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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 35 36 [37] 38 39 ... 56

Author Topic: Claimed Eucharistic Miracles  (Read 32059 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline SeanJohnson

Re: Claimed Eucharistic Miracles
« Reply #180 on: December 20, 2022, 02:52:26 PM »
Quote from: SeanJohnson on December 20, 2022, 02:21:02 PM
Does not this CE article on schism perfectly describe Ladislaus?

"Various motives have been brought forward in justification of Schism:

(1) Some have claimed the introduction into the Church of abuses, dogmatic and liturgical novelties, superstitions, with which they are permitted, even bound, not to ally themselves.

...the doctrines of the Fathers exclude a priori any such attempt at justification; to use their words, it is forbidden for individuals [...] to constitute themselves judges of the universal Church..."

https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13529a.htm

Perhaps reflect on the bolded words.
Logged

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Claimed Eucharistic Miracles
« Reply #181 on: December 20, 2022, 03:16:29 PM »
Quote from: SeanJohnson on December 20, 2022, 02:52:26 PM
Perhaps reflect on the bolded words.

You do realize, no, that every Traditional Catholic is "judging" the Conciliar Church?  Ironically, this passage too condemns you, as you claim that the Conciliar Church is the Catholic Church.  Therefore, by simple logic, you are judging the Catholic Church.

SVs are making a judgment that the Conciliar Church is not the Catholic Church, and so in judging the Conciliar Church, they're not judging the Catholic Church but an imposter.

As Vatican I taught, there's one place where human judgment (reason) comes into play, and that's in assessing the motives of credibility, i.e. determining whether a particular institution is in fact the One True Church founded by Christ.

It's really bizarre that you pull out these quotes that condemn you, and yet your mind, your thinking, has become so badly warped that you believe that they defend you.
Logged

Offline SeanJohnson

Re: Claimed Eucharistic Miracles
« Reply #182 on: December 20, 2022, 03:19:26 PM »
Quote from: Ladislaus on December 20, 2022, 03:16:29 PM
You do realize, no, that every Traditional Catholic is "judging" the Conciliar Church?  Ironically, this passage too condemns you, as you claim that the Conciliar Church is the Catholic Church.  Therefore, by simple logic, you are judging the Catholic Church.

False: The conciliar church is distinct from the Catholic Church, but not completely separated from it (i.e., one pope for two churches).

The concept is similar to dual citizenship (i.e., one man for two countries).

In judging the Church an imposter, and separating yourself from membership in it, manifested by your rejection of its visible head, your position is schismatic.

We are not separating ourselves from the Catholic Church, which is merely eclipsed by the conciliar church, as manifested by our recognition of its visible head.
Logged

Offline DecemRationis

  • Supporter
Re: Claimed Eucharistic Miracles
« Reply #183 on: December 20, 2022, 03:23:07 PM »
Quote from: Ladislaus on December 20, 2022, 03:16:29 PM
As Vatican I taught, there's one place where human judgment (reason) comes into play, and that's in assessing the motives of credibility, i.e. determining whether a particular institution is in fact the One True Church founded by Christ.



Can you show us where it teaches this?
Logged

Offline Quo vadis Domine

  • Supporter
Re: Claimed Eucharistic Miracles
« Reply #184 on: December 20, 2022, 04:06:40 PM »
Quote from: Meg on December 20, 2022, 02:50:44 PM
Canon law........commentaries? What are those commentaries exactly, and who are bound to them?

F.X. Wernz, P. Vidal: “Finally they cannot be numbered among the schismatics, who refuse to obey the Roman Pontiff because they consider his person to be suspect or doubtfully elected on account of rumours in circulation.” (Ius Canonicuм, 7:398, 1943) 

Rev Ignatius Szal: “Nor is there any schism if one merely transgress a papal law for the reason that one considers it too difficult, or if one refuses obedience inasmuch as one suspects the person of the pope or the validity of his ɛƖɛctıon, or if one resists him as the civil head of a state.” (Communication of Catholics with Schismatics, 1948) 

De Lugo: “Neither is someone a schismatic for denying his subjection to the Pontiff on the grounds that he has solidly founded [‘probabiliter'] doubts concerning the legitimacy of his ɛƖɛctıon or his power [refers to Sanchez and Palao].” (Disp., De Virt. Fid. Div., disp xxv, sect iii, nn. 35-8)
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 35 36 [37] 38 39 ... 56
« previous next »