Haec Sacra
    « Reply #44 on: September 13, 2017, 09:07:25 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Yeah, but his was a secondary signature (if it was indeed legitimate) in the role of "Assessor", whatever that meant.
    I know, but he would still be associated with a "fraud" and yet silent.
    "Assuredly the infinite power of God is not bound by anything; all things obey it as so many passive instruments. In regard to this external principle, therefore, we must inquire which one of all the means in His power Christ did actually adopt."

    Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum

     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 
    Powered by SMFPacks WYSIWYG Editor