Author Topic: Sinagoglio hard to be proven a heretic? (Read 8460 times)

Sneakyticks · « **Reply #15 on:** July 11, 2014, 01:05:44 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus

Mortalium Animos referred to Ecuмenism as wrong to the extent that it's premised on what he called the "false opinion" (note, this is a far cry from "heresy" proper) of religious indifferentism that LEADS to the loss of faith. He did not in and of itself call Ecuмenism "apostasy", as you claim.

You left out the rest of the sentence: "...but also in distorting the idea of true religion they reject it."

You would have us believe religious indifferentism is not even heresy!

Cantarella · « **Reply #16 on:** July 11, 2014, 01:15:14 PM »

Important thing to remember is that none of this is actually new. Old heresies never die.

Vatican II as well as the Assisi Prayers are the official acceptance of Modernism and Paganism but there is really nothing new. Rome succuмbed to the old temptations of the idolaters, who were happy to offer a place of Christ in the Pantheon and accept the Catholic religion AMONG the other cults of the Empire. What is unforgivable to the world is that the Church claims to be the ONLY one true.

Church history is a constant reiteration of the warning that Israel will be prosperous if she serves her God and will be punished if she turns towards false Gods who are really demons. The current crisis is a punishment for our disbelief.

Sneakyticks · « **Reply #17 on:** July 11, 2014, 01:19:51 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus

Quote from: Sneakyticks
Quote from: Ladislaus
There's nothing inherently wrong with speaking with members of other religions; it all depends on the underlying premises (i.e. is there religious indifferentism in play).

Obviously.

If you agree, then you have to prove religious indifferentism from the statements of Jorge Bergoglio.

Nope, this is false; heresy and apostasy can also be manifested by deeds and omission of deeds.

You are just repeating the old R&R false arguments which say unless someone were to deny WORD FOR WORD, EXACTLY, some dogma, by WORD OR WRITING, then there is no heresy.

You are just repeating what the blind fool Ferrara said in his "Enterprise" articles.

So when the antichrist Synagoglio sat by silently while Skorka said they are still waiting for the Messiah right in Synagoglio's face, that was an act of APOSTASY by omission.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #18 on:** July 11, 2014, 01:26:24 PM »

Quote from: Sneakyticks

Nope, this is false; heresy and apostasy can also be manifested by deeds and omission of deeds.

No, that only renders one "suspect" of heresy according to Church law.

Cantarella · « **Reply #19 on:** July 11, 2014, 02:09:08 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus

There's nothing inherently wrong with speaking with members of other religions; it all depends on the underlying premises (i.e. is there religious indifferentism in play).

The underlying premise is the Cushing error on there being exceptions to the Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus dogma (the invincible ignorant). The heretical 1949 Holy Office Letter is the doctrinal foundation for the Prayer Meeting at Assisi as well as the false post - Vatican II Ecuмenist and Inter-faith dialogues, in which the goal is not conversion but convergence with non-Catholics. This is based on the belief that they can be in the state of Grace and be saved through the Church while being IN a false religion. If this is somehow possible, then why a need for conversion at all?

This is precisely the basis of Inter-Faith dialogue and false Ecuмenism approach.

Sneakyticks · « **Reply #20 on:** July 11, 2014, 02:54:44 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus

Quote from: Sneakyticks
Nope, this is false; heresy and apostasy can also be manifested by deeds and omission of deeds.

No, that only renders one "suspect" of heresy according to Church law.

Slow down there: communicating in things divine with heretics against the prescription of Canon 1258 renders you suspect of heresy.

Manifesting heresy/apostasy by deeds and omission of deeds does not render you "merely suspect of heresy".

Canon 1258 is dealing with individual cases in which people go and communicate in things divine with heretics against the prescription of Canon 1258.

Ecuмenism is something completely different. Mortalium Animos is not dealing with individual cases in which people go and communicate in things divine with heretics against the prescription of Canon 1258; it is dealing with the entire philosophy and reasoning behind Ecuмenism, and THAT he condemned as apostasy.

And what did Vatican 2 did? It officially legislated and taught as true what Canon 1258 condemns and consecrated Ecuмenism.

Now how in the world can the Church do such a thing? Where is infallibility?

"Vatican 2 was not infallible" you will say.

You bet it was, if you believe Paul 6 was a true Pope.

Sneakyticks · « **Reply #21 on:** July 11, 2014, 03:19:54 PM »

Quote from: Cantarella

Important thing to remember is that none of this is actually new. Old heresies never die.

Vatican II as well as the Assisi Prayers are the official acceptance of Modernism and Paganism but there is really nothing new. Rome succuмbed to the old temptations of the idolaters, who were happy to offer a place of Christ in the Pantheon and accept the Catholic religion AMONG the other cults of the Empire.

But the Church CANNOT do this. This is to say that the Gates of Hell prevailed.

The Church is infallible and indefectible.

So how do YOU explain this?

SV says, based on the very own Church teaching, that these men were and are usurpers and therefore DO NOT represent the Church and the Church did none of this.

You, on the other hand, contend that these men still represent the Church, so you contend that the Church did in fact do all this and is responsible for it.

Sneakyticks · « **Reply #22 on:** July 11, 2014, 03:29:06 PM »

And you still haven't answered the Pius XII questions Ladislaus.

Graham · « **Reply #23 on:** July 11, 2014, 03:39:07 PM »

Quote from: Sneakyticks

Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, #2:

Quote
A similar object is aimed at by some, in those matters which concern the New Law promulgated by Christ our Lord. For since they hold it for certain that men destitute of all religious sense are very rarely to be found, they seem to have founded on that belief a hope that the nations, although they differ among themselves in certain religious matters, will without much difficulty come to agree as brethren in professing certain doctrines, which form as it were a common basis of the spiritual life. For which reason conventions, meetings and addresses are frequently arranged by these persons, at which a large number of listeners are present, and at which all without distinction are invited to join in the discussion, both infidels of every kind, and Christians, even those who have unhappily fallen away from Christ or who with obstinacy and pertinacity deny His divine nature and mission. Certainly such attempts can nowise be approved by Catholics, founded as they are on that false opinion which considers all religions to be more or less good and praiseworthy, since they all in different ways manifest and signify that sense which is inborn in us all, and by which we are led to God and to the obedient acknowledgment of His rule. Not only are those who hold this opinion in error and deceived, but also in distorting the idea of true religion they reject it, and little by little turn aside to naturalism and atheism, as it is called; from which it clearly follows that one who supports those who hold these theories and attempt to realize them, is altogether abandoning the divinely revealed religion.[/b]

Notice, that the Pope here merely spoke about "conventions, meetings and addresses", in which "a large number of listeners are present, and at which all without distinction are invited to join in the discussion".

He merely spoke about discussing, and this he condemned as apostasy!

What about the present day Vatican 2 ecuмenism? What about Assisi and the things Synagoglio himself has engaged in, which are miles away from what is described in Mortalium Animos?

What the Pope described here seems like NOTHING in comparison with what Vatican 2 taught and what has been happening ever since!

Quote from: Ladislaus

Mortalium Animos referred to Ecuмenism as wrong to the extent that it's premised on what he called the "false opinion" (note, this is a far cry from "heresy" proper) of religious indifferentism that LEADS to the loss of faith. He did not in and of itself call Ecuмenism "apostasy", as you claim.

There's nothing inherently wrong with speaking with members of other religions; it all depends on the underlying premises (i.e. is there religious indifferentism in play).

Quote from: 2Vermont

I don't know. That last sentence highlighted in Mortalium Animos says they completely abandon the true religion. How is that not the textbook definition of apostasy?

2vt, Ladislaus's interpretation is correct. See the orange highlighted text. Pius XI is condemning "conventions, meetings, and addresses" which are based on a premise of indifferentism.

It's academic in this case, since Francis undoubtedly practises false ecuмenism.

Mithrandylan · « **Reply #24 on:** July 11, 2014, 04:36:29 PM »

Ladislaus,

Have you read my post at the top of page three?

Add Mithrandylan to your buddy list Send a personal messsage to Mithrandylan Ignore all posts by Mithrandylan Click to Like this post by Mithrandylan1 Click to Dislike this post by Mithrandylan0 Reply with a quote from this post Delete this single post by Mithrandylan Go to the top of the page
I'm pretty sure that a man could be a freemason and still be pope. The latae sententiae excommunication for masonry does is an ecclesiastical impediment, and ecclesiastical impediments do not bar one from participating in an election. Nor does this type of excommunication actually result in a loss of membership, whereas heresy does. I'm welcome to be corrected on any of this of course.

As to his heresies, all of these occurred before his election:

He co-wrote a book with a Jєωιѕн Rabbi. Here are some quotes:

“I do not approach the relationship in order to proselytize, or convert the atheist; I respect him… nor would I say that his life is condemned, because I am convinced that I do not have the right to make a judgment about the honesty of that person"(Heaven on Earth 12).

"I did not forget how you [Rabbi Skorka] invited me twice to pray and to speak in the ѕуηαgσgυє, and I invited you to speak to my seminarians about values" (Ibid. 37).

"The Church officially recognizes that the People of Israel continue to be the Chosen People. Nowhere does it say: ‘You lost the game, now it is our turn.’ It is a recognition of the People of Israel" (Ibid. 188).

“I often say that the only glory we have, as Saint Paul says, is that of being sinners... That’s why, for me, sin is not a stain I need to clean (Ibid. 120-22)”.

Francis attended Jєωιѕн religious ceremonies in the ѕуηαgσgυє: http://www.lanacion.com.ar/637973-el-gesto-de-dos-amigos

Here's some nice video of him celebrating Hanukkah:

He instituted memorial services for Jews to be celebrated in his cathedral: http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2013/03/bnai-brith-memorial-liturgy-in.html

More interreligious worship:

http://www.lanacion.com.ar/334917-oracion-por-la-paz-al-pie-del-obelisco
http://www.lanacion.com.ar/368653-sintesis
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fcomipaz.wordpress.com%2Ftag%2Frabino-abraham-skorka%2F
http://ceirberea.blogdiario.com/1154140980/ (where he kneels for a "blessing" from prot ministers)

Support of gαy "marriage":

http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/20/world/americas/argentina-pope-civil-unions
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/20/pope-francis-civil-unions_n_2917222.html?view=print&comm_ref=false

Mithrandylan · « **Reply #25 on:** July 11, 2014, 04:53:06 PM »

Sorry, looks like I copied some of the links on the page by accident. Too late to edit.

Sneakyticks · « **Reply #26 on:** July 11, 2014, 05:56:54 PM »

He asked for heresy and now he doesn't say anything.

Graham · « **Reply #27 on:** July 11, 2014, 06:43:04 PM »

Quote from: Mithrandylan

Sorry, looks like I copied some of the links on the page by accident. Too late to edit.

I thought you wanted us to add you to our buddy lists. :sad:

PG · « **Reply #28 on:** July 11, 2014, 06:52:16 PM »

SV's need to finish reading the entire sentence(yes, the same one) that they use to condemn Borgolio. The sentence ends by stating that they(ecuмenists) are only(and I say "only" for a reason) "abandoning"(not the same as "abandoned") the divinely revealed religion(to address 2vermont who used the word "abandoned" on page 2).

Ecuмenists are altogether "abandoning" the divinely revealed religion. But, they have not yet necessarily altogether "abandoned" it.

"Not only are those who hold this opinion in error and deceived, but also in distorting the idea of true religion they reject it, and little by little turn aside to naturalism and atheism, as it is called; from which it clearly follows that one who supports those who hold these theories and attempt to realize them, is altogether abandoning the divinely revealed religion." - mortalium animos

Ladislaus · « **Reply #29 on:** July 11, 2014, 07:00:23 PM »

Correct, +PG+.

Which is why I said that Ecuмenism that's driven by an underlying religious indifferentism LEADS to loss of faith. Pius XII called it a "false opinion" that endangers Catholic faith but not heresy per se.

Quote from: Mortalium Animos

and little by little turn aside to naturalism and atheism