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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 23

Author Topic: The Heretical Pope Fallacy  (Read 61179 times)

0 Members and 9 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 12120
  • Reputation: +7648/-2331
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Heretical Pope Fallacy
« Reply #135 on: January 04, 2018, 04:17:47 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote
    A council's decrees approved by the pope are infallible by reason of that approbation, because the pope is infallible also extra concilium, without the support of a council.
    The key word is 'decrees'.  I can go to any ecuмenical council before V2 and easily find the decrees which tell me exactly what I must believe, or what error I must avoid, and what the penalty is.  Where do I find that in the V2 docuмents? - where is the enactment, law, or order in the docuмents??

    'Decree' definition:
    1.  Generally legislative enactments of the Pope, a council of the Church, or a congregation of the Holy See.
    https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/dictionary/index.cfm?id=32979

    2.  An authoritative application of a given law to a particular case.
    https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/dictionary/index.cfm?id=32978

    3.  In a general sense, an order or law made by a superior authority for the direction of others.
    http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04670a.htm
    Logged

    Offline trad123

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 2033
    • Reputation: +450/-96
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Heretical Pope Fallacy
    « Reply #136 on: January 04, 2018, 11:35:46 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • If the ordinary magisterium is the day to day teaching of the bishops in their dioceses, it seems the universal ordinary magisterium is the universal agreement of each diocese, in practice. Thus it would be a mortal sin to deny the existence of guardian angels, for example.  
    Logged
    2 Corinthians 4:3-4 

    And if our gospel be also hid, it is hid to them that are lost, In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of unbelievers, that the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should not shine unto them.

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 14732
    • Reputation: +6068/-906
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Heretical Pope Fallacy
    « Reply #137 on: January 05, 2018, 06:32:08 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on January 04, 2018, 12:06:37 PM
    :facepalm: ... my point is that it WOULD be infallible if one assumed a legitimate pope.  I really don't understand why it's that difficult for you.
    No surprise here, but you did not answer the question, I already know what your point is - it's ridiculous.

    I think the reason you have no understanding, is because you are in a self inflicted conundrum, i.e. believing your "new theologians" in spite of reality.

    Simply.......
    If you actually believed the "new theologians'" teachings as regards infallibility, councils and etc., , then, like the rest who actually believe them and on that account, actually abandoned the true faith for the new faith, you would be a card carrying NOer. But, because errors and heresies that certainly have come from the conciliar hierarchy of and since V2, clash with your beliefs attained from new theologians' teachings, you are left in the state of another casualty of this crisis which you have dubbed, "sededoubtism". IMO, this "position" would be more correctly stated as being a problem to solve, not a position to be content with.

    Reality shows there was a *true* council with a *true* pope and [nearly] all the bishops of the world - and from it came forth error. That is reality.

    Reality shows that the pope and council were not infallible. That is reality.

    Reality shows that popes and councils can teach error and when they do, [our faith teaches that] we are not to follow them - (those who don't follow them are commonly called "traditionalists"). That is reality.

    Reality shows that the "new theologians" ideas, wrongly passed off and accepted as authoritative teachings, are wrong. That is reality.

    Debate, deny and argue against reality all you want, to do so you will need to deny reality and use the new theologians' teachings and misuse Catholic teachings (not necessarily in that order), the result of which leads to your "sededoubtism". To paraphrase 2V's sig - "Anything but reality".

    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 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11444
    • Reputation: +6406/-1149
    • Gender: Female
    Re: The Heretical Pope Fallacy
    « Reply #138 on: January 05, 2018, 08:06:25 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: An even Seven on January 04, 2018, 10:45:06 AM
    You are trying to make a distinction where there is none. Vatican II has to be an act of the Magisterium. Yes, it appeared to be "hierarchy", but that "hierarchy" included the man you call "pope". A Popes approval of a Council is what makes it binding. You will not find any theologian, saint, Catholic writer etc... before Vatican II that would say that a General Council is not an act of the Magisterium. In fact, I would bet the only people that have said that it is not, are the people who adhere to the novel beliefs of the SSPX/R&R.
    Better known as "ANYTHING, but Sedevacantism".
    Logged

    Offline 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11444
    • Reputation: +6406/-1149
    • Gender: Female
    Re: The Heretical Pope Fallacy
    « Reply #139 on: January 05, 2018, 08:21:08 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: An even Seven on January 04, 2018, 12:56:53 PM
    Bellator is correct above. Confirming his statement above is Paul VI speaking of the "council" and John XXIII.
    You seem to have missed Pax's earlier comments that it doesn't matter what the pope says:

    "a pope can say whatever he wants about a council - the proof is in the words on the council docuмents."

    You're welcome in advance.  ;)
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12120
    • Reputation: +7648/-2331
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Heretical Pope Fallacy
    « Reply #140 on: January 05, 2018, 08:47:18 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
    • Dear all,
    After doing some reading, it seems that much like the debate between +Bellarmine and Cajaten over 'when' a pope gets deposed is undecided, so also is the exact, practical meaning of 'indefectibility' not defined in all its parameters.  So if you want to bring the argument of indefectibility into the discussion of V2 and magisterium (which I think is incorrect, since V2 didn't 'teach' in a formal manner) you are welcome to, but that just means that you are muddying waters that are already brown.  The debate becomes unsolvable on both sides.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46653
    • Reputation: +27513/-5103
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Heretical Pope Fallacy
    « Reply #141 on: January 05, 2018, 09:40:50 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • I'm sorry, but when the entire Church, in union with the Pope, teach something to the Church, the Holy Spirit absolutely guarantees that it cannot be substantially corrupt.  Sure, not every single small point is guaranteed infallible.  But it cannot be substantially corrupt without completely undermining the indefectibility of the Church and the Magisterium.

    There are only two possible Catholic solutions:

    1) Vatican II is substantially Catholic.

    2) Paul VI was not a legitimate pope.

    I have to question whether people who think like Stubborn even have Catholic faith anymore.
    Logged

    Offline 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11444
    • Reputation: +6406/-1149
    • Gender: Female
    Re: The Heretical Pope Fallacy
    « Reply #142 on: January 05, 2018, 09:56:51 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on January 05, 2018, 09:40:50 AM
    I'm sorry, but when the entire Church, in union with the Pope, teach something to the Church, the Holy Spirit absolutely guarantees that it cannot be substantially corrupt.  Sure, not every single small point is guaranteed infallible.  But it cannot be substantially corrupt without completely undermining the indefectibility of the Church and the Magisterium.

    There are only two possible Catholic solutions:

    1) Vatican II is substantially Catholic.

    2) Paul VI was not a legitimate pope.

    I have to question whether people who think like Stubborn even have Catholic faith anymore.
    But don't you also believe that it's Catholic to believe it is only possible that Paul VI was not a legitimate pope? Isn't that what sededoubtism is?
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46653
    • Reputation: +27513/-5103
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Heretical Pope Fallacy
    « Reply #143 on: January 05, 2018, 10:19:35 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: 2Vermont on January 05, 2018, 09:56:51 AM
    But don't you also believe that it's Catholic to believe it is only possible that Paul VI was not a legitimate pope? Isn't that what sededoubtism is?

    We decide between #1 and #2 based on our private judgment, and the legitimacy of a pope must be known with the certainty of faith.  Catholics may not simply decide the matter of papal legitimacy based on private judgment, so all we can do is act on the grave positive doubt until it's resolved by the authority of the Church.  Based on classic sedevacantism, there's absolutely nothing to stop a Catholic living during the time of a legitimate pope (say, Pius XII) from waking up one morning and just deciding that Pius XII isn't pope and that therefore the dogma of the Assumption isn't to be held de fide.
    Logged

    Offline 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11444
    • Reputation: +6406/-1149
    • Gender: Female
    Re: The Heretical Pope Fallacy
    « Reply #144 on: January 05, 2018, 10:33:00 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on January 05, 2018, 10:19:35 AM
    We decide between #1 and #2 based on our private judgment, and the legitimacy of a pope must be known with the certainty of faith.  Catholics may not simply decide the matter of papal legitimacy based on private judgment, so all we can do is act on the grave positive doubt until it's resolved by the authority of the Church.  Based on classic sedevacantism, there's absolutely nothing to stop a Catholic living during the time of a legitimate pope (say, Pius XII) from waking up one morning and just deciding that Pius XII isn't pope and that therefore the dogma of the Assumption isn't to be held de fide.
    But it sounds that you do have certainty of faith.  If one knows that the Vatican II council is not substantially Catholic, then one also knows with certainty that #2 has to be the correct position.  Either the pope is legitimate or not.  There is no he may or may not be pope.
    Logged

    Offline Cantarella

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7782
    • Reputation: +4579/-579
    • Gender: Female
    Re: The Heretical Pope Fallacy
    « Reply #145 on: January 05, 2018, 10:34:38 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Canon 227 /1917:

    Quote
    The decrees of the Council have no definitive binding force unless they shall be confirmed by the Roman Pontiff and promulgated by his orders.

    In other words, once it is confirmed by the Roman Pontiff, the decrees of an ecuмenical Council ARE indeed binding.
    Logged
    If anyone says that true and natural water is not necessary for baptism and thus twists into some metaphor the words of our Lord Jesus Christ" Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit" (Jn 3:5) let him be anathema.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46653
    • Reputation: +27513/-5103
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Heretical Pope Fallacy
    « Reply #146 on: January 05, 2018, 10:39:35 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: 2Vermont on January 05, 2018, 10:33:00 AM
    But it sounds that you do have certainty of faith.  If one knows that the Vatican II council is not substantially Catholic, then one also knows with certainty that #2 has to be the correct position.  Either the pope is legitimate or not.  There is no he may or may not be pope.

    I do not have anything close to a certainty of faith; my assessment that V2 is not Catholic comes from my own private judgment.  While the logic "If Vatican II is not Catholic, the pope who promulgated is not legitimate" has certainty of faith, my establishment of the one premise is based on private judgment.
    Logged

    Offline 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11444
    • Reputation: +6406/-1149
    • Gender: Female
    Re: The Heretical Pope Fallacy
    « Reply #147 on: January 05, 2018, 10:41:01 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Cantarella on January 05, 2018, 10:34:38 AM
    Canon 227 /1917:

    In other words, once it is confirmed by the Roman Pontiff, the decrees of an ecuмenical Council ARE indeed binding.
    Canon 228 is also interesting:

    "....there is no appeal to the General Council"
    Logged

    Offline Cantarella

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7782
    • Reputation: +4579/-579
    • Gender: Female
    Re: The Heretical Pope Fallacy
    « Reply #148 on: January 05, 2018, 10:41:17 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Canon 228 / 1917:

    Quote
    The General Council has supreme jurisdiction in the whole Church. From the judgement of the Roman Pontiff, there is no appeal to the General Council. 

    In other words, there is no appeal to Vatican II Council if a true pope in fact promulgated it, no matter how many bishops dispute it. 
    Logged
    If anyone says that true and natural water is not necessary for baptism and thus twists into some metaphor the words of our Lord Jesus Christ" Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit" (Jn 3:5) let him be anathema.

    Offline 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11444
    • Reputation: +6406/-1149
    • Gender: Female
    Re: The Heretical Pope Fallacy
    « Reply #149 on: January 05, 2018, 10:44:01 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on January 05, 2018, 10:39:35 AM
    I do not have anything close to a certainty of faith; my assessment that V2 is not Catholic comes from my own private judgment.
    So is your "private judgment" that he "may not be a legitimate pope" or "is not a legitimate pope"?  In your earlier post, you only include the latter as a possible "Catholic solution".
    Logged
    Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 23
    « previous next »