Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Crisis in the Church => Topic started by: AnthonyPadua on August 06, 2024, 07:40:45 AM
-
(https://i.imgur.com/SQiWwVu.jpeg)Strong words from St. Augustine, which confound the false doctrines that non-Catholics are Christians, or that one can be united with Christ through the Soul of the Church without being a member of the Body of Christ.
-
Indeed. Great quote from St Augustine and good point by you, regarding Church membership.
-
How does this quote apply to today's times?
St. Augustine didn't have the protestants to contend with (1500-), nor the Crisis of the Catholic Church (1962-), nor all of the different Catholic opinions currently (1970s-)? People wanted to follow Christ, so they became a Christian (Catholic) and then the rules were straight forward without any confusion.
I ask, because I constantly have to fight myself in knowing whether God is unhappy with me in attending a church that is not recognized by Rome. Rome would say that we are in schism and have cut ourselves off from the Body of Christ. We would say that Rome cut itself off by not practicing True Catholicism.
What if we are not really pleasing to God? What if we have it all wrong? What if we are suppose to close down our churches and return to Rome? What if .....
I know I am babbling and I know I will just keep doing what I am doing and hoping that God has mercy, but I still long for a simple time. Which probably never really existed. I wouldn't have wanted to be fed to the lions, either.
-
St. Augustine didn't have the protestants to contend with (1500-),
He had the pelagian heretics to deal with. They were baptized catholics, though they started to deny the necessity of baptism (just like many protestants today). The point is, even if you are baptized, your heresy cuts you off from the Church's membership. This principle still stands today.
I ask, because I constantly have to fight myself in knowing whether God is unhappy with me in attending a church that is not recognized by Rome.
Eternal Rome > modern rome.
The Arian heresy in the 4th century engulfed 95% of catholics in that day...St Athanasius stayed strong to doctrine and truth. Today is no different.
-
He had the pelagian heretics to deal with. They were baptized catholics, though they started to deny the necessity of baptism (just like many protestants today). The point is, even if you are baptized, your heresy cuts you off from the Church's membership. This principle still stands today.
That's not actually what St. Augustine said Pax, he said: "...a Christian man is Catholic while he lives in the body, cut off, he is made a heretic..." He does not say "heresy cuts you off..."
How does this quote apply to today's times?
It applies because it is truth, and that truth applies to all times. St. Augustine is saying that all those who are not members of the Church are cut off from the Church, same as an amputated limb is cut off from the body.
I ask, because I constantly have to fight myself in knowing whether God is unhappy with me in attending a church that is not recognized by Rome. Rome would say that we are in schism and have cut ourselves off from the Body of Christ. We would say that Rome cut itself off by not practicing True Catholicism.
What if we are not really pleasing to God? What if we have it all wrong? What if we are suppose to close down our churches and return to Rome? What if .....
It's all about having faith. It is only through our faith that we know Rome is wrong, completely wrong.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4v82F5A-9Mw&t=3s&ab_channel=FideiPromotor
-
St. Athanasius, pray for us.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/SQiWwVu.jpeg)Strong words from St. Augustine, which confound the false doctrines that non-Catholics are Christians, or that one can be united with Christ through the Soul of the Church without being a member of the Body of Christ.
It's perfectly straightforward, simple, and sensical.
Then came the Gallican SSPX - the Faith and common sense overturned; the Catholic rule of action replaced by the law of compromise; division upon division until not a stone upon a stone.
-
How does this quote apply to today's times?
St. Augustine didn't have the protestants to contend with (1500-), nor the Crisis of the Catholic Church (1962-), nor all of the different Catholic opinions currently (1970s-)? People wanted to follow Christ, so they became a Christian (Catholic) and then the rules were straight forward without any confusion.
I ask, because I constantly have to fight myself in knowing whether God is unhappy with me in attending a church that is not recognized by Rome. Rome would say that we are in schism and have cut ourselves off from the Body of Christ. We would say that Rome cut itself off by not practicing True Catholicism.
What if we are not really pleasing to God? What if we have it all wrong? What if we are suppose to close down our churches and return to Rome? What if .....
I know I am babbling and I know I will just keep doing what I am doing and hoping that God has mercy, but I still long for a simple time. Which probably never really existed. I wouldn't have wanted to be fed to the lions, either.
If you believe, in good faith, to the best of your ability, that "Rome" is not practicing True Catholicism, then you have an obligation to separate yourself from that false "Rome."
That false "Rome" is the "Babylon" that we are told to "go out from" (Apocalypse 18):
1 And after these things, I saw another angel come down from heaven, having great power: and the earth was enlightened with his glory. 2 And he cried out with a strong voice, saying: Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen; and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every unclean spirit, and the hold of every unclean and hateful bird: 3 Because all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication; and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her; and the merchants of the earth have been made rich by the power of her delicacies. 4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying: Go out from her, my people; that you be not partakers of her sins, and that you receive not of her plagues. 5 For her sins have reached unto heaven, and the Lord hath remembered her iniquities.
Meditate and pray about what is being commanded by the Angel in Apocalypse 18:
1. The Angel from heaven calls us his people. He is talking to the faithful remnant of the Roman Catholic Church.
2. He says to "go out from her." What are we to go "out" from? We are to "go out from" the false Church so that we "be not partakers in her sins."
3. What does the word "partakers" in her sins imply? That we not be in "communion" with such a detestable abomination. We are required to break "communion" with the "habitation of devils." Otherwise, we condone their sins.
4. When we give our consent to the sins of the false Church by remaining "in communion with it," we will receive the punishment of the "operation of error" (2 Thessalonians 2). Instead, the proper response is break communion and "hold the traditions."
10 And in all seduction of iniquity to them that perish; because they receive not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. Therefore God shall send them the operation of error, to believe lying: 11 That all may be judged who have not believed the truth, but have consented to iniquity. 12 But we ought to give thanks to God always for you, brethren, beloved of God, for that God hath chosen you firstfruits unto salvation, in sanctification of the spirit, and faith of the truth: 13 Whereunto also he hath called you by our gospel, unto the purchasing of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. 14 Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle.
-
Thank you, all.
I had more to say, but it just never comes out right.....:pray::pray::pray::pray:
-
He does not say "heresy cuts you off..."
:facepalm: He asks, "And if a member be cut off..." Can a member (i.e. hand, foot, finger) cut itself off? No, a person does such, by sin.
So, logically, how is a member "cut off" from the Church? Answer: Heresy or schism. Therefore, heresy/schism cuts one off from the Church (i.e. membership).
Yes, yes, Fr Wathen said, "once a catholic, always a catholic" but he was speaking of POTENTIAL membership. No baptized person loses potential membership. But Heresy/schism concern ACTUAL membership (i.e. current status). And such sins (and the accompanying excommunications) put one in a state of spiritual 'time out'. Potentially, the person can get out of the 'time out/suspension' anytime they want (i.e. repentance), but until they do such, they are *treated* as being outside the church. They can get back in the church anytime they want (an unbaptized person is not part of the church, in any way), but if there's no repentance, there's no membership.
Analogy: A person who passes his driver's license test is a legal driver. But they could lose their license (it's suspended) if they repeatedly violate certain traffic laws...even though they are STILL a legal driver. They can get their license re-instated if they pay the fines and admit guilt. If they don't, then their status as a 'legal driver' remains suspended.
-
If you believe, in good faith, to the best of your ability, that "Rome" is not practicing True Catholicism, then you have an obligation to separate yourself from that false "Rome."
That false "Rome" is the "Babylon" that we are told to "go out from" (Apocalypse 18):
This pertains to the objective, not the subjective order. Our duties are not negotiable, circuŠ¼stantial, or determined by "prudential considerations." [See Maccabees, 1 and 12] Either we act in accordance with the Faith, or we are in sin. Either we reject Vatican II and its hierarchy, or we share the culpability.
The Gallican heresy, which is the SSPX heresy, is pure modernism, which is pure subjectivism, pure indifferentism. It has infected everything, even much in sedevacantist thought.
The original and appropriate traditional reaction against Vatican II was cleverly and subtly re-routed at the railway points. The train switched rails, going from categorical rejection to compromise, going from the objective to the subjective order.
This explains 100% of our current impasse and stagnation.
-
:facepalm:
You have to read it like he taught it and not misapply it to sedeism, which did not exist when he wrote it.
-
You have to read it like he taught it and not misapply it to sedeism, which did not exist when he wrote it.
The false church of antichrist existed when he wrote it, existed at Calvary, exists now. What St. Augustine wrote applies to all times. It's application is prompted and precipitated by emergencies which are capable of being comprehended by all Catholics of all ages.
Catholics must be in a right relationship to both the True Church and the false church, or else perish. Period. 60 years of Vatican II, 60 years of Divine unmasking and unveiling. No, you are culpable if you "stubbornly" insist on calling the false church of satan the True Church of Jesus Christ.
I'm not your judge, but I am reality's judge, by the moral and spiritual imperatives of my created rational nature, and of my Baptismal Vows.
-
Yes, yes, Fr Wathen said, "once a catholic, always a catholic" but he was speaking of POTENTIAL membership. No baptized person loses potential membership. But Heresy/schism concern ACTUAL membership (i.e. current status). And such sins (and the accompanying excommunications) put one in a state of spiritual 'time out'. Potentially, the person can get out of the 'time out/suspension' anytime they want (i.e. repentance), but until they do such, they are *treated* as being outside the church. They can get back in the church anytime they want (an unbaptized person is not part of the church, in any way), but if there's no repentance, there's no membership.
Analogy: A person who passes his driver's license test is a legal driver. But they could lose their license (it's suspended) if they repeatedly violate certain traffic laws...even though they are STILL a legal driver. They can get their license re-instated if they pay the fines and admit guilt. If they don't, then their status as a 'legal driver' remains suspended.
-
This pertains to the objective, not the subjective order. Our duties are not negotiable, circuŠ¼stantial, or determined by "prudential considerations." [See Maccabees, 1 and 12] Either we act in accordance with the Faith, or we are in sin. Either we reject Vatican II and its hierarchy, or we share the culpability.
The Gallican heresy, which is the SSPX heresy, is pure modernism, which is pure subjectivism, pure indifferentism. It has infected everything, even much in sedevacantist thought.
The original and appropriate traditional reaction against Vatican II was cleverly and subtly re-routed at the railway points. The train switched rails, going from categorical rejection to compromise, going from the objective to the subjective order.
This explains 100% of our current impasse and stagnation.
Yes, objective reality governs. The "traditions" are objective. We must "hold" them.
But the "false prophets" confuse. And some, through sin, weakness and human respect (all subjective defects) do not understand their objective obligations to "hold the traditions."
They are tortured by subjective doubts. They don't trust their God-given ability to judge truth and falsehood. They think some authority has to give them permission to say the emperor has no clothes.
-
The false church of antichrist existed when he wrote it, existed at Calvary, exists now. What St. Augustine wrote applies to all times. It's application is prompted and precipitated by emergencies which are capable of being comprehended by all Catholics of all ages.
Catholics must be in a right relationship to both the True Church and the false church, or else perish. Period. 60 years of Vatican II, 60 years of Divine unmasking and unveiling. No, you are culpable if you "stubbornly" insist on calling the false church of satan the True Church of Jesus Christ.
I'm not your judge, but I am reality's judge, by the moral and spiritual imperatives of my created rational nature, and of my Baptismal Vows.
I said sedeism didn't exist - even with "the false church of antichrist" and I said what he wrote is truth, "...a Christian man is Catholic while he lives in the body, cut off, he is made a heretic..." I don't know what you are arguing?
I am in no relationship with the NO false church. Period. And I agree "you are culpable if you "stubbornly" insist on calling the false church of satan the True Church of Jesus Christ." Which means the overwhelming vast majority of NO people ever born since V2 are culpable, what we cannot say is to what degree their culpability is, God knows, we don't.
-
Yes, yes, Fr Wathen said, "once a catholic, always a catholic" but he was speaking of POTENTIAL membership. No baptized person loses potential membership. But Heresy/schism concern ACTUAL membership (i.e. current status). And such sins (and the accompanying excommunications) put one in a state of spiritual 'time out'. Potentially, the person can get out of the 'time out/suspension' anytime they want (i.e. repentance), but until they do such, they are *treated* as being outside the church. They can get back in the church anytime they want (an unbaptized person is not part of the church, in any way), but if there's no repentance, there's no membership.
Analogy: A person who passes his driver's license test is a legal driver. But they could lose their license (it's suspended) if they repeatedly violate certain traffic laws...even though they are STILL a legal driver. They can get their license re-instated if they pay the fines and admit guilt. If they don't, then their status as a 'legal driver' remains suspended.
You're going off on a defensive sede position for no reason, to understand what he says, just read what he wrote: "...a Christian man is Catholic while he lives in the body, cut off, he is made a heretic..."
-
"...a Christian man is Catholic while he lives in the body, cut off, he is made a heretic..."
And the end phrase, which you are leaving off..."And the Spirit does not follow an amputated member". (i.e. the amputated member is not part of the LIVING body anymore).
p.s. This has nothing to do with sedeism. A heretic pope is spiritually suspended/impounded (Fr Chazal) but he's still the pope in a temporal way, just as the amputated body part is still part of your body. A heretic pope is just not part of the LIVING church, just as the amputated body part is not part of the LIVING body.
-
And the end phrase, which you are leaving off..."And the Spirit does not follow an amputated member". (i.e. the amputated member is not part of the LIVING body anymore).
I'm leaving it off for the sake of brevity - obviously as St. Augustine said, one cut off from the Church is not a part of the living body.
p.s. This has nothing to do with sedeism. A heretic pope is spiritually suspended/impounded (Fr Chazal) but he's still the pope in a temporal way, just as the amputated body part is still part of your body.
To state the obvious - this is your opinion, shared by some others. It's not de fide.
A heretic pope is just not part of the LIVING church, just as the amputated body part is not part of the LIVING body.
Again to state the obvious - this is your opinion shared by some others. It's not de fide.
-
Stubborn, the logic is clear:
Major: St. Augustine said, one cut off from the Church is not a part of the living body.
Minor: Heresy and schism cut off one from the Church.
Conclusion: A heretic or schismatic is not part of the living body of the Church.
1. What name/phrase do you call "not part of the living body of the Church"? You disagree with the words 'impounded/suspended' but what word do you agree with?
2. What are the consequences of being "cut off from the Church"? This is the definition of being excommunicated. Are you saying a pope can't be excommunicated? Per Pope St Pius X and XII's conclave rule changes, they most certainly can. So what are you arguing about?