Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]

Author Topic: 'Sedes'  (Read 5981 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Cletus

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 603
  • Reputation: +20/-0
  • Gender: Male
'Sedes'
« Reply #45 on: August 25, 2008, 05:09:51 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • But of course I agree that if it is true that Rome allowed a bishop who had not given up his Freemasonic associations to continue ordaining THAT would be scandalous.

    I doubt that it did.

    This story was told in a very iffy and sketchy manner.
    Logged

    Offline roscoe

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7611
    • Reputation: +617/-404
    • Gender: Male
    'Sedes'
    « Reply #46 on: August 26, 2008, 12:04:12 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: roscoe
    I think what MS was trying to do is say that it's OK for freemasons to be in the v2 clergy because we had this in the 19th Century and it was OK with the Pope then: this is known as equivocation. Well the fact is that it was not OK with any Pope and no proof will be forthcoming.

    To illustrate the seriuosness of the mason problem take a hint from Pope Clement XIII in his 1738 condemnation of the order. Absolution from having joined the masons is reserved to the Pope and the Pope only. Not even a bishop or Cardinal or even arch-priest of the Vatican Cathedral is authorised to give the required absolution. And in fact after the condemnation any Catholic  who joined the masons was SUBJECT TO THE DEATH PENALTY. Source--von Pastor v34

    The above Pope should read Clement XII.
    Logged
    There Is No Such Thing As 'Sede Vacantism'...
    nor is there such thing as a 'Feeneyite' or 'Feeneyism'
    Pages: 1 2 3 [4]
    « previous next »