Author Topic: Can I go? (Read 3930 times)

Conspiracy_Factist · « **Reply #30 on:** February 21, 2014, 09:13:38 PM »

Quote from: Mithrandylan

Quote from: gooch
Quote from: Mithrandylan
Quote from: gooch
Quote from: Thorn
gooch, Pope Pius XI stated "This Apostolic See has never
Again:

Quote from: Mit
[/quote

So you admit that a person can be present at a non-Catholic service without sinning. You admit that mere presence is not necessarily accompanied by sin. And then you say you won't believe it unless the pope says it.

gooch, the Canon Lawyers say it. The moral theologians say it. No pope calls passive attendance a sin. That is your construction and your scruple.

can you honestly say the worker who goes into a ѕуηαgσgυє to do his work, save a life or what have you is the same as someone who attends the the marriage ceremony, celebrates with them afterwards

Mithrandylan · « **Reply #31 on:** February 21, 2014, 09:26:10 PM »

Quote from: gooch

Quote from: Mithrandylan
Quote from: gooch
Quote from: Mithrandylan
Quote from: gooch
Quote from: Thorn
gooch, Pope Pius XI stated "This Apostolic See has never
Again:

Quote from: Mit
[/quote

So you admit that a person can be present at a non-Catholic service without sinning. You admit that mere presence is not necessarily accompanied by sin. And then you say you won't believe it unless the pope says it.

gooch, the Canon Lawyers say it. The moral theologians say it. No pope calls passive attendance a sin. That is your construction and your scruple.

can you honestly say the worker who goes into a ѕуηαgσgυє to do his work, save a life or what have you is the same as someone who attends the the marriage ceremony, celebrates with them afterwards

The point isn't that they're the same. The point is that material presence does not necessitate sin. With that mind, it should be easily conceivable how a person may conditionally be present at a non-Catholic wedding, funeral, etc. without sinning.

Conspiracy_Factist · « **Reply #32 on:** February 22, 2014, 12:19:31 AM »

[/quote]
can you honestly say the worker who goes into a ѕуηαgσgυє to do his work, save a life or what have you is the same as someone who attends the the marriage ceremony, celebrates with them afterwards [/quote]

The point isn't that they're the same. The point is that material presence does not necessitate sin. With that mind, it should be easily conceivable how a person may conditionally be present at a non-Catholic wedding, funeral, etc. without sinning.[/quote]

I agree that it's easily conceivable that material presence at a non catholic wedding maybe done without sinning,the example of the worker saving someone's life..agreed....this doesn't answer whether someone who accepts an invitation to go to a Jєωιѕн wedding, enters the ѕуηαgσgυє, doesn't say their prayers but just listens, then afterwards party's with these Christ killers .....is not sinning, can you not see why I should question whether this action would offend God?....I have offended God for more than 3/4 of my life, I can not afford to Offend Him any more, my problem is of course by taking this stance I upset many loved ones in my family

Conspiracy_Factist · « **Reply #33 on:** February 27, 2014, 07:37:24 PM »

besides the couple of people here that are 100% sure it's safe to passively attend the funerals and marriages of non catholics, Jєωs, novus order what have you..am I to assume everyone else is in agreement with them?

Thorn · « **Reply #34 on:** February 27, 2014, 07:51:27 PM »

Since no one's arguing to the contrary, I'd say that was a safe bet.

JoeZ · « **Reply #35 on:** February 27, 2014, 10:18:39 PM »

Quote from: gooch

Quote from: Mithrandylan
gooch,

Authorities trained and deputed by the Church are reliable guides on moral questions. Latin Mass Magazine can boast neither. You are insisting on personal scruples and are using any "evidence" that supports your scruples and ignoring Church authorities.

All of your rebuttals can be summarized into "what if?" You have no reason to insist on this issue. You should seek spiritual counsel if you're not trolling.

how am I trolling? you make no sense and are being dishonest if you think it's so clear cut , that there's nothing to debate, you made up your mind so that's good for you just allow others to express their beliefs or questions without shooting the troll word half haphazardly, our souls are at stake

Pope Pius XI,
Mortalium Animos
(# 10), Jan. 6, 1928: “...
this Apostolic See has never allowed its subjects to take part in the assemblies of non-Catholics
...
Pope Pius VI,
Charitas
(# 31-32), April 13, 1791, speaking of priests who went along with
the notoriously heretical civil constitution of
the clergy in France: “Above all, avoid and
condemn the sacrilegious intruders...
do not hold communion with them especially in
divine worship

Speaking of priests who belong to the “Old Catholic” sect, which publicly rejects Vatican I and its
definition on Papal Infallibility, Pope Pius IX declared:
Pope Pius IX,
Graves ac diuturnae
(# 4), March 23, 1875: “
They [the faithful] should totally shun their religious celebrations, their buildings,
and their chairs of pestilence
which they have with impunity established
to transmit the sacred teachings. They should shun their writings and all contact with
them. They should not have any dealings or meetings with usurping priests and apostates from the faith who dare to exercise the duties of an ecclesiastical minister without possessing a legitimate mission or any
jurisdiction

I tend to agree with gooch here as a general feeling. Looking at his quotes I offer these observations;

The first, by Pius XI, says don't take part in assemblies which means don't assemble with them. I admit these quotes must have been written in Latin and I am only seeing a translation and I could very well be wrong.

The second, by Pius VI says don't hold communion with them. This term is even more broad than being in the same room and I'd say we here on these boards, even as spread out as we are, admit the same communion if we claim to be Catholic.

The third is more of the same, except these poor people are separated from the faithful by one doctrine and not a whole lifestyle.

Also, a requirement of attendance is if no scandal is caused. If you are known by your circle of friends as a practicing Catholic and they see you enter their temple but do not see you NOT participating, how did you not scandalize? This reminds me of the priest Eleazar who could have saved his own life by pretending to eat pork but refused. He chose to obey (and even seem to obey) a materially insignificant law for the love of God over the esteem of men.

Please correct me if I am wrong.
God bless,
JoeZ

Conspiracy_Factist · « **Reply #36 on:** February 27, 2014, 10:35:02 PM »

Quote from: Thorn

Since no one's arguing to the contrary, I'd say that was a safe bet.

don't quit your day job to become a gambler, since Joe Z is expressing the same doubts as I that makes 2 of us, I quickly counted 3 on your side

JoeZ · « **Reply #37 on:** February 27, 2014, 10:37:38 PM »

And to the OP, thank you for the post as it inspired me to reread the account for tonight's reading. 2 Machabees, chapter 6 reads like our times.

God bless,
JoeZ

Thorn · « **Reply #38 on:** February 28, 2014, 12:02:17 AM »

What can I tell you, gooch? I was brought up waaay before VatII & that's what I was taught in Religion class. I had non-Catholic friends & no one seemed scandalized if we attended a non-Catholic wedding or funeral of a friend & just sat there. They knew that that's what Catholics did. If non-Catholics came to our church, the women didn't cover their heads, they just sat there too but did stand when the Gospel was read. To all of us, we just considered this common courtesy on both sides of the aisle. Why make things more demanding than need be? It was a completely different atmosphere then. Now, we have not only different branches of Protestants, but every flavor of Catholicism & all the Catholics are fighting each other & convinced that their flavor is the correct one.