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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 30

Author Topic: Is there a One Ring in Tradition, to rule them all?  (Read 30031 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline forlorn

Re: Is there a One Ring in Tradition, to rule them all?
« Reply #55 on: September 02, 2019, 09:45:57 AM »
Quote from: Stubborn on September 02, 2019, 09:11:31 AM
To say that the Church is leading people away from salvation is to say that Christ is leading people away from salvation. You cannot separate Christ from the Church, that's exactly what Protestants do.    

The Church's indefectibility has never been compromised nor will it ever. The pope and hierarchy is not indefectible because the they are not the Church, Christ is the Church - Christ and the Church are one and the same.

:facepalm: That's the whole point. If the Church is leading people away from salvation, then it has defected. But the Church cannot defect. Ergo the Church cannot lead people away from salvation. Ergo an organisation that leads people away from salvation CANNOT be the Church.

Quote from: Stubborn on September 02, 2019, 09:11:31 AM
You do not like answering questions but I will ask you once again:
Why is it that *you* don't believe the errors and heresies taught by the clergy and conciliar popes, but (figuratively speaking) everyone else does?

I used my own judgement to determine that their teachings were contrary to Church dogma and therefore heresy, and yes, like I know you'll bring up now, any Catholic can do that. But the fact that an educated and well-informed Catholic can determine that the hierarchy is teaching heresy, doesn't mean the hierarchy teaching heresy is not a problem. It doesn't change the fact that the Conciliar Church is actively leading souls to heresy and encouraging them to sin(e.g telling remarried "couples" they can go to communion). Leading souls to heresy and sin is the opposite of saving souls, it's the opposite of the Church's mission. So not only is the Conciliar Church failing in its mission, it's actually achieving the exact opposite. Leading souls away from salvation. Therefore the Conciliar Church has defected - it has embraced heresy(and indeed theologians in the past have said the "gates of Hell" refers to heretics/heresy) and it is leading souls astray. If the Conciliar Church has defected, and the Catholic Church can never defect, that would mean necessarily mean the Conciliar Church is not Catholic Church.

So don't try telling me that R&R doesn't have the same issue with indefectibility as sedevacantism has. In sedevacantism, we're without a pope for 60 years and soon to be without any hierarchy at all. In R&R we have a pope and hierarchy actively leading souls away from salvation, and a Church without the Mass(i.e one of the essential elements the CE says the Church cannot lose) - and also, if you're one of the R&R who say the new rite of ordination is doubtful(and I think most of them do), then we'd soon be without a hierarchy anyway.

From that I assert that neither position can fully explain the Crisis and that both positions have serious problems. You can argue that the sedevacantist position has more serious problems, but the assertion that the R&R position is without problems and can explain everything is just ridiculous and easily falsifiable.
Logged

Offline forlorn

Re: Is there a One Ring in Tradition, to rule them all?
« Reply #56 on: September 02, 2019, 09:52:25 AM »
Quote from: Pax Vobis on September 02, 2019, 08:57:30 AM
Novus ordo catholics are told this by their bishops/priests, not rome.  None of the V2 popes, nor any Vatican official has ever declared this.  In fact, as I said previously, Benedict XVI said in his "motu" that Quo Primum is still in force and that all priests have a legal right to say the True Mass.  This is confirmation, directly from the pope/rome, that anyone can attend the latin mass and they do not have to attend the novus ordo.
Rome asserts that the new mass is a valid and licit mass. Therefore if a Catholic lived too far to go to a Latin mass, he is required to attend the new mass to fulfil his mass obligation. That requirement is under the pain of mortal sin.

Quote from: Pax Vobis on September 02, 2019, 08:57:30 AM
Agree but no pope since John XXIII in 1962 has revised, or attempted to revise, QP.  John Paul II's commission to study the matter, which led to the indult mass in the early 80s, shows that Paul VI's novus ordo liturgy/law was not a revision but a new liturgy/law.

New laws can override old laws, they also cannot.  It depends what they say.  We know for a FACT that Paul VI's new liturgy/law in 1969 did not override or revise QP because of Benedict's "motu".  He confirmed this in 2007 when he said that QP was "not abrogated" and that the True Mass "was always allowed".
Did Quo Primum prohibit the promulgation of new rites? Honest question, I actually can't recall.

Quote from: Pax Vobis on September 02, 2019, 08:57:30 AM
Further, QP orders that ALL latin rite catholics ONLY say/attend the True Mass and they aren't allowed to use/attend any other missal.  Paul VI's liturgy/law could've revised this part, in order to allow a new/2nd missal.  This was within Paul VI's authority to do so...but he did not.  Therefore QP's command is still in force and even though the new mass legally exists, those who say/use it commit a grave sin by using an illicit missal.  The missal is legal, but to use it is illegal.  Ah, what a diabolically clever situation the devil hath created!  But the legalities are clear as day since the "motu".  We can thank Benedict for that (and not much else).
QP orders they all attend authorised missals. It did away with every missal that was under 200 years old, but it allowed Catholics to continue to attend the ancient rites. Paul VI clearly authorised the new mass, so it's authorised in the same way the ancient ones are.
Logged

Offline Stubborn

  • Supporter
Re: Is there a One Ring in Tradition, to rule them all?
« Reply #57 on: September 02, 2019, 10:12:18 AM »
Quote from: forlorn on September 02, 2019, 09:45:57 AM
:facepalm: That's the whole point. If the Church is leading people away from salvation, then it has defected. But the Church cannot defect. Ergo the Church cannot lead people away from salvation. Ergo an organisation that leads people away from salvation CANNOT be the Church.
That's right, the conciliar church is not "The Church". So you should stop saying it is. The pope is not the Church either, neither is the hierarchy.


Quote
I used my own judgement to determine that their teachings were contrary to Church dogma and therefore heresy, and yes, like I know you'll bring up now, any Catholic can do that. But the fact that an educated and well-informed Catholic can determine that the hierarchy is teaching heresy, doesn't mean the hierarchy teaching heresy is not a problem. It doesn't change the fact that the Conciliar Church is actively leading souls to heresy and encouraging them to sin......
Are you saying that you figured that we're in this mess via the use of your own wits? Do you not admit that you must have felt something was wrong and corresponded to graces that were offered to you? Do you think that God does not offer those same graces to every human creature? Certainly you agree that most people reject those graces - *those* are the ones who are content to go to hell while foolishly relying on the the popes authority to excuse them from their own sins.


Quote
So don't try telling me that R&R doesn't have the same issue with indefectibility as sedevacantism has. In sedevacantism, we're without a pope for 60 years and soon to be without any hierarchy at all. In R&R we have a pope and hierarchy actively leading souls away from salvation, and a Church without the Mass(i.e one of the essential elements the CE says the Church cannot lose) - and also, if you're one of the R&R who say the new rite of ordination is doubtful(and I think most of them do), then we'd soon be without a hierarchy anyway.
So you're without a pope for 60 years now - how much longer till you agree that you really have never needed a pope at all? 10 more years? 60 more years? 100 more years?

Why is it that you even need a pope?



Quote
From that I assert that neither position can fully explain the Crisis and that both positions have serious problems. You can argue that the sedevacantist position has more serious problems, but the assertion that the R&R position is without problems and can explain everything is just ridiculous and easily falsifiable.

Well I agree that your reasoning can never explain the crisis. So that much we agree on.
Logged

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
Re: Is there a One Ring in Tradition, to rule them all?
« Reply #58 on: September 02, 2019, 10:36:46 AM »
Quote
Rome asserts that the new mass is a valid and licit mass.
The new mass can be valid, it also cannot be.  Depends on the priest, and depends on the canon prayers used.  But validity does equal legal.
.
Rome has never said the new mass is legal to attend/say.  It has only said it legally exists.  You might say this is a technicality, but the pharisees ruled the world through technicalities when Christ was alive.  And the devil rules the world now through technicalities through his many satanic lawyers.
.
It has also said that QP is still in force, which disallows any other missal to be used.  Paul VI's law only created a missal; it does not give anyone permission to use it.  Ergo, QP supercedes Paul VI's law because QP is specific in its rules, while Paul VI's law is general and non-specific.  The law with more clarity always takes precedent.
.

Quote
Did Quo Primum prohibit the promulgation of new rites?
No, but it prohibits the use of any new rites, it prohibits any changes to the QP rite, and any pressure/command to use a new rite or an altered QP rite.
.

Quote
QP orders they all attend authorised missals. It did away with every missal that was under 200 years old, but it allowed Catholics to continue to attend the ancient rites.
Agree.  And those rites which were 200 years old at the time of 1500s were very, VERY similar to the Tridentine rite (i.e. Benedictine and Dominican rites are 99% the same, save for the addition of St Benedict and St Dominic in certain prayers and other non-essential rubrics).
.

Quote
Paul VI clearly authorised the new mass, so it's authorised in the same way the ancient ones are.
Yes, he created a new missal, since QP did not forbid this (technically).  No, you cannot use it, because it violates QP.  Nowhere in Paul VI's law does he:
1.  Order anyone to use/attend the new mass
2.  Place a penalty for ignoring the new mass
3.  Specifically allow anyone to use this missal.
.
All Paul VI's constitution says is: "Here is my new missal, which I am creating by this new law.  Here are the changes in the new missal.  I wish this law go into effect on the 1st Sunday of Advent."  All his law does is create a new missal.  The use of it violates QP.
Logged

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Is there a One Ring in Tradition, to rule them all?
« Reply #59 on: September 02, 2019, 10:53:31 AM »
Look, this thread was not intended to blow up into a full R&R vs. SV debate.  Just stop already.

I lean sedeprivationist, but I readily admit that ALL the sides have issues.  SPism is the side I find to be the least problematic.  This is precisely the point of Matthew's post.

R&R rely on the fact that not everything the Pope teaches is infallible ... but then stretch it to the limits of credibility.  It's one thing for an isolated statement in an Encyclical to be wrong, but quite another for the entire Magisterium and Universal Discipline to go corrupt with Modernism, and to be actively leading souls to hell.  If people can lose their souls by adhering to the Magisterium, then the Church's mission has failed.

SVs rely on the fact that vacancies of the Holy See exist and that the Magisterium does not thereby go defunct.  Again, on their side, 60 years does stretch the limits of credibility.

SPs actual hold an in-between position, that the organs of the Magisterium continue to endure but they have gone dormant (in so many words).

But all sides are stretching the limits of credibility, because, to be perfectly frank, this entire crisis stretches the limits of Catholic credibility.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 30
« previous next »