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

Author Topic: Mhfm refutes 'partial communion'  (Read 2124 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline AnthonyPadua

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 2111
  • Reputation: +1068/-205
  • Gender: Male
Mhfm refutes 'partial communion'
« on: August 20, 2023, 11:46:28 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0


    • A short video by mhfm that shows non-catholics cannot have 'partial communion' with the body of Christ.
    Logged

    Offline Quo vadis Domine

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4750
    • Reputation: +2896/-667
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Mhfm refutes 'partial communion'
    « Reply #1 on: August 21, 2023, 05:29:25 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

    • If a Catholic who has reached the age of reason and has been instructed in the truths of the Faith and doesn’t realize this is heretical, he’s probably a heretic himself.
    Logged
    For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46428
    • Reputation: +27341/-5047
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Mhfm refutes 'partial communion'
    « Reply #2 on: August 21, 2023, 07:25:07 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Unfortunately, however, many Traditional Catholics also believe in partial communion.

    If it's possible for non-Catholics to be saved, they must be considered to be inside the Church.  But they are not fully inside the Church due to their adherence to heretical doctrines, lack of the Sacraments, etc.  So they must be in some partial communion with the Church.

    Everything in Vatican II derives from the new ecclesiology invented in order to gut EENS dogma.
    Logged

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3162
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Mhfm refutes 'partial communion'
    « Reply #3 on: August 21, 2023, 08:08:15 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • I’m wondering whether there is a distinction to be made between “partial communion” and “partial membership?”
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Quo vadis Domine

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4750
    • Reputation: +2896/-667
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Mhfm refutes 'partial communion'
    « Reply #4 on: August 21, 2023, 09:57:59 AM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!0
    • There is only one Faith, one fold, one shepherd, and one baptism. There is no “partial” anything. There can’t be any distinction between membership and communion since one of the four Marks of the Church is Her Unity.
    Logged
    For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3162
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Mhfm refutes 'partial communion'
    « Reply #5 on: August 21, 2023, 10:27:05 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Quo vadis Domine on August 21, 2023, 09:57:59 AM
    There can’t be any distinction between membership and communion since one of the four Marks of the Church is Her Unity.

    But there are three elements of unity:

    1) Faith,

    2) Governance,

    3) Sacraments.

    If a man be lacking in any of the three, he cannot be a member.

    But what if he has one or two of the three?

    Many of the saints, Fathers, and Doctors (eg., St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Augustine, St. Bellarmine et al) spoke of such being in communion with the Church, even as they remained outside it).

    This implies to me that “communion” and “membership” could be two different things, which are incessantly conflated.
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Marulus Fidelis

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 750
    • Reputation: +401/-122
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Mhfm refutes 'partial communion'
    « Reply #6 on: August 21, 2023, 10:32:19 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on August 21, 2023, 10:27:05 AM
    But there are three elements of unity:

    1) Faith,

    2) Governance,

    3) Sacraments.

    If a man be lacking in any of the three, he cannot be a member.

    But what if he has one or two of the three?

    Many of the saints, Fathers, and Doctors (eg., St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Augustine, St. Bellarmine et al) spoke of such being in communion with the Church, even as they remained outside it).

    This implies to me that “communion” and “membership” could be two different things, which are incessantly conflated.
    Pope Leo XIII said both expertem (no part of communion) and extorrem (exiled from the Church).

    These incessant "nuances" and "distinctions" are the mark of a modernist mind. Sound doctrine is simple. You're either outside or you're inside.
    Logged

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3162
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Mhfm refutes 'partial communion'
    « Reply #7 on: August 21, 2023, 10:44:25 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Marulus Fidelis on August 21, 2023, 10:32:19 AM
    Pope Leo XIII said both expertem (no part of communion) and extorrem (exiled from the Church).

    These incessant "nuances" and "distinctions" are the mark of a modernist mind. Sound doctrine is simple. You're either outside or you're inside.

    OK, well, here’s one such “modernist mind” making precisely such distinctions, here:

    https://aquinas.cc/la/en/~Sent.III.D13.Q2.A2.qa2.C

    And here:

    https://aquinas.cc/la/en/~ST.III.Q8.A3
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Mithrandylan

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4578
    • Reputation: +5299/-450
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Mhfm refutes 'partial communion'
    « Reply #8 on: August 21, 2023, 11:24:09 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on August 21, 2023, 10:27:05 AM
    But there are three elements of unity:

    1) Faith,

    2) Governance,

    3) Sacraments.

    If a man be lacking in any of the three, he cannot be a member.

    But what if he has one or two of the three?

    Many of the saints, Fathers, and Doctors (eg., St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Augustine, St. Bellarmine et al) spoke of such being in communion with the Church, even as they remained outside it).

    This implies to me that “communion” and “membership” could be two different things, which are incessantly conflated.
    I could be mistaken, but the word "communion" as a descriptor of one's relationship to the Church and its members isn't something I've seen except among post-conciliar writers. 

    That said, there is a longstanding tradition of identifying some people who have a certain union with Christ and His Church while not being a member of the Church. This relationship has been described in a plethora of different ways and with different types of jargon, but all those different ways point to the same reality: a person whose soul is animated by supernatural faith, hope, and charity but who fails to satisfy the threefold criteria of membership (baptism, profession of faith, and not being excluded by Church government).

    The pre-conciliar authors who discuss this manage to do so without leaning on the term "communion," at least so far as I have read. 
    Logged
    "Be kind; do not seek the malicious satisfaction of having discovered an additional enemy to the Church... And, above all, be scrupulously truthful. To all, friends and foes alike, give that serious attention which does not misrepresent any opinion, does not distort any statement, does not mutilate any quotation. We need not fear to serve the cause of Christ less efficiently by putting on His spirit". (Vermeersch, 1913).

    Offline trento

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 799
    • Reputation: +224/-144
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Mhfm refutes 'partial communion'
    « Reply #9 on: August 21, 2023, 11:51:59 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on August 21, 2023, 07:25:07 AM
    Unfortunately, however, many Traditional Catholics also believe in partial communion.

    If it's possible for non-Catholics to be saved, they must be considered to be inside the Church.  But they are not fully inside the Church due to their adherence to heretical doctrines, lack of the Sacraments, etc.  So they must be in some partial communion with the Church.

    Everything in Vatican II derives from the new ecclesiology invented in order to gut EENS dogma.

    Let's say a baby was baptized by their Anglican parents in the Anglican church. Assuming the baptism was valid, it would mean the baby is actually Catholic and part of the Catholic Church, because even non-Catholics can validly administer baptism. However, on the surface they would be seen as non-Catholics. When the child reaches the age of reason and adheres to the errors of Anglicanism, only then is that person considered separated from the Catholic Church.
    Logged

    Offline LeDeg

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 778
    • Reputation: +535/-135
    • Gender: Male
    • I am responsible only to God and history.
    Re: Mhfm refutes 'partial communion'
    « Reply #10 on: August 21, 2023, 11:54:50 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on August 21, 2023, 10:27:05 AM
    But there are three elements of unity:



    2) Governance,


    Well, that would be a problem for trads.
    Logged
    "You must train harder than the enemy who is trying to kill you. You will get all the rest you need in the grave."- Leon Degrelle

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3162
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Mhfm refutes 'partial communion'
    « Reply #11 on: August 21, 2023, 12:02:11 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Mithrandylan on August 21, 2023, 11:24:09 AM
    I could be mistaken, but the word "communion" as a descriptor of one's relationship to the Church and its members isn't something I've seen except among post-conciliar writers.

    That said, there is a longstanding tradition of identifying some people who have a certain union with Christ and His Church while not being a member of the Church. This relationship has been described in a plethora of different ways and with different types of jargon, but all those different ways point to the same reality: a person whose soul is animated by supernatural faith, hope, and charity but who fails to satisfy the threefold criteria of membership (baptism, profession of faith, and not being excluded by Church government).

    The pre-conciliar authors who discuss this manage to do so without leaning on the term "communion," at least so far as I have read.

    "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet."  -Shakespeare
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3162
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Mhfm refutes 'partial communion'
    « Reply #12 on: August 21, 2023, 12:04:41 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: LeDeg on August 21, 2023, 11:54:50 AM
    Well, that would be a problem for trads.

    "Necessity carries within itself its own dispensation."
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Marulus Fidelis

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 750
    • Reputation: +401/-122
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Mhfm refutes 'partial communion'
    « Reply #13 on: August 21, 2023, 01:16:38 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on August 21, 2023, 10:44:25 AM
    OK, well, here’s one such “modernist mind” making precisely such distinctions, here:

    https://aquinas.cc/la/en/~Sent.III.D13.Q2.A2.qa2.C

    And here:

    https://aquinas.cc/la/en/~ST.III.Q8.A3
    I already read this when a Novus Ordite was trying to demonstrate eastern schismatics were inside the Church.

    I didn't mean to say that communion and membership are the same thing, obviously, they're two different words. But I did mean to say that there can be no such distinction for those OUTSIDE the Church. If one is outside the Church he has no part with us, he is alien to us, he is exiled, excommunicated, in schism, anathematized, reprobate, etc. I'm sorry for not expressing myself clearly enough.
    Logged

    Offline LeDeg

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 778
    • Reputation: +535/-135
    • Gender: Male
    • I am responsible only to God and history.
    Re: Mhfm refutes 'partial communion'
    « Reply #14 on: August 21, 2023, 01:16:57 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on August 21, 2023, 12:04:41 PM
    "Necessity carries within itself its own dispensation."
    So the necessity is because they (the conciliar church) possesses governance, but not the faith, correct? While the resistors do not possess the governance, but do have the faith? Together, they check off all the boxes, but separated do not? 
    Logged
    "You must train harder than the enemy who is trying to kill you. You will get all the rest you need in the grave."- Leon Degrelle
    Pages: [1] 2 3
    « previous next »