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: ST. VINCENT FERRER WAS NEVER A SEDEVACANTIST: True Story of Vincent and Benedict  (Read 1619 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Clemens Maria

Re: ST. VINCENT FERRER WAS NEVER A SEDEVACANTIST: True Story of Vincent and Benedict
« Reply #15 on: June 12, 2021, 02:50:59 PM »
Quote from: Matthew on June 12, 2021, 01:57:46 PM
Wow.

Once again, the truth is rarely "simple".

Especially impressive was this part:


If only more Trads -- whatever their position -- were this rational.

So even if he were wrong, he wouldn't be culpable of anything.

Modern-day Trads, however, anathematize each other in pure fits of emotion, fancying themselves a modern-day St. Vincent at worst ("He was a saint and he backed the wrong pope.")

So what if lack of charity, giving in to emotions (especially anger) in matters of Catholic theology polemics is NOT blameless. St. Vincent Ferrer was canonized, yes, but he didn't do that.

Interesting.
You mean like St Augustine and St Jerome?  (They anathematized each other during their own lifetimes.)  Emotions are part of human nature which God gave us.  They are to be directed to a good end.  Unity for its own sake is worthless.  We have to be united in the Catholic Faith.  That's what is at stake here.  If people make mistakes it could have eternal consequences.  That's something to get excited about.  And note that there is not a single R&R organization from the 70s through the 2000s which is not either already absorbed into the Novus Ordo or will soon be.  Maybe there is some hope for organizations led by leaders such as Fr Chazal who has articulated a sede privationist (whether he likes that term or not) position.  But anyone who takes the same position as Archbishop Lefebvre will sooner or later end up absorbed in the Novus Ordo protestant sect.
Logged

Offline RomanTheo

Re: ST. VINCENT FERRER WAS NEVER A SEDEVACANTIST: True Story of Vincent and Benedict
« Reply #16 on: June 13, 2021, 01:48:56 PM »
Quote from: Ladislaus on June 12, 2021, 11:18:53 AM
So in reading all the bluster in the OP, the only actual argument against Lane, which could be summed up in one sentence (the rest of the article being just chaff) is that in the episode cited by Lane, St. Vincent merely READ someone else's decree rather than express his own opinion.  Meh.  Presumably St. Vincent would not have read it if he felt that it would have been schismatic for them to make that declaration.  Six of one, half dozen of the other.  Too bad this guy wasted so much of his time writing this stupid article.

St. Vincent merely read someone else's decree?  Are you serious?   He read the decree of the King of Aragon, which was based on the agreement that he an the other two kings reached with the Council of Constance to withdraw their obedience from Benedict and submit to the authority of the Council.  

Quote
Following the judgment of the bishops and theologians at the Congress of Perpignan, an agreement was quickly reached between the subjects of Benedict and the representatives of the Council.  The kingdoms of Aragon, Castile, and Navarre would withdraw their obedience from Benedict XIII and would transfer it to the Council of Constance.  The Council would then depose Benedict XIII and a new pope would be elected. This was agreed to in the famous Treaty of Narbonne, which was signed by both parties on December 13, 1415.  As the Catholic Encyclopedia (1913) explains, this is when Benedict “was abandoned by the Kings of Aragon, Castile, and Navarre, hitherto his chief supporters.” [10]  
“By the Treaty of Narbonne (13 Dec., 1415), they [the Kings of Aragon, Castile, and Navarre], bound themselves to co-operate with the Council of Constance for the deposition of Benedict and the ɛƖɛctıon of a new pope.” [11]
The Treaty was subsequently confirm by the Council of Constance during the XXII Session.

St. Vincent read a decree that was based on an agreement that had been reached by the secular and ecclesiastical authority in a Council. 

The way Lane portrays the events, the saint judged and declared based on his own private judgment that Benedict had forfeited his membership in the Church and lost his papal office.


Quote
It's just like Salza and Siscoe having spent nearly a thousand pages to claim that in effect Bellarmine held the exact same position as Cajetan ... even though no other Catholic theologian has expressed that opinion, and Bellarmine HIMSELF explicitly rejected Cajetan's opinion, evidently unaware that he held the same position.  What a colossal waste of time.  


I've seen you make this claim before, but what it reveals is that you have not read their book?   I just flipped through it, and they only dedicate 7 or 8 pages to Bellarmine's opinion.  That's all.   And what they argue in those pages is that Bellarmine and Suarez held the same opinion, not Bellarmine and Cajetan. 

Logged

Offline RomanTheo

Re: ST. VINCENT FERRER WAS NEVER A SEDEVACANTIST: True Story of Vincent and Benedict
« Reply #17 on: June 13, 2021, 02:30:29 PM »
Quote from: Geremia on June 12, 2021, 01:53:50 PM
But St. Vincent refused to attend the Council of Constance and disagreed with its outcome, the ɛƖɛctıon of Martin V! St. Vincent never publicly recognized Martin V or the Council of Constance (Daileader pp. 168-76)

This is contradicted by the other book that you cited, St. Vincent Ferrer: Angel of the Judgment, by Andrew Pradel.  This is what Pradel wrote on page 80:
 

Quote
“In the latter town our Saint received pressing letters from the illustrious Chancellor Gerson, one of the lights of the Council of Constance . That great man once more invited Vincent to repair to the august assembly of the Universal Church, to aid it by his counsel, and to edify it by his example. The learned Peter d'Ailly, Cardinal Archbishop of Cambray, having added a post script to Gerson's letter , Vincent judged it fitting to yield to their request ; he had, moreover, a particular interest in explaining and justifying his conduct before the Church . Whether through ignorance or from malice, there were many who confounded the sect of Flagellants, who arose at that epoch, with the Disciplinants of St. Vincent Ferrer. Gerson gave him prudent and charitable advice regarding this. It behoved him, he said, to contradict these false and injurious reports.  St. Vincent then hastened on his way to Germany, and reached Constance some days before the last session of the Council. His presence smoothed down the difficulties that yet remained. On the 11th November, 1417, measures were able to be taken to proceed to the election of a Sovereign Pontiff, which ended in the nomination of Martin V. After this great achievement, St. Vincent delivered a discourse in Latin, to thank God for the re - establishment of union and peace in the Church.”

 
Another confirmation that St. Vincent accepted the pontificate of Martin V is found in Fr. Hogan’s book, St. Vincent Ferrer, where it is related that he asked for and received from Martin V a plenary indulgence applicable at the hour of death.
 

Quote
“St. VINCENT's work was almost finished . His day was nearly done, and it was a spent and weary man who returned to Vannes at the beginning of 1419. … Martin V had asked him what favour he could confer upon him for his services to the Church, and St. Vincent begged for a Plenary Indulgence at the hour of death; he asked for nothing more. This he received, and then he was anointed for the final combat, and received the last Sacraments from Jean Collet, the Vicar of the Cathedral.” (Hogan, St. Vincent Ferrer, pp. 84-85)

Regarding the council of Constance, if the saint had rejected the authority of the Council, he would have been considered a heretic at the time and consequently would not have been canonized (in 1455).  The following two propositions were defined by the Council to be used by the inquisition to judge if someone was in heresy:
 

Quote
Likewise, whether he believes, holds, and declares, that every general Council, including that of CONSTANCE, represents the universal Church. (Denz. 657)
 
 Likewise, whether he believes that what the sacred Council of Constance, which represents the Catholic Church, has approved and does approve in favor of faith, and for the salvation of souls, must be approved and maintained by all the faithful of Christ; and that what (the Council) has condemned and does condemn to be contrary to faith and good morals, this must be believed and proclaimed by the same as considered worthy of condemnation.” (Denz. 658)

 
Daileader's claim that the Saint never accepted the authority of Constance or the pontificate of Martin V is untenable.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]
« previous next »