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

Author Topic: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?  (Read 56223 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
« Reply #375 on: May 31, 2023, 07:42:59 AM »
PS: But I’d still be interested in seeing something which states schismatic infants forfeit grace at the age of reason (since invincible ignorance would seem to make the morally culpable sin by which such a forfeiture transpired impossible), which would be necessary for them to avoid salvation.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
« Reply #376 on: May 31, 2023, 07:51:20 AM »
PS: But I’d still be interested in seeing something which states schismatic infants forfeit grace at the age of reason (since invincible ignorance would seem to make the morally culpable sin by which such a forfeiture transpired impossible), which would be necessary for them to avoid salvation.

One need not actually sin against the faith to lack the virtue of faith.  It can be missing by simple absence.  This is a semi-Pelagian mindset where people must actively sin in order to forfeit salvation.


Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
« Reply #377 on: May 31, 2023, 07:56:10 AM »
This is a semi-Pelagian mindset where people must actively sin in order to forfeit salvation.

What??

If one is invincibly ignorant, by what means is grace forfeited, since full knowledge is necessary for the grave sin by which the grace is lost?

Conversely, if the grace is not forfeited, how would such a one be damned?

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
« Reply #378 on: May 31, 2023, 08:02:38 AM »
Quote
Everything that was de fide before Vatican II is de fide today, and nothing has been proposed as de fide since Vatican II that was not already de fide before the Council.  What that means is that the faith taught by the Church has not changed. 
:facepalm:  The Church is more than just doctrine.  It is well known that most Modernists in Pope St Pius X's days started their plotting in the liturgical area, which is the PRACTICAL application of doctrine.  The V2 anti-church has corrupted people's application/attitude/practices of the Faith, even if the core tenants of the Faith are still "pure".


Example: The core doctrine of "temporal punishment due to sin" (i.e. purgatory) is still believed, but in practice, the V2 church no longer has requiem masses, nor encourages the faithful to pray for the dead.

2 of my novus ordo neighbors told me about some family members who had died and I offered to pray for their souls and started talking about purgatory.  They quickly changed the subject and didn't want to be bothered about it.  They still go to weekly church and are considered "good" catholics.  It was very odd behavior for a catholic; but very typical for a novus ordo protestant...which is what they've been TRAINED TO BE.


Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
« Reply #379 on: May 31, 2023, 08:05:20 AM »
Quote
One need not actually sin against the faith to lack the virtue of faith.  It can be missing by simple absence.
Once one reaches the age of reason, they have a DUTY to practice the Faith (to follow truth and seek it).  So a baptized person who does not follow the prompts of grace in his heart and the inspirations of the Holy Ghost, sins by omission and inaction.