Author Topic: Ratzinger bows to "alter" in Lutheran church (Read 2660 times)

Gregory I · « **Reply #15 on:** October 17, 2011, 01:14:50 AM »

Quote from: Santo Subito

Quote from: SpiritusSanctus
The thing is, by bowing he implied that he believes Christ is present at their church. When actually, Christ is not present at their heretical services.

Actually Christ IS present at their church, as He Himself said, "When two or more are gathered in My Name, there I am in their midst."

In any case, you probably meant to argue that bowing towards the Lutheran altar NECESSARILY MUST mean that Pope Benedict believes in the validity of the Lutheran Eucharist, which is absurd.

Quote
You're wrong if you think sedes are the only ones who don't like Benedict.

I'm quite aware that a LOT of people don't LIKE Pope Benedict. All of the liberals hate him, for instance. But not LIKING someone, an accusing them of sacrilegous and blashpemous acts is quite different thing!

WOW!!! I cannot believe I have to cover this ground AGAIN with you Santo: THere is a distinct difference in the Various KINDS and MODES of Presences:

1. Physical Presence: Where the Substance of Something is Present with its accidents, that is its appearance. I am substantially Present, and the Appearance of my substance is present. Therefore, I am physically Present. Christ was Present this way on earth for Approx. 33 years.

2. Substantial Presence: Where the Substance ALONE is Present either without any accidents, or veiled beneath the accidents of a subject that no longer posses any substance (Consecrated Hosts). Christ is Present this way as the Eucharist at Mass.

3. VIRTUAL Presence: Where a substance is present VIRTUALLY, that is, by reason of activity in a given place. THIS ALONE is the type of Presence indicated by Christ in the Verses you cite. For example, this would be like you watching a DVD of Ricky Martin. He is present to you VIRTUALLY by reason of Activity.

Now, these three Presences are indeed "real" in as far as they are real KINDS of presence. But they are NOT Equal. A substantial presence is NOT the same as a Physical Presence which is NOT the same as a virtual presence.

Is Christ Present in a Lutheran Assembly in ANY mode of the three presences? NO, in general.

If a person were a Lutheran on the road to conversion however, and Christ was acting in a group of these Lutherans and moving them to convert from their Church to the One Faith, then you could say Christ was VIRTUALLY present in the midst of these Lutherans who are in the midst of converting. BUt it is NOT by Virtue of the Lutheran Whore (read Promiscuous Church, oops, ecclesiastical community :rolleyes: ), and it is NOT by Virtue of any of the tenets of the Lutheran Religion.

It is the DIRECT and IMMEDIATE work of CHRIST on the hearts of individuals who HAPPEN TO BE in a Lutheran Church that is moving them to CONVERT. THAT is a VIRTUAL presence.

But it is NOT equal to any kind of sacramental, abiding and substantial presence, FCOL.

Lutherans are heretics. Plain and simple.

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #16 on:** October 17, 2011, 09:13:13 AM »

Very well said, Raoul and Gregory.

Quote from: PartyIsOver

Thanks, SS. I appreciate the comments, and I noticed this as well about my ignore count. If people want to put their fingers in their ears and shut out the truth, so be it. They will be double liable at the Judgment because of that.

Yeah, I'd just "ignore" those ignores. Semi-Trads and neo-Caths don't like me either, because I don't sit in the middle and go "Oh, the TLM is nice but the NO is equally valid". Rather, I call Vatican II and the Bogus Ordo what they really are: a sham. On Council of Trent, the other forum I post on (it just opened in June and isn't really active, I only post there because I was invited to) two semi-Trads left and blamed their departure on me. One left because he didn't like the comments that I and a few others made about the NO, he said he was going to stop posting on Traditional Catholics forums because it "wasn't good for him spiritually". The other poster who left got mad because I cut down a Novus Ordo priest who was present at a ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ event, he said I was "spreading calumny" when the picture of him being at the event was even posted. That's the problem with semi-Trads, they like the TLM but don't get the full picture. That probably explains my ignore count as well, there are probably semi-Trads here who don't post very much and don't like my criticism of the Bogus Ordo so they ignore me.

And if anyone wonders where herbert is, he announced on the Trent forums that he's giving up Traditional Catholic forums because he's "gotten stale".

Nishant · « **Reply #17 on:** October 17, 2011, 09:45:29 AM »

We know St.Peter's public denial of Christ did not amount to manifest apostasy. We know that his scandalous actions, even misleading St.Barnabas, and deservedly earning a rebuke from St.Paul, did not amount to a tacit approval of the Judaizer heretics. It is clear that in such matters not even a Pontiff, or even the Prince of the Apostles, was or is to be imitated.

I am reminded of Sr.Lucia's and Our Lady of Fatima's ceaseless commands, "Pray much for the Holy Father". And if the faithful can make a difference at all, it is surely by prayer. On a related note, how do sedevacantists understand that injunction of Our Lady since you say we have no Holy Father, and none of the venerable Pontiffs before the Second Vatican Council seemed especially in need of our prayers?

Stephen Francis · « **Reply #18 on:** October 17, 2011, 10:26:46 AM »

None of the Holy Fathers before Vat II seemed 'especially in need of our prayers'?!?

Are you not well? The Apostles themselves asked for prayer over and over in Scripture. They asked for prayer that their teaching and preaching might take root and be fruitful, they asked for prayer in their travels because they faced perils of all kinds.

How much more did our Venerable Pontiffs of the past need prayer, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE they were holy and righteous men?

The righteous, especially in this day and age, need prayer more than ever.

As for Our Lady's command to pray for the Holy Father, first, there WAS a Holy Father at the time of the apparitions at Fatima, and for some years afterward, Deo gratias.

In terms of our current situation, the Holy Father we need, pray for and seek IS out there... when God Almighty chooses to crush the heretical Conciliar religion once and for all, we will joyfully and gratefully elect a new Pope.

Until then, we pray for what we DO have, which is the Church, her faithful and the suffering souls in Purgatory. We also pray for the heretics and infidels to be converted.

Mary, help of Christians, pray for us.

Sacred Heart of Jesus, have mercy on us.

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #19 on:** October 17, 2011, 03:21:51 PM »

Quote from: Nishant2011

We know St.Peter's public denial of Christ did not amount to manifest apostasy. We know that his scandalous actions, even misleading St.Barnabas, and deservedly earning a rebuke from St.Paul, did not amount to a tacit approval of the Judaizer heretics. It is clear that in such matters not even a Pontiff, or even the Prince of the Apostles, was or is to be imitated.

St. Peter was sincerely sorry for his sins and denial of Christ. He also had every intention of pleasing God and spreading the Truth. The Vatican II Popes, on the other hand, commit error after error, sin after sin, even heresy after heresy yet express no guilt or sorrow for their actions, nor do any of them teach the full Truth.

Quote

On a related note, how do sedevacantists understand that injunction of Our Lady since you say we have no Holy Father, and none of the venerable Pontiffs before the Second Vatican Council seemed especially in need of our prayers?

The Pope always needs prayers, regardless of how Traditional or modernist he is. He is a human being capable of sin and needs prayers to be able to keep fighting the evil of sin daily.

Nishant · « **Reply #20 on:** October 22, 2011, 07:39:46 AM »

Apologies for the late response.

Stephen, I actually meant it relatively, but obviously I was still incorrect in expressing it. You're right. Everyone needs prayers of course. But in this context, we always pray for the Holy Father. That's not unusual. I think Our Lady made a point about it, specifically, to indicate that the triumph of her Immaculate Heart, and that of the Church would come about particularly through the prayers of the faithful, but not without prayers for the Holy Father.

So, that we would have Popes, but those given to human respect seems plausible. If indeed this is the hour of the Passion of Holy Church, then that seems to fit nicely, for St.Peter's moment of weakness was during the Passion of Our Lord.

Spiritus,

St.Catherine said, "Even if the Pope were Satan incarnate, we ought not to raise up our heads against him, but calmly lie down to rest on his bosom." I imagine she was talking about the laity here, so this is not to say that senior prelates cannot legitimately oppose a Pope in public, and to his face, sometimes, as St.Paul did. But, seriously, would you really prefer to have Popes who engage, say, in fornication, sire children etc as some have done in the past. I think those who admit there is a Pope, at least, should do as Our Lord said, with regard the Pharisees, not by any means to imitate their works ourselves, but certainly to respect the seat in which they sit.

Stephen Francis · « **Reply #21 on:** October 22, 2011, 09:44:10 AM »

We DO respect the seat Ratzinger is in; we just admit and declare publicly that HE doesn't belong in it anymore (if, as opposed to what some say, he ever did qualify, which I doubt).

I think St. Catherine was probably also referring to the PERSONAL conduct of the Popes in question; while I would HATE to imagine having a Pope who was MORALLY a monster, yet orthodox in teaching, that would certainly be better than what exists now, which is a morally-bankrupt hierarchy which ALSO teaches and promotes errors of the most heinous sort.

St. Teresa of Avila, pray for us.

Sacred Heart of Jesus, have mercy on us.