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

Author Topic: Heiner/TR attacks CMRI  (Read 42624 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Heiner/TR attacks CMRI
« Reply #85 on: January 29, 2022, 12:00:53 PM »
But since you agree that the perpetuity of papal succession is de fide, do you believe there as been perpetual successors of Peter up to the present day, or do you believe the last Pope died 65 years ago?

I believe that the last pope died in 1989 (about 33 years ago).

Re: Heiner/TR attacks CMRI
« Reply #86 on: January 29, 2022, 12:01:48 PM »
This is absolutely correct.  THIS is where private judgement has a legitimate role, in examining the motives of credibility.  Traditional Catholics look at the Conciliar counterfeit Church and recognize that it lacks the Marks or Notes of the One True Church found by Christ. 

Interesting that the Protestants arrived at the same conclusion about the Roman Catholic Church after the Council of Trent.  They maintained that the Church post-Trent was a New Church that taught a New Religion, just like the Sedevacantist heretics believe the Church post-Vatican II is a New Church that teaches a New Religion.  There is another parallel between the Protestants and Sedevacantists.

If the Roman Catholic Church - i.e., the Church of Rome and all the particular churches throughout the world in union with it - lacks the four marks, where is the infallible, indefectible Church with four marks, outside of which there is no salvation? 

I've been asking Sedevacantist heretics this question for years, and all I ever get in reply is a blank stare. 


Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Heiner/TR attacks CMRI
« Reply #87 on: January 29, 2022, 12:03:34 PM »
Two points. First, show me where the Church has ever taught that such a thing is impossible.  I'm not asking for the opinion of a theologian, such as Franzelin, but where has the magisterium has ever taught that a Pope cannot teach heresy in a non-infallible docuмent.

Second, show me where any of the recent Popes have taught heresy (not an error, but heresy) as an act of their ordinary magisterium.  And be sure to quote the dogma that the alleged heresy directly contradicts.  Good luck.

It contradicts the infallible OUM that has always maintained that the See of Peter cannot defect from the faith.  Teaching HERESY (in authentic Magisterium) would constitute a public and formal defection of the Holy See from the faith.

As for point two, I've already said that I prescind from analyzing individual doctrines and establishing their theological notes.  SVism cannot be founded on that.  I argue that one could plausibly make a judgment regarding the fact that the Conciliar Church as a whole is not in fact the Catholic Church.

Now you find a dogmatic teaching that DIRECTLY asserts that an extended period of sedevacante due to infiltration of the papacy is not possible.  Good luck.  You are in fact arguing from other principles yourself.  This has never been taught.  Your allegation that sedevacantism is heresy is completely unfounded.

Re: Heiner/TR attacks CMRI
« Reply #88 on: January 29, 2022, 12:05:42 PM »
I believe that the last pope died in 1989 (about 33 years ago).

Mystici Corporis Christi: "69. Now since its Founder willed this social body of Christ to be visible, the cooperation of all its members must also be externally manifest through their profession of the same faith and their sharing the same sacred rites, through participation in the same Sacrifice, and the practical observance of the same laws. Above all, it is absolutely necessary that the Supreme Head, that is, the Vicar of Jesus Christ on earth, be visible to the eyes of all, since it is He who gives effective direction to the work which all do in common in a mutually helpful way towards the attainment of the proposed end."

So much for the Siri Theory.  Moreover, how could Siri have been  the Pope when he remained a member of the "Vatican II sect" that you claim lacks the four marks?  How can the member of a false Church be the Pope of the true Church?  

Re: Heiner/TR attacks CMRI
« Reply #89 on: January 29, 2022, 12:08:46 PM »
Interesting that the Protestants arrived at the same conclusion about the Roman Catholic Church after the Council of Trent.  They maintained that the Church post-Trent was a New Church that taught a New Religion, just like the Sedevacantist heretics believe the Church post-Vatican II is a New Church that teaches a New Religion.  There is another parallel between the Protestants and Sedevacantists.

If the Roman Catholic Church - i.e., the Church of Rome and all the particular churches throughout the world in union with it - lacks the four marks, where is the infallible, indefectible Church with four marks, outside of which there is no salvation? 

I've been asking Sedevacantist heretics this question for years, and all I ever get in reply is a blank stare.

“Protestantism” preceded the Council of Trent and claimed that the RC Church was corrupt and taught new doctrines prior to Trent. This is demonstrably false. All of the doctrines taught in the Medieval period as well as at the time of Trent can be shown to have direct continuity with the Early Church.

Secondly, Vatican II is not the problem. This council can be interpreted in light of Tradition. But it’s not interpreted in light of Tradition and has not been for the past ~60 years. There is clear discontinuity in interpretation and teaching by the post Vatican II magisterium.

Where was the RCC during the Arian crisis? The Great Western Schism? With its four marks and visibility?