After watching the newest episode of the Remnant's Remnant TV program  "Neocatholic Update:Canonizing Vatican 2 and to Hell with Tradition", I find it to be a bit confusing if they are accepting the false canonizations. It appears they have.

At minute mark 9:15 Christopher Ferrara says that he doesn't believe the canonizations were prudent, but that he does not disagree with the majority of Catholic theologians about the object of the canonization. He seems to say that the only thing required to accept the canonization is that these two men have received the Beatific Vision. Michael Matt jumps in agreeing and says "yeah, well he had a priest at his deathbed and received the Sacraments," or something live that. One thing I wondered is who was he referring to regarding these "Catholic theologians"? Does he mean the theologians who claim that canonizations are infallible or does he mean the "modernist theologians" who occupy Catholic positions illegitimately?

So, it appears that our friends at the Remnant have compromised once more by sending out videos of them having accepted the false canonizations, declared in a video addressing Neo-Catholics.



Thoughts?

I have not watched the video yet.  However, this is  backtracking on the part of Chris Ferrara.  In the early May, 2011, issue of "The Remnant",  he penned an article saying that JPII was not worthy of beatification, but, one does not have to worry too much, since beatifications are not infallible.  He finally goes on to write that it is different with canonisation because, and he clearly writes this, canonisations are INFALLIBLE.  He goes on to say that JPII would not be canonised.
  He has either changed his mind in the past three years(people can certainly do that; however, given that he has been at this sort of thing for some time, how can he be put forth as a guide of sorts concerning the faith and what is possible if he is now going against what Pope Benedict XIV taught on canonisations as well as scores of approved theologians and the practice of the Church.  He is doing it on his say so-he knows better than the Church).

  I know that Novusordowatch has this on their website.  When I tried to  post something similiar as to what I just wrote as a comment on an article at "The Remnant", it was soon taken off.  

  If nothing else, people need to do their own research, seeking help when needed of course, then verifying things and make their own discisions.  This is like the blind leading the blind.

 Joe

The Remnant has not been traditional for 20 years, ignore them.

Marsha

Quote from: joe17

I have not watched the video yet.  However, this is  backtracking on the part of Chris Ferrara.  In the early May, 2011, issue of "The Remnant",  he penned an article saying that JPII was not worthy of beatification, but, one does not have to worry too much, since beatifications are not infallible.  He finally goes on to write that it is different with canonisation because, and he clearly writes this, canonisations are INFALLIBLE.  He goes on to say that JPII would not be canonised.
  He has either changed his mind in the past three years(people can certainly do that; however, given that he has been at this sort of thing for some time, how can he be put forth as a guide of sorts concerning the faith and what is possible if he is now going against what Pope Benedict XIV taught on canonisations as well as scores of approved theologians and the practice of the Church.  He is doing it on his say so-he knows better than the Church).

  I know that Novusordowatch has this on their website.  When I tried to  post something similiar as to what I just wrote as a comment on an article at "The Remnant", it was soon taken off.  

  If nothing else, people need to do their own research, seeking help when needed of course, then verifying things and make their own discisions.  This is like the blind leading the blind.

 Joe

Chris Ferrara, Michael Voris, John Vennari, Michael Matt, etc., are all cut from the same cloth.

Chris Ferrara, Michael Voris, Michael Matt, John Vennari

I have not watched the video yet.  However, this is  backtracking on the part of Chris Ferrara.  In the early May, 2011, issue of "The Remnant",  he penned an article saying that JPII was not worthy of beatification, but, one does not have to worry too much, since beatifications are not infallible.  He finally goes on to write that it is different with canonisation because, and he clearly writes this, canonisations are INFALLIBLE.  He goes on to say that JPII would not be canonised.

 He has either changed his mind in the past three years(people can certainly do that; however, given that he has been at this sort of thing for some time, how can he be put forth as a guide of sorts concerning the faith and what is possible if he is now going against what Pope Benedict XIV taught on canonisations as well as scores of approved theologians and the practice of the Church.  He is doing it on his say so-he knows better than the Church).

  I know that Novusordowatch has this on their website.  When I tried to  post something similiar as to what I just wrote as a comment on an article at "The Remnant", it was soon taken off.  

  If nothing else, people need to do their own research, seeking help when needed of course, then verifying things and make their own discisions.  This is like the blind leading the blind.

 Joe