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

Author Topic: Can it be said that Vatican II is heretical? TAKE TWO  (Read 7900 times)

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 46600
  • Reputation: +27457/-5070
  • Gender: Male
Can it be said that Vatican II is heretical? TAKE TWO
« Reply #15 on: April 28, 2015, 08:23:51 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: PapalSupremacy
    misericordianos and Ladislaus

    are once again discussing doctrine relating to BoD and Feeneyism, so instead of forcing me to reply by quoting Catholic theologians again, I expect Matthew will delete those comments.

    Quote from: Matthew
    I'm going to start this thread again. NO FEENEYISM or discussion of BoB and BoD here! I'll delete any violating posts without mercy.


    So are you, dimwit.

    Quote from: PapalSupremacy
    It does so by attacking one of the fundamental dogmas of the Catholic Faith - that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church.


    You admit that your allegation of heresy rests on soteriology but then when we try to refute that the soteriology is heretical if one accepts Suprema Haec then you start getting your panties in a knot.  No one has mentioned BoD, but merely broader soteriological issues, which you YOURSELF raised first.  So let's delete all your posts on this thread, eh?

    But if Matthew won't allow anyone to bring up soteriology, then this discussion is a joke.  That's why I asked Matthew to define "Feeneyism".  Every SV claims that the heresy of V2 is in the soteriology and ecclesiology, you allege the same, and then you try to silence us when we refute your allegation.  But Matthew has disappeared from this thread.  YOU are the first one to discuss "Feeneyism".

    Offline PapalSupremacy

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 115
    • Reputation: +89/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Can it be said that Vatican II is heretical? TAKE TWO
    « Reply #16 on: April 28, 2015, 08:31:35 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Ladislaus
    Every error contradicts Revelation; it's the proximity of the contradiction that leads to the theological note.  Daly has no idea what he's talking about.


    Pope Pius IX is quite clear that religious liberty is "against the doctrine of Scripture, of the Church, and of the Holy Fathers". The only theological note which fits that qualification is de fide divina et catholica (a truth proposed by the Church as revealed by God), and the denial of such a doctrine is heresy.

    Quote from: Ladislaus
    Uhm, not even close.  If Daly's making the charge of heresy, the burden of proof rests squarely on him to prove it and not on me to disprove it.  I have to disprove nothing.


    He does prove it in his article, which means that the burden of proof is on you to refute his evidence, every single qualification of heresy (because only one is enough to prove his point). By summarily dismissing them all and resorting to insults ad hominem against him you are only proving that you are unable to do so.
    He that reigneth on high, to whom is given all power in heaven and earth, has committed One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, outside of which there is no salvation, to one alone upon earth, namely to Peter, the first of the apostles, and to Peter's


    Offline misericordianos

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 187
    • Reputation: +31/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Can it be said that Vatican II is heretical? TAKE TWO
    « Reply #17 on: April 28, 2015, 09:00:27 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: PapalSupremacy
    misericordianos and Ladislaus

    are once again discussing doctrine relating to BoD and Feeneyism, so instead of forcing me to reply by quoting Catholic theologians again, I expect Matthew will delete those comments.

    Quote from: Matthew
    I'm going to start this thread again. NO FEENEYISM or discussion of BoB and BoD here! I'll delete any violating posts without mercy.


    I never discussed either.

    Offline Centroamerica

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2671
    • Reputation: +1684/-444
    • Gender: Male
    Can it be said that Vatican II is heretical? TAKE TWO
    « Reply #18 on: April 28, 2015, 09:33:07 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Bishop de Castro Mayer
    "The Code of Canon Law defines schismatics as the faithful who have separated themselves from the body of the Church, made up of the Pope and the bishops in union with him. More directly they are against charity, than against the Faith. Thus, before the First Vatican Council, one would have thought that this referred to someone who held to heresy. A historical example is the act constituted by the "petite église", formed by the bishops and faithful who had not heeded to the decision of Pius VII, when, yielding to the demands of Napoleon, dismissed all the faithful bishops to the monarchy of Louis XVI. These bishops and faithful did not adhere to any doctrinal error, but did not heed to the Pope's decision. They only had distanceds themselves from the Pope and the bishops united with the Pope. It was a schism. It was not a heresy.

    "Since the First Vatican Council has defined as a dogma of faith that the Roman Pontiff has in the Church, the supreme power of jurisdiction over bishops and faithful, there is no possibility of a schism forming that is not also heresy, which does not reject one truth of faith.

    "However, as does heresy, schism, in general, also involves doctrinal disagreement. That's what we mean when we talk about the St. Hippolytus schism in the third century, when the Saint refused to accept the authority of the Pope Saint Callistus. Schism, then could set up a body of doctrine that would pose as a doctrinal lot of the Church, and that, in fact, turns away the purity and integrity of the teachings of the Church.

    "In the case of Vatican II, this could and should be appointed as schismatic, since it shows that, in its authentic texts, there are deviations from the  teachings of the Church's traditional faith.
    "Now similar dissonance was noted even during the Council's work. It is, moreover, of all known religious freedom, claimed by the council as natural law, even for those who do not comply with the duty to investigate the true religion. In other words, the Council admits that such a right is recognized by all states. This teaching of Vatican is diametrically opposed to the traditional doctrine, renewed by Pius IX in his encyclical 'Quanta Cura'.
    "This is one example. There is much more.

    "Given this schismatic position of Vatican II, the good of souls requires the absolute need to discard it before taking care of any others that may arise. Incidentally, the Vatican 2 Council must not be presented as a council of the Catholic Church."
    We conclude logically that religion can give an efficacious and truly realistic answer to the great modern problems only if it is a religion that is profoundly lived, not simply a superficial and cheap religion made up of some vocal prayers and some ceremonies...

    Offline JPaul

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3832
    • Reputation: +3723/-293
    • Gender: Male
    Can it be said that Vatican II is heretical? TAKE TWO
    « Reply #19 on: April 29, 2015, 07:41:08 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Centroamerica
    Quote from: Bishop de Castro Mayer
    "The Code of Canon Law defines schismatics as the faithful who have separated themselves from the body of the Church, made up of the Pope and the bishops in union with him. More directly they are against charity, than against the Faith. Thus, before the First Vatican Council, one would have thought that this referred to someone who held to heresy. A historical example is the act constituted by the "petite église", formed by the bishops and faithful who had not heeded to the decision of Pius VII, when, yielding to the demands of Napoleon, dismissed all the faithful bishops to the monarchy of Louis XVI. These bishops and faithful did not adhere to any doctrinal error, but did not heed to the Pope's decision. They only had distanceds themselves from the Pope and the bishops united with the Pope. It was a schism. It was not a heresy.

    "Since the First Vatican Council has defined as a dogma of faith that the Roman Pontiff has in the Church, the supreme power of jurisdiction over bishops and faithful, there is no possibility of a schism forming that is not also heresy, which does not reject one truth of faith.

    "However, as does heresy, schism, in general, also involves doctrinal disagreement. That's what we mean when we talk about the St. Hippolytus schism in the third century, when the Saint refused to accept the authority of the Pope Saint Callistus. Schism, then could set up a body of doctrine that would pose as a doctrinal lot of the Church, and that, in fact, turns away the purity and integrity of the teachings of the Church.

    "In the case of Vatican II, this could and should be appointed as schismatic, since it shows that, in its authentic texts, there are deviations from the  teachings of the Church's traditional faith.
    "Now similar dissonance was noted even during the Council's work. It is, moreover, of all known religious freedom, claimed by the council as natural law, even for those who do not comply with the duty to investigate the true religion. In other words, the Council admits that such a right is recognized by all states. This teaching of Vatican is diametrically opposed to the traditional doctrine, renewed by Pius IX in his encyclical 'Quanta Cura'.
    "This is one example. There is much more.

    "Given this schismatic position of Vatican II, the good of souls requires the absolute need to discard it before taking care of any others that may arise. Incidentally, the Vatican 2 Council must not be presented as a council of the Catholic Church."


    And the Bishop was correct. The council needs to be rejected in toto, and yes by its implications, attempted teaching, and its intent , which intent, was confirmed by many of the authors of the docuмents, and by the supreme authority as interpreted by the conciliar popes, it is indeed heretical, and it will remain as such in thread three, four, five, and so on.


    Offline Centroamerica

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2671
    • Reputation: +1684/-444
    • Gender: Male
    Can it be said that Vatican II is heretical? TAKE TWO
    « Reply #20 on: April 29, 2015, 11:37:37 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • The interesting part is: why is Matthew insisting on debating whether or not the Vatican 2 Council was heretical, while putting emphasis on the fact that Archbishop Lefebvre signed every last docuмent despite telling us he didn't?

    If it is the hermeneutic of continuity that is being pushed in this forum, why not sign up with the Fraternity of St. Peter?
    We conclude logically that religion can give an efficacious and truly realistic answer to the great modern problems only if it is a religion that is profoundly lived, not simply a superficial and cheap religion made up of some vocal prayers and some ceremonies...

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46600
    • Reputation: +27457/-5070
    • Gender: Male
    Can it be said that Vatican II is heretical? TAKE TWO
    « Reply #21 on: April 29, 2015, 11:39:46 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Centroamerica

    The interesting part is: why is Matthew insisting on debating whether or not the Vatican 2 Council was heretical, while putting emphasis on the fact that Archbishop Lefebvre signed every last docuмent despite telling us he didn't?

    If it is the hermeneutic of continuity that is being pushed in this forum, why not sign up with the Fraternity of St. Peter?


    Matthew is suggesting that there is in fact nothing strictly heretical in Vatican II, not that there isn't lesser error in Vatican II.  (he's pushing the notion of "heresy" in the strict sense of the word).  Now, if there's no actual lesser error even, but just ambiguities, then I do suggest everyone simply apply the hermeneutic of continuity and follow the leadership of Bishop Fellay back into the Catholic fold.

    I believe that there is heresy, but I am not allowed to discuss it due to that being "Feeneyism".

    Offline Centroamerica

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2671
    • Reputation: +1684/-444
    • Gender: Male
    Can it be said that Vatican II is heretical? TAKE TWO
    « Reply #22 on: April 29, 2015, 11:56:28 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Ladislaus
    Quote from: Centroamerica

    The interesting part is: why is Matthew insisting on debating whether or not the Vatican 2 Council was heretical, while putting emphasis on the fact that Archbishop Lefebvre signed every last docuмent despite telling us he didn't?

    If it is the hermeneutic of continuity that is being pushed in this forum, why not sign up with the Fraternity of St. Peter?


    Matthew is suggesting that there is in fact nothing strictly heretical in Vatican II, not that there isn't lesser error in Vatican II.  (he's pushing the notion of "heresy" in the strict sense of the word).  Now, if there's no actual lesser error even, but just ambiguities, then I do suggest everyone simply apply the hermeneutic of continuity and follow the leadership of Bishop Fellay back into the Catholic fold.

    I believe that there is heresy, but I am not allowed to discuss it due to that being "Feeneyism".


    Well then your issue is with...

    1. COUNCIL OF TRENT (1545-1563)
    Canons on the Sacraments in General (Canon 4):
    “If anyone shall say that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary for salvation, but are superfluous, and that although all are not necessary for every individual, without them or without the desire of them (sine eis aut eorum voto), through faith alone men obtain from God the grace of justiflcation; let him be anathema.”
    Decree on Justification (Session 6, Chapter 4):
    “In these words a description of the justification of a sinner is given as being a translation from that state in which man is born a child of the first Adam to the state of grace and of the ‘adoption of the Sons’ (Rom. 8:15) of God through the second Adam, Jesus Christ, our Savior and this translation after the promulgation of the Gospel cannot be effected except through the layer of regeneration or a desire for it, (sine lavacro regenerationis aut eius voto) as it is written: ‘Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter in the kingdom of God’ (John 3:5).”

    2. ST. ALPHONSUS LIGUORI (1691-1787)
    Moral Theology (Bk. 6):
    “But baptism of desire is perfect conversion to God by contrition or love of God above all things accompanied by an explicit or implicit desire for true Baptism of water, the place of which it takes as to the remission of guilt, but not as to the impression of the [baptismal] character or as to the removal of all debt of punishment. It is called “of wind␅ [flaminis] because it takes place by the impulse of the Holy Ghost Who is called a wind [flamen]. Now it is de fide that men are also saved by Baptism of desire, by virtue of the Canon Apostolicam De Presbytero Non Baptizato and the Council of Trent, Session 6, Chapter 4, where it is said that no one can be saved “without the laver of regeneration or the desire for it.”

    3. 1917 CODE OF CANON LAW On Ecclesiastical Burial (Canon 1239. 2)
    “Catechumens who, through no fault of their own, die without Baptism, are to be treated as baptized.” — The Sacred Canons
    by Rev. John A. Abbo. St.T.L., J.C.D., and Rev. Jerome D. Hannan, A.M., LL.B., S.T.D., J.C.D.
    Commentary on the Code:
    “The reason for this rule is that they are justly supposed to have met death united to Christ through Baptism of desire.”

    4. POPE INNOCENT III
    Apostolicam:
    To your inquiry we respond thus: We assert without hesitation (on the authority of the holy Fathers Augustine and Ambrose) that the priest whom you indicated (in your letter) had died without the water of baptism, because he persevered in the faith of Holy Mother the Church and in the confession of the name of Christ, was freed from original sin and attained the joy of the heavenly fatherland. Read (brother) in the eighth book of Augustine’s City of God where among other things it is written, “Baptism is ministered invisibly to one whom not contempt of religion but death excludes.” Read again the book also of the blessed Ambrose concerning the death of Valentinian where he says the same thing. Therefore, to questions concerning the dead, you should hold the opinions of the learned Fathers, and in your church you should join in prayers and you should have sacrifices offered to God for the priest mentioned (Denzinger 388).
    Debitum pastoralis officii, August 28, 1206:
    You have, to be sure, intimated that a certain Jew, when at the point of death, since he lived only among Jews, immersed himself in water while saying: “I baptize myself in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.”
    We respond that, since there should be a distinction between the one baptizing and the one baptized, as is clearly gathered from the words of the Lord, when He says to the Apostles: “Go baptize all nations in the name etc.” (cf. Matt. 28:19), the Jew mentioned must be baptized again by another, that it may be shown that he who is baptized is one person, and he who baptizes another... If, however, such a one had died immediately, he would have rushed off to his heavenly home without delay because of the faith of the sacrament, although not because of the sacrament of faith (Denzinger 413).

    5. POPE ST. PIUS V (1566-1572)
    Ex omnibus afflictionibus, October 1, 1567
    Condemned the following erroneous propositions of Michael du Bay:
    Perfect and sincere charity, which is from a “pure heart and good conscience and a faith not feigned” (1 Tim. 1:5) can be in catechumens as well as in penitents without the remission of sins.
    That charity which is the fullness of the law is not always connected with the remission of sins.
    A catechumen lives justly and rightly and holily, and observes the commandments of God, and fulfills the law through charity, which is only received in the laver of Baptism, before the remission of sins has been obtained.

    6. ST. AMBROSE
    “I hear you express grief because he [Valentinian] did not receive the Sacrament of Baptism. Tell me, what else is there in us except the will and petition? But he had long desired to be initiated... and expressed his intention to be baptized... Surely, he received [it] because he asked [for it].”

    7. ST. AUGUSTINE, City of God
    “I do not hesitate to place the Catholic catechumen, who is burning with the love of God, before the baptized heretic... The centurion Cornelius, before Baptism, was better than Simon [Magus], who had been baptized. For Cornelius, even before Baptism, was filled with the Holy Ghost, while Simon, after Baptism, was puffed up with an unclean spirit” (De Bapt. C. Donat., IV 21).

    8. ST. THOMAS AQUINAS
    Summa, Article 1, Part III, Q. 68:
    “I answer that, the sacrament of Baptism may be wanting to someone in two ways. First, both in reality and in desire; as is the case with those who neither are baptized, nor wished to be baptized: which clearly indicates contempt of the sacrament, in regard to those who have the use of the free will. Consequently those to whom Baptism is wanting thus, cannot obtain salvation: since neither sacramentally nor mentally are they incorporated in Christ, through Whom alone can salvation be obtained.
    “Secondly, the sacrament of Baptism may be wanting to anyone in reality but not in desire: for instance, when a man wishes to be baptized, but by some ill-chance he is forestalled by death before receiving Baptism. And such a man can obtain salvation without being actually baptized, on account of his desire for Baptism, which desire is the outcome of faith that worketh by charity, whereby God, Whose power is not yet tied to visible sacraments, sanctifies man inwardly. Hence Ambrose says of Valentinian, who died while yet a catechumen: ‘I lost him whom I was to regenerate: but he did not lose the graces he prayed for.’”

    9. ST. ROBERT BELLARMINE, Doctor of the Church (1542-1621)
    Liber II, Caput XXX:
    “Boni Catehecuмeni sunt de Ecclesia, interna unione tantum, non autem externa” (Good catechumens are of the Church, by internal union only, not however, by external union).

    10. Roman Martyrology
    January 23: At Rome, St. Emerentiana, Virgin and Martyr, who was stoned by the heathen while still a catechumen, when she was praying at the tomb of St. Agnes, whose foster-sister she was.
    April 12: At Braga, in Portugal, St. Victor, Martyr, who, while still yet a catechumen, refused to worship an idol, and confessed Christ Jesus with great constancy, and so after many torments, he merited to be baptized in his own blood, his head being cut off.

    11. POPE PIUS IX (1846-1878) — Singulari Quadam, 1854:
    174. “It must, of course, be held as a matter of faith that outside the apostolic Roman Church no one can be saved, that the Church is the only ark of salvation, and that whoever does not enter it will perish in the flood. On the other hand, it must likewise be held as certain that those who are affected by ignorance of the true religion, if it is invincible ignorance, are not subject to any guilt in this matter before the eyes of the Lord. Now, then, who could presume in himself an ability to set the boundaries of such ignorance, taking into consideration the natural differences of peoples, lands, native talents, and so many other factors? Only when we have been released from the bonds of this body and see God just as He is (see John 3:2) all we really understand how close and beautiful a bond joins divine mercy with divine justice.”
    Quanto Conficiamur Moerore (1863):
    “...We all know that those who are afflicted with invincible ignorance with regard to our holy religion, if they carefully keep the precepts of the natural law that have been written by God in the hearts of men, if they are prepare to obey God, and if they lead a virtuous and dutiful life, can attain eternal life by the power of divine light and grace.”

    12. POPE PIUS XII (1939-1958) — Mystical Body of Christ (June 29, 1943):
    “As you know, Venerable Brethren, from the very beginning of Our Pontificate We have committed to the protection and guidance of heaven those who do not belong to the visible organization of the Catholic Church, solemnly declaring that after the example of the Good Shepherd We desire nothing more ardently than that they may have life and have it more abundantly... For even though unsuspectingly they are related to the Mystical Body of the Redeemer in desire and resolution, they still remain deprived of so many precious gifts and helps from heaven, which one can only enjoy in the Catholic Church.”

    13. FR. A. TANQUERY, Dogmatic Brevior; ART. IV, Section I, II - 1945 (1024-1)
    The Baptism of Desire. Contrition, or perfect charity, with at least an implicit desire for Baptism, supplies in adults the place of the baptism of water as respects the forgiveness of sins.
    This is certain.
    Explanation: a) An implicit desire for Baptism, that is, one that is included in a general purpose of keeping all the commandments of God is, as all agree, sufficient in one who is invincibly ignorant of the law of Baptism; likewise, according to the more common opinion, in one who knows the necessity of Baptism.
    b) Perfect charity, with a desire for Baptism, forgives original sin and actual sins, and therefore infuses sanctifying grace; but it does not imprint the Baptismal character and does not of itself remit the whole temporal punishment due for sin; whence, when the Unity offers, the obligation remains on
    one who was sanctified in this manner of receiving the Baptism of water.

    14. FR. DOMINIC PRUMMER, O.P., Moral Theology, 1949:
    “Baptism of Desire which is a perfect act of charity that includes at least implicitly the desire for Baptism by water”;
    “Baptism of Blood which signifies martyrdom endured for Christ prior to the reception of Baptism by Water”;
    “Regarding the effects of Baptism of Blood and Baptism of Desire... both cause sanctifying grace. ...Baptism of Blood usually remits all venial sin and temporal punishment...”

    15. FR. FRANCIS O’CONNELL, Outlines of Moral Theology, 1953:
    “Baptism of Desire... is an act of divine charity or perfect contrition...”
    “These means (i.e. Baptism of Blood and Desire) presuppose in the recipient at least the implicit will to receive the sacrament.”
    “...Even if an infant can gain the benefit of the Baptism of Blood if he is put to death by a person actuated by hatred for the Christian faith....”

    16. MGR. J. H. HERVE, Manuale Theologiae Dogmaticae (Vol. III: chap. IV), 1931
    II. On those for whom Baptism of water can be supplied:
    The various baptisms: from the Tridentinum itself and from the things stated, it stands firm that Baptism is necessary, yet in fact or in desire; therefore in an extraordinary case it can be supplied. Further, according to the Catholic doctrine, there are two things by which the sacrament of Baptism can be supplied: namely, an act of perfect charity with the desire of Baptism, and the death as martyr. Since these two are a compensation for Baptism of water, they themselves are called Baptism, too, in order that they may be comprehended with it under one, as it were, generic name, so the act of love with desire for Baptism is called Baptismus flaminis (Baptism of the Spirit) and the martyrium (Baptism of Blood).

    17. FR. H. NOLDEN, S.J., FR. A. SCHMIT, S.J. — Summa theologiae moralis (Vol. III de Sacramentis), Book 2 Quaestio prima, 1921
    Baptism of spirit (flaminis) is perfect charity or contrition, in which the desire in fact to receive the sacrament of Baptism is included; perfect charity and perfect contrition, however, have the power to confer sanctifying grace.

    18. FR. ARTHUR VERMEERSCH, S.J., Theologiae Moralis (Vol. III), Tractatus II, 1948:
    The Baptism of spirit (flaminis) is an act of perfect charity or contrition, in so far as it contains at least a tacit desire of the Sacrament. Therefore it can be had only in adults. It does not imprint a character; ...but it takes away all mortal sin together with the sentence of eternal penalty, according to: “He who loves me, is loved by my Father” (John 14:21).

    19. FR. LUDOVICO BILLOT, S.J., De Ecclesiae Sacmmentis (Vol. I); Quaestio LXVI; Thesis XXIV - 1931:
    Baptism of spirit (flaminis), which is also called of repentance or of desire, is nothing else than an act of charity or perfect contrition including a desire of the Sacrament, according to what has been said above, namely that the heart of everyone is moved by the Holy Ghost to believe, and to love God, and to be sorry for his sins.

    20. FR. ALOYSIA SABETTI, S.J., FR. TIMOTHEO BARRETT, S.J., Compendium Theologiae Moralis, Tractatus XII [De Baptismo, Chapter I, 1926:
    Baptism, the gate and foundation of the Sacraments, in fact or at least in desire, is necessary for all unto salvation...
    >From the Baptism of water, which is called of river (Baptismus fluminis), is from Baptism of the Spirit (Baptismus flaminis) and Baptism of Blood, by which Baptism properly speaking can be supplied, if this be impossible. The first one is a full conversion to God through perfect contrition or charity, in so far as it contains an either explicit or at least implicit will to receive Baptism of water... Baptism of Spirit (flaminis) and Baptism of Blood are called Baptism of desire (in voto).

    21. FR. EDUARDUS GENICOT, S.]., Theologiae Moralis Institutiones (Vol. II), Tractatus XII, 1902
    Baptism of the Spirit (flaminis) consists in an act of perfect charity or contrition, with which there is always an infusion of sanctifying grace connected...
    Both are called “of desire” (in voto)...; perfect charity, because it has always connected the desire, at least the implicit one, of receiving this sacrament, absolutely necessary for salvation.


    ...NOT the Second Vatican Council.


    How about we be productive and talk about the heresies of the Council.

    1) proclamation of religious liberty

    The civil right to religious liberty.

    "The Council further declares that the right to religious freedom has its foundation in the very dignity of the human person... This right to religious freedom is to be recognised in the constitutional law whereby society is governed. Thus it is to become a civil right."2 (Declaration on Religious Liberty Dignitatis Humanae, paragraph 2)

    2) Revelation was completed at the Crucifixion.

    "Finally, He brought His revelation to completion when He accomplished on the Cross the work of redemption by which He achieved salvation and true freedom for men." (Declaration on Religious Liberty Dignitatis Humanae, paragraph 11)

    This contradicts the traditional and definite Catholic teaching that many truths proposed by the Church as Divinely revealed were not revealed by Our Lord until after His Resurrection. For instance, the Council of Trent (Session 6, chapter 14) taught that "Jesus Christ instituted the sacrament of Penance when He said, "Receive the Holy Ghost; whose sins you shall forgive they are forgiven them, and whose sins you shall retain they are retained." These words were pronounced by Our Lord (John 20:23) on the evening of Easter Sunday, more than two full days after His Crucifixion. And of course Catholic tradition contains not the slightest reason to believe that Our Lord had revealed before the Crucifixion His plan to institute the sacrament; and to claim that He did so would therefore be to invent a new dogma never before heard of in the Church. And even then the objection remains that the answers to such questions as exactly who were the ministers of the sacrament could not have been revealed before the Passion, since the apostasy of Judas was kept secret by Our Lord until it took place.

    The list of dogmas revealed by Our Lord after His Crucifixion includes the form of the sacrament of Baptism, the extension of the preaching mandate of the Apostles to the entire world, the abolition of the patriarchal religions as means of salvation, the coming into force of the promised primacy and infallibility of St. Peter, the elevation to the Apostolic dignity of St. Paul, and of course Our Lord's own Resurrection. This last He had already prophesied long before, of course; but it is as a historic event that we must believe it today, and its historical fulfilment was not revealed until the morning of Easter Sunday when it took place and was announced by the angels to the holy women.

    So the doctrine of Vatican II on this topic denies the Divine revelation of a large part of the Catholic Faith and the Catholic sacramental system, relegating to the status of an unrevealed inessential the very linchpin of Christianity concerning which St. Paul wrote "If Christ be not risen again, your faith is in vain" (1 Corinthians 15:17). But of course if Our Lord did not reveal his choice of St. Paul as an Apostle (an event which probably happened more than a full year after the Crucifixion), it is not surprising that the Conciliar Sect takes no notice of his doctrine!

    3)  Heretical and schismatic sects are means of salvation.

    "The separated churches and communities as such, though we believe they suffer from the defects already mentioned, have been by no means deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fulness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church." (Decree on Oecuмenism Unitatis Redintegratio, paragraph 3)

    This contradicts a doctrine which has been repeated perhaps more times than any other by the Church and is unquestionably Divinely revealed. Only a single example of the magisterial teaching of the true doctrine is necessary and we select the following from the Council of Florence held under Pope Eugene IV (1441):

    "The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the Devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with her..."

    We have heard it argued that the word "means", occurring in the aberrant passage in this decree, was perhaps intended to signify something like "stepping-stone"; but of course the word is not capable of that meaning either in itself or in the Latin word of which it is the translation. A philosophical axiom states that "a means which cannot achieve its end is not a means." Flying in an aeroplane is a means of getting from England to France, but riding on a bicycle is not, even if, on reaching the Channel, one tossed the bicycle aside and used some other form of transport instead.

    note: if Feeneyite knuckleheads can't understand this that's not my problem.



    4) ) The Church has a high regard for doctrines which differ from her own.

    "The Catholic Church rejects nothing of what is true and holy in these [non-Christian] religions. She has a high regard for the manner of life and conduct, the precepts and doctrines which, although differing in many ways from her own teaching, nevertheless often reflect a ray of that truth which enlightens all men." (Declaration on the Relation of the Church to Non-Christian Religions Nostra Aetate, paragraph 2)

    Putting aside the scandalous reference to life, conduct and precepts, let us concentrate on the statement that the Church has "a high regard" for the "doctrines" of false religions, not only those doctrines which, fortuitously, may be true, but even those which "differ...from her own teaching." Now since the teaching of the Catholic Church is true, it is a logical necessity that any doctrine which differs from it must be false. The Fathers of Vatican II, therefore, have firmly declared that the Church "has a high regard" for false doctrines. Of course, this is perfectly true of the Conciliar Sect; but the attitude of the Catholic Church towards false doctrines has always been the same as that of her Divine founder: unrestrained loathing.


    Quote from: Bishop de Castro Mayer

    ...there are many more examples.
    We conclude logically that religion can give an efficacious and truly realistic answer to the great modern problems only if it is a religion that is profoundly lived, not simply a superficial and cheap religion made up of some vocal prayers and some ceremonies...


    Offline JPaul

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3832
    • Reputation: +3723/-293
    • Gender: Male
    Can it be said that Vatican II is heretical? TAKE TWO
    « Reply #23 on: April 29, 2015, 01:52:41 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Ladislaus
    Quote from: Centroamerica

    The interesting part is: why is Matthew insisting on debating whether or not the Vatican 2 Council was heretical, while putting emphasis on the fact that Archbishop Lefebvre signed every last docuмent despite telling us he didn't?

    If it is the hermeneutic of continuity that is being pushed in this forum, why not sign up with the Fraternity of St. Peter?


    Matthew is suggesting that there is in fact nothing strictly heretical in Vatican II, not that there isn't lesser error in Vatican II.  (he's pushing the notion of "heresy" in the strict sense of the word).  Now, if there's no actual lesser error even, but just ambiguities, then I do suggest everyone simply apply the hermeneutic of continuity and follow the leadership of Bishop Fellay back into the Catholic fold.

    I believe that there is heresy, but I am not allowed to discuss it due to that being "Feeneyism".


    There is no doubt that the conciliar docuмents promote the notion that the Catholic Church is not the exclusive means of salvation. The worst of them are in fact based up-on this premise. John Paul II wrote and taught this using quotes from the council in his encyclicals and books. There is material heresy contained in these where they quote the council.
    So this so called "Feeneyism" issue does not enter into it.

    Heresy is objectively what it is. It does not need formal declaration to be such.
    That which is opposed to the defined and settled doctrine of the Church is heresy plain and simple, no matter how it is transmitted.

    Offline JPaul

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3832
    • Reputation: +3723/-293
    • Gender: Male
    Can it be said that Vatican II is heretical? TAKE TWO
    « Reply #24 on: April 29, 2015, 02:08:13 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • If the council were a true council of the Catholic Church, it could not promote or propose heresy.
    If it is a true council of the Church, one must submit to it.

    One does not have the option to pick and choose which items or lines to reject and which are ok, as to to do this in regards to a true council is schismatic.

    Rejecting this questionable council in its entirety is the only logical path, using the same standard as the Church uses and has used. If any manuscript or proposition contained as much as a whiff of heresy, it would be placed upon the index or condemned by the supreme pontiff.

    Such an attitude suffers the same defects as the R&R position, which claims full validity and authority for the conciliar popes, and yet, believes that it can pick and choose where he must be submitted to.

    So, you either accept the council as it is, or you reject it as a whole, as Bishop Castro Mayer and Father Hesse did, correctly, in my opinion.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46600
    • Reputation: +27457/-5070
    • Gender: Male
    Can it be said that Vatican II is heretical? TAKE TWO
    « Reply #25 on: April 29, 2015, 03:16:47 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Centroamerica
    Quote from: Ladislaus
    Quote from: Centroamerica
    note: if Feeneyite knuckleheads can't understand this that's not my problem.


    No, Centro, YOU are the knucklehead who understands absolutely nothing.



    Nothing? Absolutely nothing?  Geez what a bag of hot air.


    Obviously in the context of this thread.

    First you chime in criticizing Matthew for something that he didn't say and which would have been obvious had you read the OP, and then you spam the thread with quotes regarding "Baptism of Desire" when no one has made any reference whatsoever to Baptism of Desire.  Please read the actual thread before posting and derailing everything.


    Offline Centroamerica

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2671
    • Reputation: +1684/-444
    • Gender: Male
    Can it be said that Vatican II is heretical? TAKE TWO
    « Reply #26 on: April 29, 2015, 05:21:10 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • I didn't spam the thread, I made one post to show you you're issue was with de fide Catholic doctrine, namely the desire of baptism.

    I read the post the first time Matthew posted it before he had to close it because objective non-Catholics wouldn't stop obsessing over feeneyism...and I simply made the question as a thought expecting a response whether or not he was now going down the road of interpreting the Council in the light of Tradition, to which no one has replied.
    We conclude logically that religion can give an efficacious and truly realistic answer to the great modern problems only if it is a religion that is profoundly lived, not simply a superficial and cheap religion made up of some vocal prayers and some ceremonies...

    Offline Cantarella

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7782
    • Reputation: +4579/-579
    • Gender: Female
    Can it be said that Vatican II is heretical? TAKE TWO
    « Reply #27 on: April 30, 2015, 12:07:56 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The whole collapse in the Church today can be traced to the denial of the necessity of belonging to the Catholic Church for salvation. Most conservatives and traditionalists are not aware of this fact and they have hard time identifying the real disease, let alone the solution. They cannot name the disease nor propose the real cure, because most of the time they themselves share it in common with the same enemies of the Church they think they are opposed to and they are not aware of it. That is how Modernism works. The disease is the heresy of Liberalism; and the reality is that not until the fundamental truth of exclusive salvation is preached again from every Catholic pulpit shall we see again the triumph of Catholic values and morals.

    Having said that, here is Prof. Plinio Correo de Oliveira talking about how the Vatican II Council itself may be "suspect of heresy":

    Quote
    Prof. Plinio said:

     Your Excellency ( Bishop Mayer ) spoke about the ambiguity of the Council, and I spoke of those ambiguities making up a system of thinking. Let me elaborate on this point so that Your Excellency may tell me whether it is right or wrong. I believe that by putting all these ambiguities together, what emerges is a wrong doctrine, a false doctrine. These are not, therefore, accidental ambiguities due to the inaccuracy of the writers. Even when the ambiguities are contradictory, there is a common thread that weaves them together. I used the expression “the suspicion of heresy.”

    It is good to point out to those here [in the auditorium] who are accustomed to the language and implications of civil law, that when a person is suspected of a crime in civil law, he is supposed innocent until proven guilty. Thus, even when he is suspected of a crime, he is to be treated as innocent. This is not the case with the suspicion of heresy in Canon Law. To be suspected of heresy is a crime in itself. Therefore, when such a situation presents itself, when an individual author writes ambiguous things representing an erroneous system of thinking, he objectively acts wrongly and commits a crime. It is not licit for him to do this.

     Applying this to the Council, we cannot go so far as to say: “The Council has these many ambiguities, therefore it is heretical.” But we can say: “It is in an irregular situation according to Canon Law.” It seems that the Council’s systematic ambiguity goes against the teaching mission of the Church.

       
    This false system of thinking, this false emerging doctrine cringes on the obliteration of the Catholic dogma of exclusive salvation and the allowance for those in false religions to be in "partial communion" with the Church of Christ. This started way before Vatican II and was what had set up the stage for the progressivists to totally take over after the Council.
    If anyone says that true and natural water is not necessary for baptism and thus twists into some metaphor the words of our Lord Jesus Christ" Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit" (Jn 3:5) let him be anathema.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46600
    • Reputation: +27457/-5070
    • Gender: Male
    Can it be said that Vatican II is heretical? TAKE TWO
    « Reply #28 on: April 30, 2015, 05:21:51 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • No, this isn't about ambiguity or a number of ambiguities.

    In Vatican II you find a new subjectivized ecclesiology rooted in the new subjectivized soteriology.

    Offline JPaul

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3832
    • Reputation: +3723/-293
    • Gender: Male
    Can it be said that Vatican II is heretical? TAKE TWO
    « Reply #29 on: April 30, 2015, 07:20:57 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Ladislaus
    No, this isn't about ambiguity or a number of ambiguities.

    In Vatican II you find a new subjectivized ecclesiology rooted in the new subjectivized soteriology.


    The constant reduction of the council's apostasies to simple ambiguities is but a soft selling of un-Catholic ideas which it proposed.