Author Topic: Against the Una Cum Benedicto  (Read 669 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Clovis

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 269
  • Reputation: +13/-0
Against the Una Cum Benedicto
« on: February 25, 2010, 05:46:13 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Pope Benedict XIV (14), Ex Quo, 1756: "First Admonition-Commemoration of Pontiff in the Mass:  "9. The first admonition is thus expressed: "It must be known that the priests who will use the Euchologion should be acquainted with the ecclesiastical canons of the holy Fathers and the Constitutions of the Catholic Church in order that they may avoid obvious mistakes in administering the divine Sacraments and performing their other duties. Therefore where commemorations are customarily made in the sacred liturgy, the Roman Pontiff should be first commemorated, then one's own bishop and patriarch, provided they are Catholic. But if either or both of them are schismatic or heretic they should by no means be commemorated." Certainly this is in full agreement with the decrees passed at the meeting of the Congregation on May 1, 1746, which We approved and confirmed. The following question was raised at that meeting: "whether the name of the supreme pontiff should be put into the prayers said by priest and deacon at the Offertory as well as in the other prayers, that is, For the supreme pontiff N." This response was given to that question: "In the instruction which is to be added at the start of the Euchologion, Greek priests should be advised to make a commemoration of the supreme pontiff and of their bishop or archbishop if he is in union with the Roman Catholic Church, and moreover a rubric should be put in the margin of the Liturgy referring them to the instruction." For it seemed best to add in this manner such matter as was missed in the text of the Euchologion itself."

    Offline Raoul76

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4814
    • Reputation: +2007/-4
    • Gender: Male
    Against the Una Cum Benedicto
    « Reply #1 on: February 25, 2010, 07:35:41 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • As I'm sure you're aware Clovis, he's saying the bishop or patriarch should be commemorated if he is union with the Catholic Church.  Commemorating the pontiff doesn't have any such rider attached.

    That could either favor or disfavor the sedevacantist cause.  It favors our cause if you read it to imply that the Pontiff cannot even be the Pontiff if he's a heretic.  It disfavors it if it makes it look like he must be commemorated no matter what.

    Or perhaps the same principle applies with the Pontiff as with the bishops and patriarchs, but it doesn't say that here.
    As I was a new convert when posting here, my posts are often full of error, even unwitting heresy and rash judgment, all of which I renounce, and all my writings are best avoided -- MDLS


    Offline Raoul76

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4814
    • Reputation: +2007/-4
    • Gender: Male
    Against the Una Cum Benedicto
    « Reply #2 on: February 25, 2010, 07:40:26 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    "... The Roman Pontiff should be first commemorated, then one's own bishop and patriarch, provided they are Catholic. But if either or both of them are schismatic or heretic they should by no means be commemorated."


    Who does the "they" refer to, the Pontiff and bishop and/or patriarch, or just the bishop and/or Patriarch?  I'd say the latter, because of the following explanation:

    Quote
    Greek priests should be advised to make a commemoration of the supreme pontiff and of their bishop or archbishop if he is in union with the Roman Catholic Church."

    As I was a new convert when posting here, my posts are often full of error, even unwitting heresy and rash judgment, all of which I renounce, and all my writings are best avoided -- MDLS

     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16