Author Topic: N.O. ritual epithet: "Pelagian" (Read 670 times)

Mark 79 · « **on:** October 23, 2022, 11:31:37 AM »

It seems that "Pelagian" is the Bogus Ordo's favorite ritual epithet.

As best I can tell, when used as a curse word, "Pelagian" is meant to convey that we practicing Catholics reject the "grace" of the novel made-up bullshit of the Bogus Ordo rabbis and counter-Magisterium.

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pope-francis-says-traditionalism-is-infidelity-to-the-catholic-church-and-vatican-ii/

DigitalLogos · « **Reply #1 on:** October 23, 2022, 01:36:25 PM »

That's incredibly ironic

Hardicanute · « **Reply #2 on:** October 23, 2022, 01:49:40 PM »

https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11604a.htm

…extracts from his lost work "Contra traducem peccati" — were branded as heretical. These theses ran as follows:

Even if Adam had not sinned, he would have died.
Adam's sin harmed only himself, not the human race.
Children just born are in the same state as Adam before his fall.
The whole human race neither dies through Adam's sin or death, nor rises again through the resurrection of Christ.
The (Mosaic Law) is as good a guide to heaven as the Gospel.
Even before the advent of Christ there were men who were without sin.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #3 on:** October 23, 2022, 06:15:48 PM »

Bergoglio has no dea what "Pelagian" means. If he did, he'd open the cause of Pelagius for canonization. He clearly meant "Jansenist" or something along those lines.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #4 on:** October 23, 2022, 06:40:41 PM »

from the article:

Quote

Furthermore, as Bishop Athanasius Schneider has recalled, a November 16, 1964, note by the Council’s Secretary-General reads: “Taking conciliar custom into consideration and also the pastoral purpose of the present Council, the sacred Council defines as binding on the Church only those things in matters of faith and morals which it shall openly declare to be binding.”

From Dignitatis Humanae:

Quote

This Vatican Council declares that the human person has a right to religious freedom.
... [T]his doctrine of freedom has roots in divine revelation, and for this reason Christians are bound to respect it all the more conscientiously.

SimpleMan · « **Reply #5 on:** October 23, 2022, 07:30:43 PM »

Quote from: Hardicanute on October 23, 2022, 01:49:40 PM

https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11604a.htm

…extracts from his lost work "Contra traducem peccati" — were branded as heretical. These theses ran as follows:

Even if Adam had not sinned, he would have died.
Adam's sin harmed only himself, not the human race.
Children just born are in the same state as Adam before his fall.
The whole human race neither dies through Adam's sin or death, nor rises again through the resurrection of Christ.
The (Mosaic Law) is as good a guide to heaven as the Gospel.
Even before the advent of Christ there were men who were without sin.

But hasn't it been traditionally taught (even if not as doctrine) that Adam, and all men, would eventually have died naturally, after living for many hundreds of years, and would have then gone to heaven, as they would have been without sin? (Not sure where the resurrection of the dead fits into this.)

That's what I've always understood, and will welcome correction if I'm wrong.

Or is it something that we don't know one way or the other? Speculative theology either way?

Nadir · « **Reply #6 on:** October 23, 2022, 08:13:44 PM »

Quote from: SimpleMan on October 23, 2022, 07:30:43 PM

But hasn't it been traditionally taught (even if not as doctrine) that Adam, and all men, would eventually have died naturally, after living for many hundreds of years, and would have then gone to heaven, as they would have been without sin? (Not sure where the resurrection of the dead fits into this.)

That's what I've always understood, and will welcome correction if I'm wrong.

Or is it something that we don't know one way or the other? Speculative theology either way?

How can there possibly be a traditional teaching on what might have been if....
The Catholic Church does not play let’s pretend.

Hardicanute · « **Reply #7 on:** October 23, 2022, 08:57:26 PM »

Quote from: SimpleMan on October 23, 2022, 07:30:43 PM

But hasn't it been traditionally taught (even if not as doctrine) that Adam, and all men, would eventually have died naturally, after living for many hundreds of years, and would have then gone to heaven, as they would have been without sin? (Not sure where the resurrection of the dead fits into this.)

That's what I've always understood, and will welcome correction if I'm wrong.

Or is it something that we don't know one way or the other? Speculative theology either way?

“(1) The sin of Adam has injured the human race at least in the sense that it has introduced death — "Wherefore as by one man sin entered into this world and by sin death; and so death passed upon all men". Here there is question of physical death. First, the literal meaning of the word ought to be presumed unless there be some reason to the contrary. Second, there is an allusion in this verse to a passage in the Book of Wisdom in which, as may be seen from the context, there is question of physical death. Wisdom 2:24: "But by the envy of the devil death came into the world". Cf. Genesis 2:17; 3:3, 19; and another parallel passage in St. Paul himself, 1 Corinthians 15:21: "For by a man came death and by a man the resurrection of the dead". Here there can be question only of physical death, since it is opposed to corporal resurrection, which is the subject of the whole chapter.

(2) Adam by his fault transmitted to us not only death but also sin, "for as by the disobedience of one man many [i.e., all men] were made sinners" (Romans 5:19). How then could the Pelagians, and at a later period Zwingli, say that St. Paulspeaks only of the transmission of physical death? If according to them we must read death where the Apostle wrote sin, we should also read that the disobedience of Adam has made us mortalwhere the Apostle writes that it has made us sinners. But the word sinner has never meant mortal, nor has sin ever meant death. Also in verse 12, which corresponds to verse 19, we see that by one man two things have been brought on all men, sin and death, the one being the consequence of the other and therefore not identical with it.

(3) Since Adam transmits death to his children by way of generation when he begets them mortal, it is by generation also that he transmits to them sin, for the Apostle presents these two effects as produced at the same time and by the same causality. The explanation of the Pelagians differs from that of St. Paul. According to them the child who receives mortality at his birth receives sinfrom Adam only at a later period when he knows the sin of the first man and is inclined to imitate it. The causality of Adam as regards mortality would, therefore, be completely different from his causality as regards sin. Moreover, this supposed influence of the bad example of Adam is almost chimerical; even the faithful when they sin do not sin on account of Adam's bad example, a fortioriinfidels who are completely ignorant of the history of the first man. And yet all men are, by the influence of Adam, sinners and condemned (Romans 5:18, 19). The influence of Adamcannot, therefore, be the influence of his bad example which we imitate (Augustine, "Contra julian.", VI, xxiv, 75).

Moreover St. Paul, and after him the councils, regarded death and original sin as two distinct things transmitted by Adam.”

https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11312a.htm

Hardicanute · « **Reply #8 on:** October 23, 2022, 09:01:02 PM »

Quote from: Nadir on October 23, 2022, 08:13:44 PM

How can there possibly be a traditional teaching on what might have been if....
The Catholic Church does not play let’s pretend.

[From the Constitution "cuм prae excelsa," Feb. 28, 1476]

1400 Dz 734 “…to reconcile with its author human nature exposed to eternal death because of the fall of the first man…”

"By one man sin entered into the world, and by sin death, and so death passed upon all men, in whom all have sinned" (Rm 5,12 see n. 175).”

In the year AD 418, the Council of Carthage condemned the teachings of Pelagius as did the Council of Ephesus in AD 431. The Council of Carthage even stated: “Whoever says, that Adam was created mortal, and would, even without sin, have died by natural necessity, let him be anathema.” (Schaff 1891, p. 690).

Author Topic: N.O. ritual epithet: "Pelagian" (Read 670 times)

Mark 79

N.O. ritual epithet: "Pelagian"

DigitalLogos

Re: N.O. ritual epithet: "Pelagian"

Hardicanute

Re: N.O. ritual epithet: "Pelagian"

Ladislaus

Re: N.O. ritual epithet: "Pelagian"

Ladislaus

Re: N.O. ritual epithet: "Pelagian"

SimpleMan

Re: N.O. ritual epithet: "Pelagian"

Nadir

Re: N.O. ritual epithet: "Pelagian"

Hardicanute

Re: N.O. ritual epithet: "Pelagian"

Hardicanute

Re: N.O. ritual epithet: "Pelagian"