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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 62 63 [64] 65 66 ... 134

Author Topic: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?  (Read 56031 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
« Reply #315 on: May 29, 2023, 01:02:03 PM »
Emile.  I agree. 

But Catholic Knight is implying that his application of such principles is 1) obvious, 2) some sort of teaching, which 3) everyone should agree with.  

Everyone agrees with the principle (ie a heretic loses membership) but the APPLICATION of this principle is anything but clear.  If it was simple, then +Bellarmine and all the theologians wouldn’t have debated the issue for decades.  …And they still never agreed.  …So, no, there’s no consensus. 
Logged

Offline LaCosaNostra

Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
« Reply #316 on: May 29, 2023, 03:03:00 PM »
Quote from: Catholic Knight on May 27, 2023, 09:57:13 AM
The sin of heresy can be either an interior act alone or it can also be manifested externally.  That the Church defines the external manifestation of heresy as a crime does not detract from the sin of heresy being a sin whether internal alone or manifested externally. 

But the point is, if the sin of heresy, of its nature, severed a person from the Church, a person who committed the sin of heresy by an interior act alone would be severed from the Church.    The sin of heresy only severs the internal bonds that joins a person to the Church.   It does not sever the external bonds.   What severs the external bond is not a "public sin" of heresy, it is notorious heresy (and nothing less than notorious heresy); and notorious heresy severs the external bonds even if the person in question is not guilty of the sin. 

None of the recent popes, including Francis, has come close to being a notorious heretic.  



Logged

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
« Reply #317 on: May 29, 2023, 03:26:34 PM »
Quote from: LaCosaNostra on May 29, 2023, 03:03:00 PM

None of the recent popes, including Francis, has come close to being a notorious heretic. 

:facepalm: ... you posted this with a straight face?

Bergoglio recently declared some Coptic Orthodox "martyrs" to be saints and had them included in the Roman martyrology ... thereby verbatim contradicting the dogmatic declaration of the Council of Florence.
Logged

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
« Reply #318 on: May 29, 2023, 03:29:46 PM »
The worst was +Francis denying hell.
Logged

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
« Reply #319 on: May 29, 2023, 04:32:39 PM »
Quote from: Pax Vobis on May 29, 2023, 03:29:46 PM
The worst was +Francis denying hell.

Well, with that one he maintains deniability because those statements were reported by Scalfari.  Bergoglio, in his typical scandalous fashion, never repudiated the grossly-heretical statements attributed to him by Scalfari, and even kept granting him additional interviews.  IMO, he did this because he wanted to create chaos, and I suspect that Scalfari was quite accurate, but Jorge used him precisely because he could maintain a plausible deniability due to Scalfari not taking notes.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 62 63 [64] 65 66 ... 134
« previous next »