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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 ... 23

Author Topic: The Heretical Pope Fallacy  (Read 44561 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Stubborn

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 14692
  • Reputation: +6056/-904
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Heretical Pope Fallacy
« Reply #240 on: January 09, 2018, 10:40:24 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on January 09, 2018, 10:02:33 AM
    You must have missed all the previous citations.  Councils have Ecuмenical status if and only when they're approved by the pope.  No legitimate pope = no Ecuмenical Council.

    As for the gap in time, the Magisterium can go many years without defining anything new ... without it thereby ceasing to be the rule of faith.
    The pope was legitimate when he convened the Council, you cannot even think otherwise much less prove it - particularly if all councils are automatically infallible - and there is no mistaking here, V2 was a real, genuine and authentic Council. As a real council, both the pope and the council were infallible. This is the common thinking and a major reason that +50 years later, we are still in this crisis.  

    As for not defining anything, that has not been the issue because V2 never defined anything, yet you and the others say "An ecuмenical Council is an Act of the Magisterium" and  ecuмenical councils are infallible because they are "an act of the Magisterium."
    Now you gratuitously add "No legitimate pope = no Ecuмenical Council" into the mix, though you as much admit that nothing that came from V2 was binding on anyone anyway - so why did basically the whole Catholic world submit?

    Because they believed they had to because that is what they were taught. Because they believed that all councils are automatically  infallible, that V2, being a council was by default infallible, that the pope is infallible when he isn't -  and if that's not enough, they also believe that whatever the bishops and pope teach in unison is automatically infallible. Whoever believes all or even any part of this errs in *not* submitting - period.
    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 Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12036
    • Reputation: +7579/-2279
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Heretical Pope Fallacy
    « Reply #241 on: January 09, 2018, 10:45:11 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote
    After the Church defines a dogma, then the faithful is obliged to believe in the veracity of it; if they do not, then they compromise the unity of the Faith separating themselves from the Church through heresy and incur in anathemas; but even before the dogmatic definitions occur, we are still bound to believe the revealed truths proposed by the Magisterium (Scripture / Tradition).
    (First off, using the word 'magisterium' to describe Scripture/Tradition is not accurate.  Magisterium is related to the Church, of which Scripture/Tradition are separate.)

    So, to make it simple, what we can say is that:
    1.  ALL articles of faith are part of Scripture/Tradition.  
    2.  Dogma is just a "re-teaching" of the articles of faith by the Church (i.e. magisterium)  
    3.  Articles of faith are sometimes called 'doctrine'.
    4.  Doctrine is the foundation of our Faith, since they precede dogma, which is a function of the Church's teaching office over time.
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12036
    • Reputation: +7579/-2279
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Heretical Pope Fallacy
    « Reply #242 on: January 09, 2018, 10:47:38 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote
    Councils have Ecuмenical status if and only when they're approved by the pope. 
    No this is not accurate.  Ecuмenical only refers to the council being represented by ALL the church.
    A council, whether ecuмenical or local, is only INFALLIBLE (in potential, depending on what is said at the council) if it is approved by the pope.
    Logged

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 14692
    • Reputation: +6056/-904
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Heretical Pope Fallacy
    « Reply #243 on: January 09, 2018, 11:00:22 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
    • Magisterium according to Rev. Scheeben:
    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 Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46453
    • Reputation: +27352/-5048
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Heretical Pope Fallacy
    « Reply #244 on: January 09, 2018, 11:13:29 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on January 09, 2018, 10:47:38 AM
    No this is not accurate.  Ecuмenical only refers to the council being represented by ALL the church.
    A council, whether ecuмenical or local, is only INFALLIBLE (in potential, depending on what is said at the council) if it is approved by the pope.

    from the Catholic Encyclopedia

    Quote
    Ecuмenical Councils are those to which the bishops, and others entitled to vote, are convoked from the whole world (oikoumene) under the presidency of the pope or his legates, and the decrees of which, having received papal confirmation, bind all Christians.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46453
    • Reputation: +27352/-5048
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Heretical Pope Fallacy
    « Reply #245 on: January 09, 2018, 11:15:17 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Stubborn on January 09, 2018, 10:40:24 AM
    The pope was legitimate when he convened the Council, you cannot even think otherwise much less prove it

    from Catholic Encyclopedia

    Quote
    Ecuмenical Councils are those to which the bishops, and others entitled to vote, are convoked from the whole world (oikoumene) under the presidency of the pope or his legates, and the decrees of which, having received papal confirmation, bind all Christians. 
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46453
    • Reputation: +27352/-5048
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Heretical Pope Fallacy
    « Reply #246 on: January 09, 2018, 11:17:28 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Stubborn on January 09, 2018, 10:40:24 AM
    Now you gratuitously add "No legitimate pope = no Ecuмenical Council" into the mix, ...

    from Catholic Encyclopedia

    Quote
    Ecuмenical Councils are those to which the bishops, and others entitled to vote, are convoked from the whole world (oikoumene) under the presidency of the pope or his legates, and the decrees of which, having received papal confirmation, bind all Christians.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46453
    • Reputation: +27352/-5048
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Heretical Pope Fallacy
    « Reply #247 on: January 09, 2018, 11:19:38 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Stubborn on January 09, 2018, 10:40:24 AM
    The pope was legitimate when he convened the Council, you cannot even think otherwise much less prove it ...

    from Catholic Encyclopedia

    Quote
    A council, Ecuмenical in its convocation, may fail to secure the approbation of the whole Church or of the pope, and thus not rank in authority with Ecuмenical councils. Such was the case with the Robber Synod of 449 (Latrocinium Ephesinum), the Synod of Pisa in 1409, and in part with the Councils of Constance and Basle.
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12036
    • Reputation: +7579/-2279
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Heretical Pope Fallacy
    « Reply #248 on: January 09, 2018, 12:35:13 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote
    Ecuмenical Councils are those to which the bishops, and others entitled to vote, are convoked from the whole world (oikoumene) under the presidency of the pope or his legates, and the decrees of which, having received papal confirmation, bind all Christians.
    I agree.  What I'm disputing is the definition of 'decrees', which many of you are assuming that V2 had.  I say that V2 was ecuмenical; I say that it was presided over the pope; but I do not agree that it issued its docuмents in the same legal form, nor having the same legal clarity, nor using the same legal force which was used by all other previous ecuмenical councils.  Anyone with an open mind can see this is blatantly obvious.

    So what conclusion can we draw from these facts?  The facts show that that V2 was the first ecuмenical council which did not issue decrees as part of its docuмents.  This poses a BIG problem, since, as we all know, not every sentence of a council is infallible.  This is why it is impossible to prove that V2 was infallible, because the structure of its docuмents is inconsistent with all of the other councils, and since it has no decrees, (which are easily recognized as infallible) so it is NOT CLEAR what parts (or even if there are any) parts which are 'of the faith, with certainty'.  Further, it's even possible that there are NO parts of V2 which are infallible (which agrees with comments made by the hierarchy/magisterium and Paul VI himself).
    Logged

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 14692
    • Reputation: +6056/-904
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Heretical Pope Fallacy
    « Reply #249 on: January 09, 2018, 12:47:22 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote
    The pope was legitimate when he convened the Council, you cannot even think otherwise much less prove it. - Stubborn

    Ecuмenical Councils are those to which the bishops, and others entitled to vote, are convoked from the whole world (oikoumene) under the presidency of the pope or his legates, and the decrees of which, having received papal confirmation, bind all Christians. - Ladislaus

    This is exactly why I said if you believe what you posted here from the CE, which agrees with all that you claim as regards the magisterium, then you cannot revert by saying the pope was illegitimate since to do so is to reject "the sure teaching of the Church"  (the CE quote), in order to maintain your own, unproven opinion shared by few. 



    Quote
    A council, Ecuмenical in its convocation, may fail to secure the approbation of the whole Church or of the pope, and thus not rank in authority with Ecuмenical councils. Such was the case with the Robber Synod of 449 (Latrocinium Ephesinum), the Synod of Pisa in 1409, and in part with the Councils of Constance and Basle.
    The popes were true popes. This is the proof you are up against. The conciliar popes were all elected by the college of cardinals, same as always, they accepted their election and according to the law of the Church, were instantly the true pope, same as always - this election and acceptance is the infallible sign of legitimacy, same as always, it is the way the whole world knows who the successor of St. Peter is now and forever - same as always.

    If in fact it turns out that V2 was a Robber Council, a future pope will be the one to make that decision, no one else - same as always. Until then, history proves that V2 was a genuine Council of the Church complete with pope and all the bishops of the world under him, by your own definition V2 was a genuine council of the Church and from it came forth the NO errors which are so bad, that to submit and join the NO is a sin.

       
    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 Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12036
    • Reputation: +7579/-2279
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Heretical Pope Fallacy
    « Reply #250 on: January 09, 2018, 12:48:44 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote
    A council, Ecuмenical in its convocation, may fail to secure the approbation of the whole Church or of the pope, and thus not rank in authority with Ecuмenical councils. Such was the case with the Robber Synod of 449 (Latrocinium Ephesinum), the Synod of Pisa in 1409, and in part with the Councils of Constance and Basle.
    Good research. 
    This raises a further question:  Since V2 has many attributes in common with the 'robber council of 449' might V2, at a future date, be declared not ecuмenical and null/void?  I think so.  Let's look at the attributes of the Robber Council:

    1.  Intended to be an ecuмenical council
    2.  The proceedings/voting of the council were scandalous
    3.  There were questionable legalities in formulating its canons
    4.  Its canons and decrees were 'heterodox' which means 'not conforming with accepted and orthodox beliefs'  (i.e. quasi heretical)
    5.  It was repudiated by the next council, 2 years later

    All of these attributes of the 'robber council' belong to V2.  The only major difference is that instead of waiting 2 years for the Church to clear the matter up, we have been waiting for almost 50 years.  I don't see that as a big problem, and I wait for V2 to be repudiated.  The Robber council is a good example that a council, which was originally thought to be ecuмenical and infallible, was not.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46453
    • Reputation: +27352/-5048
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Heretical Pope Fallacy
    « Reply #251 on: January 09, 2018, 01:47:13 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on January 09, 2018, 12:35:13 PM
    I agree.  What I'm disputing is the definition of 'decrees', which many of you are assuming that V2 had.  I say that V2 was ecuмenical; I say that it was presided over the pope; but I do not agree that it issued its docuмents in the same legal form, nor having the same legal clarity, nor using the same legal force which was used by all other previous ecuмenical councils.  Anyone with an open mind can see this is blatantly obvious.

    And I'm saying that one can quibble about whether any particular teaching was technically infallible.  But being BINDING is not necessary in the case of indefectibility.  Whether or not the New Mass was obligatory, whether or not any given statement in V2 has the notes of infallibility, it's contrary to the indefectibility of the Church to say that submission to these things can cause harm to one's faith.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46453
    • Reputation: +27352/-5048
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Heretical Pope Fallacy
    « Reply #252 on: January 09, 2018, 01:48:17 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on January 09, 2018, 12:48:44 PM
    Good research.
    This raises a further question:  Since V2 has many attributes in common with the 'robber council of 449' might V2, at a future date, be declared not ecuмenical and null/void?  I think so.  Let's look at the attributes of the Robber Council:

    Papal approbation and not any of the other circuмstances is the differentiator.
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12036
    • Reputation: +7579/-2279
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Heretical Pope Fallacy
    « Reply #253 on: January 09, 2018, 02:18:14 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote
    Papal approbation and not any of the other circuмstances is the differentiator.
    I stand corrected.  The articles I read were confusing because they referred to some of the eastern bishops as 'pope'.  I thought that the one eastern bishop at the council was the pope, when Leo was actually so.  My mistake.


    Quote
    it's contrary to the indefectibility of the Church to say that submission to these things (new mass, V2) can cause harm to one's faith.
    I still think this is an unknown assertion, since the limits and parameters of indefectibility have not ever been adequately explained, because our present situation, which is more tumultuous than all 1,950 previous years combined, has never been experienced by the Church, nor could it have been forseen in all its details.

    As many theologians of time past thought that the pope could never fall into heresy, we see that it is possible and that God has allowed it.  So, it is with the idea of indefectibility.  I think that what God will allow is more than what we would consider 'wise'.  The Apostles probably thought the same thing, when Christ allowed Himself to be crucified.  They were scandalized at Christ's passion; we are scandalized at the Church's passion.




    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12036
    • Reputation: +7579/-2279
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Heretical Pope Fallacy
    « Reply #254 on: January 09, 2018, 02:36:23 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote
    But being BINDING is not necessary in the case of indefectibility.  Whether or not the New Mass was obligatory, whether or not any given statement in V2 has the notes of infallibility, it's contrary to the indefectibility of the Church to say that submission to these things can cause harm to one's faith.
    Still disagree with your reasoning because if something is not infallible, then it is not binding, then we are not required to give submission to it, because it's not a 'certainty of the faith'.  Those who do give submission to fallible teachings, even if they are tricked, are accountable because ONE HAS THE OBLIGATION TO KNOW ONE'S FAITH.  It's all right there in the catechism.

    The vast majority of adult catholics/priests of the 60s/70s knew that V2/new mass was 'new' and 'inconsistent' with what they grew up with.  They wanted modernism because 'it was easier'.  They did not choose error because of 'obedience to the magisterium'; they just used this excuse to quiet their conscience.
    Logged
    Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 ... 23
    « previous next »