Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Crisis in the Church => Topic started by: Matto on August 08, 2015, 04:32:10 PM
-
Sedevacantists generally reject the Papacies of all the Popes since John XXIII (though some do not reject John XXIII or John Paul I) even though all of those Popes were unanimously accepted by all the Cardinals and all the Bishops which is supposed to mean that the man they accept is infallibly the Pope. Actually that is not entirely true because as I understand it Pope John XXIII and Paul VI were accepted by all the Bishops and John Paul II was rejected at one point by 2 Bishops which is pretty close to unanimous if you ask me.
My point is this. If it is okay to reject Paul VI who was unanimoulsy accepted, then I see no way how it is not okay to reject Pope Pius XII for similar reasons (maybe for changing the psalter or holy week, or maybe for accapting NFP and evolution or maybe for condemning Father Feeney). If it is okay to reject some Popes then why not others. In principle there is no difference between rejecting Paul VI for accepting Vatican II and rejecting Pope Pius X for changing the Breviary. I do not see how people like CM or Richard Ibranyi are wrong for bringing sedevacantism to its logical conclusion and judging all of the Popes that ever sat in their office and deciding one by one which ones were true Popes and which ones are not Popes because if it is okay to reject some Popes who were unanimously accepted by all the Cardinals and the Bishops then why can't you do the same to others.
Any thoughts?
-
Why not use Richard Ibranyi (http://www.johnthebaptist.us/jbw_english/docuмents/articles/rjmi/tr37_no_popes_cardinals_since_1130.pdf) to exemplify why it is not up to us to determine if the pope is pope or not?
In the link above, he even offers more than his opinion, he has proof for his opinion that there have been no popes or cardinals since the year 1130.
Use him to magnify the situation. If +Sanborn, +Cekada and sedevacantists are correct in their opinion that the Chair is and has been vacant since the death of PPXII or John XXIII - (they cannot agree on who the last "true pope" actually was, but that's ok, after all, it's only the pope we're talking about - :facepalm:) and Ibranyi and his followers declare the Chair Vacant for the last 885 years, and counting, then why can't you choose on your own which pope vacated the Chair?
The point I am trying to make is if you use Richard Ibranyi as your example of SVism - then you should better understand why it is that God made sure He did not make it our responsibility to determine the validity of popes when He founded His Church.
As Fr. Wathen puts it:
If the person who incurs the censure be the pope himself, since
there is no tribunal within the Church with the right to pass judgment
against him, he cannot be removed from his office, even though he be
under censure, and, according to the law, have no right to function as
the head of the Church. We, his subjects, are not permitted to do
anything about this. It is not within our right to declare his acts devoid
of validity, due to his having been expelled from his office. Yes, the
faithful may know well that he has committed a sin to which a censure
is affixed by the Church, but this knowledge in no way qualifies
them to declare him deprived of his office, or never to have been
elected. We should have to continue to obey him as the pope in all
those religious matters which fall within the ambit of his authority,
UNLESS he should command something which is sinful.
-
If it is okay to reject Paul VI who was unanimoulsy accepted, then I see no way how it is not okay to reject Pope Pius XII for similar reasons...
The items you listed are not heresy (and I don't think all of them are factual). The docuмents of Vatican 2 are heretical. The "reasons" are not similar.
Once you identify a known heresy invoked by Pius XII, we can talk. No one has yet done so.
-
I do not know if it is a heresy, but here are excerpts from a speech of Pope Pius XII that scandalized me because I believe that the Universe is only a few thousand years old and I thought that was what the Church teaches according to scripture, but Pope Pius XII didn't believe that. He does not say in this speech specifically if he believed in the theory of evolution or not, but I think it is likely that he did.
Pope Pius XII (Address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, November 22, 1951):
31. "If the scientist turns his attention from the present state of the universe to the future, even the very remote future, he finds himself constrained to recognize, both in the macrocosm and in the microcosm, that the world is growing old. In the course of billions of years, even the apparently inexhaustible quantities of atomic nuclei lost utilizable energy and, so to speak, matter becomes like an extinct and scoriform volcano. And the thought comes spontaneously that if this present cosmos, today so pulsating with rhythm and life is, as we have seen, insufficient to explain itself, with still less reason, will any such explanation be forthcoming from the cosmos over which, in its own way, the shadow of death will have passed."
Here we see that Pope Piux XII believed the Universe was "billions" of years old.
Pope Pius XII:
36. The examination of various spiral nebulae, especially as carried out by Edwin W. Hubble at the Mount Wilson Observatory, has led to the significant conclusion, presented with all due reservations, that these distant systems of galaxies tend to move away from one another with such velocity that, in the space of 1,300 million years, the distance between such spiral nebulae is doubled. If we look back into the past at the time required for this process of the "expanding universe," it follows that, from one to ten billion years ago, the matter of the spiral nebulae was compressed into a relatively restricted space, at the time the cosmic processes had their beginning.
Here we see again that he believes the Universe was "billions" of years old.
Pope Pius XII:
37. To calculate the age of original radioactive substances, very approximate data are taken from the transformation of the isotope of uranium 238 into an isotope of lead (RaG), or of an isotope of uranium 235 into actinium D (AcD), and of the isotope of thorium 232 into thorium D (ThD). The mass of helium thereby formed can serve as a means of control. This leads to the conclusion that the average age of the oldest minerals is at the most five billion years.
Again, "billions" of years old.
Pope Pius XII:
39. The oscillations of gravitation between these systems, as also the attrition resulting from tides, again limit their stability within a period of from five to ten billion years.
Again, "billions" of years.
Pope Pius XII:
44. It is undeniable that when a mind enlightened and enriched with modern scientific knowledge weighs this problem calmly, it feels drawn to break through the circle of completely independent or autochthonous matter, whether uncreated or self-created, and to ascend to a creating Spirit. With the same clear and critical look with which it examines and passes judgment on facts, it perceives and recognizes the work of creative omnipotence, whose power, set in motion by the mighty "Fiat" pronounced billions of years ago by the Creating Spirit, spread out over the universe, calling into existence with a gesture of generous love matter busting with energy. In fact, it would seem that present-day science, with one sweeping step back across millions of centuries, has succeeded in bearing witness to that primordial "Fiat lux" uttered at the moment when, along with matter, there burst forth from nothing a sea of light and radiation, while the particles of chemical elements split and formed into millions of galaxies.
Again, not a few thousand years ago, but the "Fiat" of God was "billions" of years ago.
Pope Pius X:
50. It has, besides, followed the course and the direction of cosmic developments, and, just as it was able to get a glimpse of the term toward which these developments were inexorably leading, so also has it pointed to their beginning in time some five billion years ago. Thus, with that concreteness which is characteristic of physical proofs, it has confirmed the contingency of the universe and also the well-founded deduction as to the epoch when the cosmos came forth from the hands of the Creator.
Again, "billions" of years ago.
In another speech, Pope Pius XII allowed the studying of evolution among Catholics and because of this Pope John Paul II declared that Pope Pius XII said that evolution was compatable with Catholicism. You can see that on wikipedia, here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_evolution)
So while I am not sure if it is heresy or not, I disagree with it and think it is wrong and could see why some might think it is heretical.
-
http://www.the-pope.com/Ephod.jpg
Pope Paul VI wearing the ephod. No Pope ever wore such a thing.
He thinks more of the Jєωιѕн religion than the Catholic Religion.
I would reject this man as Pope and the vicar of Christ base on
it is forbidden under the pain of sin to wear any Jєωιѕн symbols.
-
Matto - thanks for this. This is a subject that I recently decided to research more in depth. However, these questionable teachings/moments lead me more towards r&r plenism than vacantism. Because, the whole catholic world was una cuм pius xii. And, he defined a dogma in 1950. It is extraordinary.
-
I just want to say that I am not arguing that Pope Pius XII was a heretic and an antipope. I just wanted to show that he did not believe as I do regarding the age of the universe and how some might think that is heretical.
-
Matto - where is the pius x "5 billion" quote taken from?
-
Matto - where is the pius x "5 billion" quote taken from?
I wondered that. It must have been a typo. The quote is Pius XII like all the rest of the quotes.
Here (http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius12/P12EXIST.HTM) is its source.
-
The Pontifical Biblical Commission of St Pius X( chaired by Card Rampolla) has decreed that it is legal to debate the actual age of the earth.... :applause:
-
The Pontifical Biblical Commission of St Pius X( chaired by Card Rampolla) has decreed that it is legal to debate the actual age of the earth.... :applause:
The Liturgy on Christmas says the age of the world and it does not say billions of years old. This is what it says (according to the source I found on the internet):
Liturgical Reading of Midnight Mass
Solemnity of the Nativity
From the Roman Martyrology
In the twenty-fourth day of the month of December;
In the year five-thousand one-hundred and ninety-nine from the creation of the world, when in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth;
In the year two-thousand nine-hundred and fifty-seven from the flood;
In the year two-thousand and fifty-one from the birth of Abraham;
In the year one-thousand five-hundred and ten from the going forth of the people of Israel out of Egypt under Moses;
In the year one-thousand and thirty-two from the anointing of David as king;
In the sixty-fifth week according to the prophecy of Daniel;
In the one-hundred and ninety-fourth Olympiad;
In the year seven-hundred and fifty-two from the foundation of the city of Rome;
In the forty-second year of the reign of the Emperor Octavian Augustus;
In the sixth age of the world, while the whole earth was at peace— JESUS CHRIST eternal God and the Son of the eternal Father, willing to consecrate the world by His gracious coming, having been conceived of the Holy Ghost, and the nine months of His conception being now accomplished, (all kneel) was born in Bethlehem of Judah of the Virgin Mary, made man. The birthday of our Lord Jesus Christ, according to the flesh.
P.S. I have contributed to taking this thread off topic. Sorry for that but I thought it was important to do so.
-
Roscoe - can you provide more info, or a link of some sort? I would like to read that docuмent.
-
This is somewhat off topic. But, in what order do the evolutionists say the birds evolved? Because, in genesis, the birds were created at the same time the ocean creatures were created. And, the earth land creatures were created on the next day. So, if the days are really allowed to be stretched out into millions/billions of years, how can the catholic evolutionist defend that birds and water creatures were present at the same time, to the exclusion of land creatures? Accordingly, it means it takes millions of years for a whale to grow legs and leave the ocean, but no time at all for it to grow wings and feathers. I think the evolutionists contend that all life first came out of the ocean. And, catholics have to hold to the order in genesis,. So, that one doesn't make any evolutionary sense.
-
The Pontifical Biblical Commission of St Pius X( chaired by Card Rampolla) has decreed that it is legal to debate the actual age of the earth.... :applause:
The Liturgy on Christmas says the age of the world and it does not say billions of years old. This is what it says (according to the source I found on the internet):
Liturgical Reading of Midnight Mass
Solemnity of the Nativity
From the Roman Martyrology
In the twenty-fourth day of the month of December;
In the year five-thousand one-hundred and ninety-nine from the creation of the world, when in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth;
In the year two-thousand nine-hundred and fifty-seven from the flood;
In the year two-thousand and fifty-one from the birth of Abraham;
In the year one-thousand five-hundred and ten from the going forth of the people of Israel out of Egypt under Moses;
In the year one-thousand and thirty-two from the anointing of David as king;
In the sixty-fifth week according to the prophecy of Daniel;
In the one-hundred and ninety-fourth Olympiad;
In the year seven-hundred and fifty-two from the foundation of the city of Rome;
In the forty-second year of the reign of the Emperor Octavian Augustus;
In the sixth age of the world, while the whole earth was at peace— JESUS CHRIST eternal God and the Son of the eternal Father, willing to consecrate the world by His gracious coming, having been conceived of the Holy Ghost, and the nine months of His conception being now accomplished, (all kneel) was born in Bethlehem of Judah of the Virgin Mary, made man. The birthday of our Lord Jesus Christ, according to the flesh.
P.S. I have contributed to taking this thread off topic. Sorry for that but I thought it was important to do so.
I was just thinking of that Matto! Amen!
In the year five-thousand one-hundred and ninety-nine from the creation of the world, when in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth;
That is the truth!
-
Roscoe - can you provide more info, or a link of some sort? I would like to read that docuмent.
www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php/Biblical-Commission-Of-1909
That is exactly how the link is spelled--- sorry if it doesn't work.
The topic Biblical Commission Of 1909 is in the Crisis In The Church sub-forum from about a year ago..... :fryingpan:
-
Since this million/billion years discussion falls into the category of the "improper sense that days refers to a certain space of time rather than a natural day". Then, the fact that birds were created on the same day as the sea creatures, and a day before the land creatures creates a problem for the long time interval. Because, I contend that there is no way that the allotted time between days is allowed to fluctuate.
That means that if you believe the earth is 5 billion years old, then each day would equal 5 billion divided by 7. That means that birds were flying around and mammals were swimming in the sea for 7142857.1 years before God created land creatures. It also means that God rested on the seventh day for 7142857.1 years, which was 7142857.1 years after he created adam and eve.
I cannot believe that only days 1-4 allow for billions, and days 5-7 can be different/less to cooperate with so called findings of modern science and lets face it, reason. So, I cannot believe that millions/billions is possible or reasonable.
-
Maybe not but Catholics are allowed to debate the actual age of E acc to Pontifical Biblical Commission of St Pius X...... :cheers:
-
edit