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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 12

Author Topic: Sedevacantists self-contradict - most aren't conclavist!  (Read 7018 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Stubborn

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 14639
  • Reputation: +6030/-901
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sedevacantists self-contradict - most aren't conclavist!
« Reply #90 on: December 29, 2019, 10:25:44 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Yeti on December 28, 2019, 07:58:05 PM
    I thought this quote from St. Alphonsus might be relevant here:
    To suppose that the Church can err in canonizing, is a sin, or is heresy, according to St. Bonaventure, Bellarmine, and others; or at least next door to heresy, according to Suarez, Azorius, Gottti, etc.; because the Sovereign Pontiff, according to St. Thomas, is guided by the infallible influence of the Holy Ghost in an especial way when canonizing the saints.
    Here is a link to the page on Archive.org: https://archive.org/details/TheCompleteAsceticalWorksOfSt.Alphonsusvolume3/page/n39
    Well, here is the dogma of infallibility of the pope, would you mind to please quote all of the articles or teachings within it where it says anything at all about the infallible influence of the Holy Ghost? 
    Logged
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

    Offline Nishant Xavier

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2873
    • Reputation: +1894/-1751
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Sedevacantists self-contradict - most aren't conclavist!
    « Reply #91 on: December 29, 2019, 11:25:16 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • "Let us open with the statement of Pope Benedict XIV (1740-1758), who wrote:

    "If anyone dared to assert that the pontiff had erred in this or that canonization, we shall say that he is, if not a heretic, at least temerarious, a giver of scandal to the whole Church, an insulter of the saints, a favorer of those heretics who deny the Church's authority in canonizing saints, savoring of heresy by giving unbelievers an occasion to mock the faithful, the assertor of an erroneous opinion and liable to very grave penalties." [1] http://www.unamsanctamcatholicam.com/theology/81-theology/605-argument-infallible-canonizations.html

    From: https://www.crisismagazine.com/2014/are-canonizations-based-on-papal-infallibility

    " Between the late 1300s and the 1600s, there are only four thinkers who dissented from the teaching.  After Pope Benedict XIV’s (r. 1740-1758) definitive 7-volume work on canonization, there was total unanimity ... If infallible acts admitted of exceptions, then how would the Christian faithful know if any dogmatic declaration were true?  We know that Francis and Dominic are in heaven, because this fact is dogmatically asserted by the Church in the infallible act of canonization. Thomas again provides the reasoning: (Quod 9, q. 16, contra 1) “In the church there is not able to be a damnable error.  But it would be a damnable error if she would venerate a saint who was a sinner, because anyone knowing their sin, might believe the church to be false; and if this were to happen, they might be led into error.  Therefore the church is not able to err in such things.”  By the year 1300 it was clear to everyone that to deny the sanctity of a canonized saint in the Church was a heresy.  While it is true that opposition to this or that saint is possible and open to debate before a formal canonization, after such an act, doubt is precluded and must be received with religious submission of intellect and will.

    Since the early 1300s the Popes themselves have understood their act of canonization as infallible.  Some, such as Sixtus IV, Sixtus V, and Clement VIII have explicitly cited this infallibility in the contexts of their own acts of canonization.  One cannot dismiss this theological consensus simply because procedures develop and emphases shift.

    On April 27, in a liturgical formula fixed since the canonizations of John XXII in the early 1300s (and very probably before, those are our first records) three petitions will be made.  The first will beseech the aid of Mary and the saints in the “solemn act we undertake.”  The second will invoke the Holy Spirit “that he might not permit the Church to err in a matter of such importance.  Then the Veni Creator will be sung (as before any solemn definition, papal or conciliar).  The third will beg the Pope to enroll the saints, in the name of the Spirit “who in every age preserves the supreme magisterium from every error.”  The pope will then utter the ancient words of canonization, the prototype for all dogmatic definitions:

    To the honor of the Holy Trinity, for the exaltation of the Catholic faith, and for the increase of the Christian life, by the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, of the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul and Our own, after due deliberation and having implored the Divine Assistance by prayer, and by the counsel of many of our brothers, we declare and define Blessed John XXIII and John Paul II to be saints, and we enroll them in the catalog of the saints, commanding that they be held among the saints by the universal Church, and to be invoked as such by pious devotion. In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.

    This is not unclear language; in act and in intention the Popes define these things to be held by all the faithful.  We cannot simply discount nearly a 1000 years of theological development in this case, particularly to suit one’s own discomfiture with certain recent happenings.  For to be Catholic is to stubbornly maintain, as St. Thomas did, that in the Church there can never be a “damnable error.”
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 11968
    • Reputation: +7517/-2254
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Sedevacantists self-contradict - most aren't conclavist!
    « Reply #92 on: December 29, 2019, 12:11:21 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Xavier, comparing post-V2 (ie JPII’s changes) canonizations to those of prior centuries is like comparing grape soda to wine.  Getting rid of the devil’s advocate, the miracle investigators and all other changes give MUCH doubt to modern canonizations.  It is not wrong to question these acts nowadays.  This is all the Vatican's fault; no ones else’s.  They bring doubt on their own processes.  They mock the communion of the saints with the lack of solemnity and due care which a canonization is SUPPOSED to represent, but its legitimacy is now tarnished.  
    Logged

    Offline Clemens Maria

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2246
    • Reputation: +1485/-605
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Sedevacantists self-contradict - most aren't conclavist!
    « Reply #93 on: December 29, 2019, 12:57:39 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Excellent post XavierSem.  Of course we disagree on the status of the post V2 papal claimants but if you are correct and Francis is a true pope then JP2 is certainly a saint.  On the other hand, I completely agree with the R&R people that JP2 did not live a saintly life in any way, shape or form.  JP2’s scandalous behavior is very well docuмented at Novus Ordo Watch.  So either JP2 is a saint despite an unholy life on earth or Francis is not a true pope.  There is no other option.  The vast majority of the r&r has resigned themselves to the former.  Only some who are associated or formerly associated with the SSPX are hanging on to the idea that a true pope could fail in his exercise of the extraordinary magisterium.  If you think you have a little bit of wiggle room on V2 because it’s status was ambiguously explained by the Conciliar hierarchy, you have none when it comes to canonizations.  The form is a very clear exercise of the pope’s infallibility.
    Logged

    Offline Clemens Maria

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2246
    • Reputation: +1485/-605
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Sedevacantists self-contradict - most aren't conclavist!
    « Reply #94 on: December 29, 2019, 01:05:36 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Another thing to keep in mind is that if Siscoe and Salsa are correct and Francis doesn’t lose the papacy until after he is declared a heretic by the Church, JP2 is still a saint despite living an unholy life.  
    Logged

    Offline Quo vadis Domine

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4750
    • Reputation: +2896/-667
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Sedevacantists self-contradict - most aren't conclavist!
    « Reply #95 on: December 29, 2019, 01:21:47 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Clemens Maria on December 29, 2019, 01:05:36 PM
    Another thing to keep in mind is that if Siscoe and Salsa are correct and Francis doesn’t lose the papacy until after he is declared a heretic by the Church, JP2 is still a saint despite living an unholy life.  
    How about “Saint” Paul VI?
    Logged
    For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?

    Offline forlorn

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2486
    • Reputation: +991/-1099
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Sedevacantists self-contradict - most aren't conclavist!
    « Reply #96 on: December 29, 2019, 01:25:01 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on December 29, 2019, 12:11:21 PM
    Xavier, comparing post-V2 (ie JPII’s changes) canonizations to those of prior centuries is like comparing grape soda to wine.  Getting rid of the devil’s advocate, the miracle investigators and all other changes give MUCH doubt to modern canonizations.  It is not wrong to question these acts nowadays.  This is all the Vatican's fault; no ones else’s.  They bring doubt on their own processes.  They mock the communion of the saints with the lack of solemnity and due care which a canonization is SUPPOSED to represent, but its legitimacy is now tarnished.  
    None of the reasons given for the Church's infallibility on canonisations had anything to do with the rigorous or thorough nature of the process. None of the theologians argued that canonisations are infallible because of the process used to investigate potential saints, but rather than they are infallible because the Church cannot make that grave an error - a principle which still applies to canonisations under the new process. 
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46127
    • Reputation: +27158/-5014
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Sedevacantists self-contradict - most aren't conclavist!
    « Reply #97 on: December 29, 2019, 01:45:10 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: forlorn on December 29, 2019, 01:25:01 PM
    None of the reasons given for the Church's infallibility on canonisations had anything to do with the rigorous or thorough nature of the process. None of the theologians argued that canonisations are infallible because of the process used to investigate potential saints, but rather than they are infallible because the Church cannot make that grave an error - a principle which still applies to canonisations under the new process.

    THIS^^^

    That response is yet another act of desperation from the R&R crowd.  For them, ANYTHING is better than the suggestion that the V2 papal claimants may have been imposters bent on destroying the Church.  So let's throw the infallibility of canonizations under the bus at the feet of Bergoglio also.
    Logged

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 14639
    • Reputation: +6030/-901
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Sedevacantists self-contradict - most aren't conclavist!
    « Reply #98 on: December 29, 2019, 01:56:26 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: XavierSem on December 29, 2019, 11:25:16 AM
    "Let us open with the statement of Pope Benedict XIV (1740-1758), who wrote:...
    XavierSem, I actually know of those quotes and a few others I can't remember at the moment, yet they only serve to prove that "true" popes can indeed teach things that are erroneous to the whole world. V1 defined when the pope is infallible in 1868, this is the way we know that the divine protection from error is not present for canonizations, is because this infallibility is not present in the dogma of papal infallibility as decreed at V1. So if you want to quote from popes and the fathers to support the idea that canonizations enjoy the divine protection, please be sure the sources you use, taught such a thing after V1, not before.

    Since V1, if for whatever reason you presume to add this additional infallibility, please note that since V1, it is not taught by the Church in your posting.  



    Logged
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 14639
    • Reputation: +6030/-901
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Sedevacantists self-contradict - most aren't conclavist!
    « Reply #99 on: December 29, 2019, 01:56:51 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on December 29, 2019, 01:45:10 PM
    THIS^^^

    That response is yet another act of desperation from the R&R crowd.  For them, ANYTHING is better than the suggestion that the V2 papal claimants may have been imposters bent on destroying the Church.  So let's throw the infallibility of canonizations under the bus at the feet of Bergoglio also.
    :facepalm:
    Logged
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

    Offline Quo vadis Domine

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4750
    • Reputation: +2896/-667
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Sedevacantists self-contradict - most aren't conclavist!
    « Reply #100 on: December 29, 2019, 02:32:59 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: forlorn on December 29, 2019, 01:25:01 PM
    None of the reasons given for the Church's infallibility on canonisations had anything to do with the rigorous or thorough nature of the process. None of the theologians argued that canonisations are infallible because of the process used to investigate potential saints, but rather than they are infallible because the Church cannot make that grave an error - a principle which still applies to canonisations under the new process.
    Excellent! Have you Father Faber book on canonizations?
    http://www.lulu.com/shop/rev-fw-faber/beatification-and-canonization/paperback/product-4672075.html
    Logged
    For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?

    Offline forlorn

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2486
    • Reputation: +991/-1099
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Sedevacantists self-contradict - most aren't conclavist!
    « Reply #101 on: December 29, 2019, 03:00:39 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Stubborn on December 29, 2019, 01:56:51 PM
    :facepalm:
    If the infallibility isn't part of the universal ordinary magisterium, then frankly nothing is.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46127
    • Reputation: +27158/-5014
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Sedevacantists self-contradict - most aren't conclavist!
    « Reply #102 on: December 29, 2019, 06:37:49 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: forlorn on December 29, 2019, 03:00:39 PM
    If the infallibility isn't part of the universal ordinary magisterium, then frankly nothing is.

    If anyone looks at the formula used by Bergoglio in his canonizations of Roncalli and Wojtyla, if this isn't infallible, then nothing is ...
    Quote
    For the honor of the Blessed Trinity, the exaltation of the Catholic faith and the increase of the Christian life, by the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul, and own own, after due deliberation and frequent prayer for divine assistance, and having sought the counsel of many of our brother bishops, we declare and define Blessed John XXIII, John Paul II, be saints, and we enroll them among the saints, decreeing that they are to be venerated as such by the whole Church. In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen

    In the bolded words above we have ALL the notes required for an infallible definition.

    Just before this formula, the "Cardinal Prefect" reads the following oration:
    Quote
    Most Holy Father, Holy Church, trusting in the Lord’s promise to send upon her the Spirit of Truth, who in every age keeps the supreme Magisterium immune from error, most earnestly beseeches Your Holiness to enroll these, her elect, among the Saints.

    This Cardinal is invoking the "supreme Magisterium immune from error" to be applied to this "enrollment".

    This is about as explicit an invocation of the infallibility of the Church as you can find.

    You R&R make a laughingstock of infallibility and of the Church's solemn rituals by claiming that these canonizations are not infallible.
    Logged

    Offline Quo vadis Domine

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4750
    • Reputation: +2896/-667
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Sedevacantists self-contradict - most aren't conclavist!
    « Reply #103 on: December 29, 2019, 06:40:55 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on December 29, 2019, 06:37:49 PM
    If anyone looks at the formula used by Bergoglio in his canonizations of Roncalli and Wojtyla, if this isn't infallible, then nothing is ...
    In the bolded words above we have ALL the notes required for an infallible definition.

    Just before this formula, the "Cardinal Prefect" reads the following oration:
    This Cardinal is invoking the "supreme Magisterium immune from error" to be applied to this "enrollment".

    This is about as explicit an invocation of the infallibility of the Church as you can find.

    You R&R make a laughingstock of infallibility and of the Church's solemn rituals by claiming that these canonizations are not infallible.
    👍👍👍
    Logged
    For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?

    Offline Meg

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6789
    • Reputation: +3467/-2999
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Sedevacantists self-contradict - most aren't conclavist!
    « Reply #104 on: December 29, 2019, 06:57:46 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on December 29, 2019, 06:37:49 PM
    This is about as explicit an invocation of the infallibility of the Church as you can find.

    Which Church would that be? The conciliar church, or the Catholic Church?
    Logged
    "It is licit to resist a Sovereign Pontiff who is trying to destroy the Church. I say it is licit to resist him in not following his orders and in preventing the execution of his will. It is not licit to Judge him, to punish him, or to depose him, for these are acts proper to a superior."

    ~St. Robert Bellarmine
    De Romano Pontifice, Lib.II, c.29
    Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 12
    « previous next »