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

Author Topic: Must Obey Pope Even if He Says Black is White  (Read 9216 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 46456
  • Reputation: +27354/-5049
  • Gender: Male
Re: Must Obey Pope Even if He Says Black is White
« Reply #210 on: December 18, 2019, 09:56:18 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • God never promised that the hierarchy wouldn't fail; Church history shows this idea is wrong.

    I cannot believe that a Catholic could write this.

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12041
    • Reputation: +7580/-2281
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Must Obey Pope Even if He Says Black is White
    « Reply #211 on: December 18, 2019, 10:09:08 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • It's a general statement, Lad.  Would God allow ALL the hierarchy to fail?  Of course not, and even today, even over the last 70 years, this hasn't happened.  Whether one is R&R or sede or whatever, the fact is that the hierarchy has failed about 99%, in that this % is no longer catholic.  The only Catholic hierarchy left (wholly 100% catholic) is in Tradition.  This is reality.  St John was the only Apostle to remain faithful to Christ.  The precedent is there.


    Offline Nishant Xavier

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2873
    • Reputation: +1894/-1751
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Must Obey Pope Even if He Says Black is White
    « Reply #212 on: December 18, 2019, 10:28:58 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    Among the prerogatives conferred on His Church by Christ is the gift of indefectibility. By this term is signified, not merely that the Church will persist to the end of time, but further, that it will preserve unimpaired its essential characteristics. The Church can never undergo any constitutional change which will make it, as a social organism, something different from what it was originally. It can never become corrupt in faith or in morals; nor can it ever lose the Apostolic hierarchy, or the sacraments through which Christ communicates grace to men. The gift of indefectibility is expressly promised to the Church by Christ, in the words in which He declares that the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. It is manifest that, could the storms which the Church encounters so shake it as to alter its essential characteristics and make it other than Christ intended it to be, the gates of hell, i.e. the powers of evil, would have prevailed. It is clear, too, that could the Church suffer substantial change, it would no longer be an instrument capable of accomplishing the work for which God called it in to being. He established it that it might be to all men the school of holiness. This it would cease to be if ever it could set up a false and corrupt moral standard. He established it to proclaim His revelation to the world, and charged it to warn all men that unless they accepted that message they must perish everlastingly.
    This is the crux of the matter. The Divine Promise, and the Perpetual Promised Providence of God in every age, preclude this absolutely.
    Such a thing is not even possible, and any theory that claims it is is ipso facto known to be false: "The body of doctrine ... treated extensively in a series of papal letters directed to and normative for the entire Church militant could not be radically or completely erroneous. The infallible security Christ wills that His disciples should enjoy within His Church is utterly incompatible with such a possibility." http://www.catholicapologetics.info/thechurch/encyclicals/docauthority.htm

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46456
    • Reputation: +27354/-5049
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Must Obey Pope Even if He Says Black is White
    « Reply #213 on: December 18, 2019, 10:29:57 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • It's a general statement, Lad.  Would God allow ALL the hierarchy to fail?  Of course not, and even today, even over the last 70 years, this hasn't happened.  Whether one is R&R or sede or whatever, the fact is that the hierarchy has failed about 99%, in that this % is no longer catholic.  The only Catholic hierarchy left (wholly 100% catholic) is in Tradition.  This is reality.  St John was the only Apostle to remain faithful to Christ.  The precedent is there.

    Hierarchs can fail, but the hierarchy cannot.  You really need to be more precise in your use of language ... since the latter statement, as written, is heretical.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46456
    • Reputation: +27354/-5049
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Must Obey Pope Even if He Says Black is White
    « Reply #214 on: December 18, 2019, 10:33:22 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • This is the crux of the matter. The Divine Promise, and the Perpetual Promised Providence of God in every age, preclude this absolutely.
    Such a thing is not even possible, and any theory that claims it is is ipso facto known to be false: "The body of doctrine ... treated extensively in a series of papal letters directed to and normative for the entire Church militant could not be radically or completely erroneous. The infallible security Christ wills that His disciples should enjoy within His Church is utterly incompatible with such a possibility." http://www.catholicapologetics.info/thechurch/encyclicals/docauthority.htm

    We agree formally but not materially.  Sedevacantists in general agree with your principles.  But I don't see how it's possible to say that Vatican II and the New Mass are not harmful failures.  That is why we say that these cannot be the work for the Church but that, rather, an enemy has done this.


    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 14694
    • Reputation: +6057/-904
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Must Obey Pope Even if He Says Black is White
    « Reply #215 on: December 18, 2019, 10:41:39 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • I love it how you always pit the "what it actually says" vs. what your opponents "think" it says, whereas in reality it's your interpretation vs. theirs.  You equate your own interpretation with objective truth.  In this case, your interpretation of that passage is completely wrong.  So you try to beg the question with this hubris of considering your undestanding of the teaching to be the objective truth while anyone else's reading is merely what they "think it says."  This is why you're so insufferable and impossible to argue with.
    I'm not the one doing the interpreting.

    Me:
    Not interpreting 1) Holy Ghost not promised so that pope can make known new doctrine - dogma
    Not interpreting 2) Holy Ghost promised so that Pope cannot teach error ex cathedra - dogma

    You:  
    Interpret 1 and 2 to mean pope can never teach grave error, therefore is always infallibly safe to follow - denies dogma.

    You make the dogma say that the Holy Ghost is not promised to make known new doctrines really means that he actually can make known doctrines, he just can't make known heretical doctrines, or ones with grave error like V2's new doctrines, because that the Holy Ghost will prevent him from doing. Yet I'm the one doing the interpreting?  

    Have patience Lad and keep at it, and you should come to figure it out, but I'm pretty sure that you will first need to purge those false teachings you harbor from your thinking.

    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

    Offline Nishant Xavier

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2873
    • Reputation: +1894/-1751
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Must Obey Pope Even if He Says Black is White
    « Reply #216 on: December 18, 2019, 10:52:43 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • "Regarding certain points taught by Vatican Council II or concerning later reforms of the liturgy and law, and which do not appear to us easily reconcilable with Tradition, we pledge that we will have a positive attitude of study and communication with the Apostolic See, avoiding all polemics." https://fsspx.org/en/protocol-agreement-may-5-1988

    "This can be debated. It is true per se that we owe respectful submission to magisterial docuмents, an encyclical for example. It is normal to receive this docuмent respectfully, since it is issued by the supreme authority. In itself the phrase is not shocking, it is even Catholic." https://sspx.org/en/can-pastoral-council-be-debatable

    Bishop Fellay, CNS interview (from memory): "Religious Liberty is used in so many different ways and looking closer I really have the impression (smiling, as if amazed) that not many knows what the Council really says about it. The Council is presenting a religious liberty that is very, very limited ... (with gestures) a VERY LIMITED ONE ... many people have an interpretation of the Council that is a wrong interpretation - and now we have the authorities in Rome say it."

    Bishop Athanasius (from memory): "When I am arguing with a Communist, I must argue from natural law. I must show him, by reason, that Christians have religious liberty. I cannot say, Christians have religious liberty, because Christianity is true. That is true, but they do not admit. So, I must show it from natural law. Religious liberty is the right to seek the Truth freely and adhere to it once it is known"

    Pope Leo XIII: "Another liberty is widely advocated, namely, liberty of conscience. If by this is meant that [Modern Pagan Religious License, let us call it MPRL] everyone may, as he chooses, worship God or not, it is sufficiently refuted by the arguments already adduced. But it may also be taken to mean that every man in the State may follow the will of God and, [Natural Law Religious Liberty, what we can call NLRL] from a consciousness of duty and free from every obstacle, obey His commands. This, indeed, is true liberty, a liberty worthy of the sons of God, which nobly maintains the dignity of man and is stronger than all violence or wrong - a liberty which the Church has always desired and held most dear. This is the kind of liberty the Apostles claimed for themselves with intrepid constancy, which the apologists of Christianity confirmed by their writings, and which the martyrs in vast numbers consecrated by their blood. And deservedly so; for this Christian liberty bears witness to the absolute and most just dominion of God over man, and to the chief and supreme duty of man toward God. It has nothing in common with a seditious and rebellious mind" http://www.vatican.va/content/leo-xiii/en/encyclicals/docuмents/hf_l-xiii_enc_20061888_libertas.html

    While MPRL is obviously wrong, NLRL is not. If a modern pagan says "I have a right to blaspheme God and worship Satan" if I want, absolutely he does not and should be prevented from doing so. But when Christians say, "The Little Sisters of the Poor have the right not to be forced to provide contraception", that is right. And when government forces it, Christians rightly ask for religious liberty from it.

    Pope John Paul II: "Freedom is not the right to do whatever we want, but having the right to do what we ought"

    Dignitatis Humanae: "On their part, all men are bound to seek the truth, especially in what concerns God and His Church, and to embrace the truth they come to know, and to hold fast to it ... leaves untouched traditional Catholic doctrine on the moral duty of men and societies toward the true religion and toward the one Church of Christ ... It is in accordance with their dignity as persons-that is, beings endowed with reason and free will and therefore privileged to bear personal responsibility-that all men should be at once impelled by nature and also bound by a moral obligation to seek the truth, especially religious truth. They are also bound to adhere to the truth, once it is known, and to order their whole lives in accord with the demands of truth ...  Man has been made by God to participate in this law, with the result that, under the gentle disposition of divine Providence, he can come to perceive ever more fully the truth that is unchanging. Wherefore every man has the duty, and therefore the right, to seek the truth in matters religious in order that he may with prudence form for himself right and true judgments of conscience, under use of all suitable means ... Among the things that concern the good of the Church and indeed the welfare of society here on earth-things therefore that are always and everywhere to be kept secure and defended against all injury-this certainly is preeminent, namely, that the Church should enjoy that full measure of freedom which her care for the salvation of men requires.(31) This is a sacred freedom, because the only-begotten Son endowed with it the Church which He purchased with His blood. Indeed it is so much the property of the Church that to act against it is to act against the will of God. The freedom of the Church is the fundamental principle in what concerns the relations between the Church and governments and the whole civil order."

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12041
    • Reputation: +7580/-2281
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Must Obey Pope Even if He Says Black is White
    « Reply #217 on: December 18, 2019, 10:56:26 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    You make the dogma say that the Holy Ghost is not promised to make known new doctrines really means that he actually can make known doctrines,

    When Ladislaus is speaking of "new" doctrines, he said that they have to be implicit in Tradition.  When you and I use the word "new" we are referring to ideals which aren't implicit in Tradition.  We all agree, it's just a different use of the word "new".
    .
    Example:  Bad pope says that St Peter never denied Christ and was free from all error.  ...Obviously, this is historically and Traditionally wrong and has no basis in reality.  We would all agree this is a "new doctrine" and anti-Catholic.  V1 never authorizes this.
    .
    Example:  Good pope says that Our Lady is Mediatrix of all graces...This is implicit in Tradition and is not new (I and Stubborn would not consider this new), although Ladislaus referred to this type of doctrine as "new" in the sense that formerly it was not defined, but now it is explicit.  V1 allows an implicit doctrine to be explicitly taught, if the pope so decides.
    .
    The different use of the word "new" is the confusion.


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46456
    • Reputation: +27354/-5049
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Must Obey Pope Even if He Says Black is White
    « Reply #218 on: December 18, 2019, 10:59:35 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • You:  
    Interpret 1 and 2 to mean pope can never teach grave error, therefore is always infallibly safe to follow - denies dogma.

    I'm going to stop wasting my time now.  It's obvious that you don't even know what I'm talking about.

    Offline Nishant Xavier

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2873
    • Reputation: +1894/-1751
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Must Obey Pope Even if He Says Black is White
    « Reply #219 on: December 18, 2019, 11:01:29 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Catechism of the Catholic Church: "The social duty of religion and the right to religious freedom

    2104 "All men are bound to seek the truth, especially in what concerns God and his Church, and to embrace it and hold on to it as they come to know it."26 This duty derives from "the very dignity of the human person." ...

    2105 The duty of offering God genuine worship concerns man both individually and socially. This is "the traditional Catholic teaching on the moral duty of individuals and societies toward the true religion and the one Church of Christ."30 By constantly evangelizing men, the Church works toward enabling them "to infuse the Christian spirit into the mentality and mores, laws and structures of the communities in which [they] live."31 The social duty of Christians is to respect and awaken in each man the love of the true and the good. It requires them to make known the worship of the one true religion which subsists in the Catholic and apostolic Church.32 Christians are called to be the light of the world. Thus, the Church shows forth the kingship of Christ over all creation and in particular over human societies.33

    2108 The right to religious liberty is neither a moral license to adhere to error, nor a supposed right to error,37 but rather a natural right of the human person to civil liberty, i.e., immunity, within just limits, from external constraint ... 2109 The right to religious liberty can of itself be neither unlimited nor limited only by a "public order" conceived in a positivist or naturalist manner.39 The "due limits" which are inherent in it must be determined for each social situation by political prudence, according to the requirements of the common good, and ratified by the civil authority in accordance with "legal principles which are in conformity with the objective moral order."40 http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c1a1.htm

    Pope Ven. Pius XII, Ci Riesce: "Could it be that <in certain circuмstances> He would not give men any mandate, would not impose any duty, and would not even communicate the right to impede or to repress what is erroneous and false? A look at things as they are gives an affirmative answer. Reality shows that error and sin are in the world in great measure. God reprobates them, but He permits them to exist. Hence the affirmation: religious and moral error must always be impeded, when it is possible, because toleration of them is in itself immoral, is not valid <absolutely and unconditionally.>

    Moreover, God has not given even to human authority such an absolute and universal command in matters of faith and morality. Such a command is unknown to the common convictions of mankind, to Christian conscience, to the sources of Revelation and to the practice of the Church. To omit here other Scriptural texts which are adduced in support of this argument, Christ in the parable of the cockle gives the following advice: let the cockle grow in the field of the world together with the good seed in view of the harvest (cf. <Matt.> 13:24-30). The duty of repressing moral and religious error cannot therefore be an ultimate norm of action. It must be subordinate to <higher and more general> norms, which <in some circuмstances> permit, and even perhaps seem to indicate as the better policy, toleration of error in order to promote a <greater good.>

    Thus the two principles are clarified to which recourse must be had in concrete cases for the answer to the serious question concerning the attitude which the jurist, the statesman and the sovereign Catholic state is to adopt in consideration of the community of nations in regard to a formula of religious and moral toleration as described above. First: that which does not correspond to truth or to the norm of morality objectively has no right to exist, to be spread or to be activated. Secondly: failure to impede this with civil laws and coercive measures can nevertheless be justified in the interests of a higher and more general good.

    Before all else the Catholic statesman must judge if this condition is verified in the concrete—this is the "question of fact." In his decision he will permit himself to be guided by weighing the dangerous consequences that stem from toleration against those from which the community of nations will be spared, if the formula of toleration be accepted. Moreover, he will be guided by the good which, according to a wise prognosis, can be derived from toleration for the international community as such, and indirectly for the member state. In that which concerns religion and morality he will also ask for the judgment of the Church. For her, only He to whom Christ has entrusted the guidance of His whole Church is competent to speak in the last instance on such vital questions, touching international life; that is, the Roman Pontiff." https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/library/ci-riesce-8948

    Soviet Premier Gorbachev: " Gorbachev, who once said the collapse of the Iron Curtain would have been impossible without John Paul II, [and the religious liberty Christians suffering under Communism in the Soviet Union successfully asked for and obtained] said the pope condemned communism the first time the two met in 1989, shortly after the fall of the Berlin Wall" https://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/04/03/pope.gorbachev/

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46456
    • Reputation: +27354/-5049
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Must Obey Pope Even if He Says Black is White
    « Reply #220 on: December 18, 2019, 11:23:23 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • When Ladislaus is speaking of "new" doctrines, he said that they have to be implicit in Tradition.  When you and I use the word "new" we are referring to ideals which aren't implicit in Tradition.  We all agree, it's just a different use of the word "new".
    .
    Example:  Bad pope says that St Peter never denied Christ and was free from all error.  ...Obviously, this is historically and Traditionally wrong and has no basis in reality.  We would all agree this is a "new doctrine" and anti-Catholic.  V1 never authorizes this.
    .
    Example:  Good pope says that Our Lady is Mediatrix of all graces...This is implicit in Tradition and is not new (I and Stubborn would not consider this new), although Ladislaus referred to this type of doctrine as "new" in the sense that formerly it was not defined, but now it is explicit.  V1 allows an implicit doctrine to be explicitly taught, if the pope so decides.
    .
    The different use of the word "new" is the confusion.

    No, that's not quite it.  Stubborn (and many R&R) interpret the passage:
    Quote
    For the Holy Spirit was not promised to the successors of Peter that by His revelation they might make known new doctrine, but that by His assistance they might inviolably keep and faithfully expound the Revelation, the Deposit of Faith, delivered through the Apostles.

    Stubborn:  this means that if the Pope teaches "novel" doctrine, it's not infallible and may be rejected.

    Actual Meaning:  this simply distinguishes papal teaching from Revelation.  When a Pope defines a new doctrine, he's not adding to Revelation but is merely keeping and expounding on that Deposit received from the Apostles.

    This passage provides ZERO support for R&R and has nothing to do with the topic.


    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 14694
    • Reputation: +6057/-904
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Must Obey Pope Even if He Says Black is White
    « Reply #221 on: December 18, 2019, 11:31:04 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • When Ladislaus is speaking of "new" doctrines, he said that they have to be implicit in Tradition.  When you and I use the word "new" we are referring to ideals which aren't implicit in Tradition.  We all agree, it's just a different use of the word "new".
    .
    Example:  Bad pope says that St Peter never denied Christ and was free from all error.  ...Obviously, this is historically and Traditionally wrong and has no basis in reality.  We would all agree this is a "new doctrine" and anti-Catholic.  V1 never authorizes this.
    .
    Example:  Good pope says that Our Lady is Mediatrix of all graces...This is implicit in Tradition and is not new (I and Stubborn would not consider this new), although Ladislaus referred to this type of doctrine as "new" in the sense that formerly it was not defined, but now it is explicit.  V1 allows an implicit doctrine to be explicitly taught, if the pope so decides.
    .
    The different use of the word "new" is the confusion.
    Understood, but if that's the only difference, then what's up with "the pope is always infallibly safe to follow" idea?

    If V1 states that should the pope teach new doctrines, the Holy Ghost's protection from error will not be present, then that's plain enough for everyone to understand, so that's what I take it to mean.

    In the sense of V1, a new doctrine is in fact heresy because that in the same sentence, V1 says why the divine protection *is* promised, namely, so "that, by his assistance, they might religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith transmitted by the apostles".

    I thought it was common knowledge here that there can never be new doctrines because everything we will ever need to know in this world is in the deposit of faith, any new doctrine is not in the deposit of faith = not Catholic = heresy. 
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46456
    • Reputation: +27354/-5049
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Must Obey Pope Even if He Says Black is White
    « Reply #222 on: December 18, 2019, 11:38:18 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Catechism of the Catholic Church: "The social duty of religion and the right to religious freedom

    Here the difference can be elicited by a concrete example.

    Can the state prohibit the building of an Islamic temple? [provided that no other prudential considerations are involved, such as rioting by Muslims if you don't allow it ... take those off the table]

    According to Traditional Catholic doctrine, absolutely.

    According to Dignitatis Humanae, no.

    Traditional Catholic doctrine holds that the duty to socially acknowledge Christ the King also entails a right and even a duty to suppress anything that would militate against His reign.  Society can and should suppress heresy and the practice of non-Catholic religion.

    Here again is manifested the core orientation of Vatican II.  Right in the internal forum granted by God become objective rights in the external forum.  Subjectivism.  Subjective bleeds into the objective.

    Similarly, that's where Bergoglio's reasoning comes from in condoning post-divorce adultery.  If somehow it is determined that a person has not sinned in the internal forum, then they are permitted to be recognized as non-sinners in the external forum and granted the right to receive the Sacraments. ... as if anyone but God can judge the internal forum.

    If someone is sincere in the internal forum, then they're recognized as part of the Church ... more and more in the external forum, leading to having joint public worship and even allowing non-Catholics to receive Communion.

    It's a total erosion of Traditional Catholic ecclesiology (confirmed by Trent) in favor of Protestant ecclesiology.  Catholic ecclesiology holds that the Church is a visible society.  It's based on a kind of gnosticism, and a separation between the spiritual and the corporeal in man.

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 14694
    • Reputation: +6057/-904
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Must Obey Pope Even if He Says Black is White
    « Reply #223 on: December 18, 2019, 11:38:25 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • No, that's not quite it.  Stubborn (and many R&R) interpret the passage:
    Stubborn:  this means that if the Pope teaches "novel" doctrine, it's not infallible and may be rejected.

    Actual Meaning:  this simply distinguishes papal teaching from Revelation.  When a Pope defines a new doctrine, he's not adding to Revelation but is merely keeping and expounding on that Deposit received from the Apostles.

    This passage provides ZERO support for R&R and has nothing to do with the topic.
    I can see why a sede would interpret it that way, but that is in no way what it means - but only because that is not what it says.

    Certainly Pope Pius IX and all the bishops were entirely capable of saying the words "novel doctrine which distinguishes it from revelation" if that's what they meant.

    I sincerely hope that one day you decide to study V1 and accept it as is. I really do.
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46456
    • Reputation: +27354/-5049
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Must Obey Pope Even if He Says Black is White
    « Reply #224 on: December 18, 2019, 11:39:56 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Understood, but if that's the only difference, then what's up with "the pope is always infallibly safe to follow" idea?

    What I'm saying is that it's an entirely separate issue from this passage in Vatican I.