Author Topic: The inherent gnosticism of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity (Read 7557 times)

Sigismund · « **Reply #45 on:** May 27, 2011, 05:42:25 PM »

Quote from: Raoul76

.

I was very careful to draw no conclusions about Ratzinger, except that he is, and this can't be denied, the head of the largest gαy cult in the world.

"It is very difficult for me to see how anyone on any side of this question, even gαy advocates or activists, could disagree with this simple assertion."

This was the reaction of a business associate of mine who is ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ when I sent him Raoul's original post on this thread.

Sigismund · « **Reply #46 on:** May 27, 2011, 05:53:29 PM »

Quote from: SJB

Quote from: SpiritusSanctus
Quote from: Sigismund
I don't remember who Bazz is.

Here's his profile. He was banned a while back for a negative comment about the Scapular.

http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php?a=profile&w=1375

I believe he was banned for other reasons, like being several people including Fr. Anthony Cekada.

I hope so. I only read his last post, which was a quite from Orestes Brownson that i found pretty unobjectionable.

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #47 on:** May 27, 2011, 06:46:15 PM »

Quote from: Sigismund

"It is very difficult for me to see how anyone on any side of this question, even gαy advocates or activists, could disagree with this simple assertion."

This was the reaction of a business associate of mine who is ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ when I sent him Raoul's original post on this thread.

Very interesting. Thank you for sharing his response, Sigi. Have a peaceful and spiritually-profitable weekend.

SJB · « **Reply #48 on:** May 28, 2011, 09:32:02 AM »

Quote from: Mortalium Animos

But, all the same, although many non-Catholics may be found who loudly preach fraternal communion in Christ Jesus, yet you will find none at all to whom it ever occurs to submit to and obey the Vicar of Jesus Christ either in His capacity as a teacher or as a governor.

The point is that Pius XI here is clearly saying submission and obedience to the Roman Pontiff is necessary.

LordPhan · « **Reply #49 on:** May 28, 2011, 09:37:16 AM »

Quote from: SJB

Quote from: Mortalium Animos
But, all the same, although many non-Catholics may be found who loudly preach fraternal communion in Christ Jesus, yet you will find none at all to whom it ever occurs to submit to and obey the Vicar of Jesus Christ either in His capacity as a teacher or as a governor.

The point is that Pius XI here is clearly saying submission and obedience to the Roman Pontiff is necessary.

Reading into statements, cutting out the parts you want and using them out of context is something a protestant would do.

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #50 on:** May 28, 2011, 09:40:10 AM »

So, LP, are you arguing that Pius XI is not, in fact, saying submission and obedience to the Roman Pontiff is necessary?

SJB · « **Reply #51 on:** May 28, 2011, 09:41:43 AM »

Quote from: LordPhan

Quote from: SJB
Quote from: Mortalium Animos
But, all the same, although many non-Catholics may be found who loudly preach fraternal communion in Christ Jesus, yet you will find none at all to whom it ever occurs to submit to and obey the Vicar of Jesus Christ either in His capacity as a teacher or as a governor.

The point is that Pius XI here is clearly saying submission and obedience to the Roman Pontiff is necessary.

Reading into statements, cutting out the parts you want and using them out of context is something a protestant would do.

Do you have any idea what you just said?

LordPhan · « **Reply #52 on:** May 28, 2011, 10:32:41 AM »

Quote from: SJB

Quote from: LordPhan
Quote from: SJB
Quote from: Mortalium Animos
But, all the same, although many non-Catholics may be found who loudly preach fraternal communion in Christ Jesus, yet you will find none at all to whom it ever occurs to submit to and obey the Vicar of Jesus Christ either in His capacity as a teacher or as a governor.

The point is that Pius XI here is clearly saying submission and obedience to the Roman Pontiff is necessary.

Reading into statements, cutting out the parts you want and using them out of context is something a protestant would do.

Do you have any idea what you just said?

Yes I said you are arguing like a protestant would.

LordPhan · « **Reply #53 on:** May 28, 2011, 10:38:45 AM »

Quote from: gladius_veritatis

So, LP, are you arguing that Pius XI is not, in fact, saying submission and obedience to the Roman Pontiff is necessary?

No but it's out of context, he's saying that the protestants do not accept the primacy of rome.

Everyone must obey the Roman Pontiff under normal circuмstances, but not if something heretical or contrary to the faith is said from Rome.

Sergius, Pyrrus, and Mennas all pleaded with the third council of constantinople that they had authorisation from Honorius to say and do what they did. They all stated they were obeying the Pope.

Mennas even provided proof of this, which resulted only in Honorius being condemned.

As in everything there is the ordinary rule and the extraordinary rule.

That is what I am saying.

I do not see how his quote relates to the question that was asked?

LordPhan · « **Reply #54 on:** May 28, 2011, 10:43:35 AM »

Quote from: LordPhan

Quote from: SJB
Quote from: LordPhan
Quote from: SJB
Quote from: Mortalium Animos
But, all the same, although many non-Catholics may be found who loudly preach fraternal communion in Christ Jesus, yet you will find none at all to whom it ever occurs to submit to and obey the Vicar of Jesus Christ either in His capacity as a teacher or as a governor.

The point is that Pius XI here is clearly saying submission and obedience to the Roman Pontiff is necessary.

Reading into statements, cutting out the parts you want and using them out of context is something a protestant would do.

Do you have any idea what you just said?

Yes I said you are arguing like a protestant would.

Let me be clear, I am not calling you a protestant, I was merely saying that taking snippets of a quote and taking it out of context is how both the protestants and neo-caths generally argue. In my opinion it is far better to take a quote in full that is in direct relation to what you are saying not meant for something else.
I appologize if my statement seemed like it was something else.

LordPhan · « **Reply #55 on:** May 28, 2011, 11:18:15 AM »

Quote from: SJB

Quote from: LordPhan
Quote from: SJB
Quote from: Mortalium Animos
But, all the same, although many non-Catholics may be found who loudly preach fraternal communion in Christ Jesus, yet you will find none at all to whom it ever occurs to submit to and obey the Vicar of Jesus Christ either in His capacity as a teacher or as a governor.

The point is that Pius XI here is clearly saying submission and obedience to the Roman Pontiff is necessary.

Reading into statements, cutting out the parts you want and using them out of context is something a protestant would do.

Do you have any idea what you just said?

On reflection, I was very uncharitable in my statement.

So please take it like this: I was arguing with neo-caths and protestants in the past, they would constantly take little snippets of quotes and use them out of context so when I saw you taking snippets from an attack on ecuмanism and using it in relation to what was asked regarding whether sedecavantism or sedeplantism would or should be dogmatic I became annoyed.

What I should have said was "I believe that quote is out of context and not relative to what was asked" but I got snippy and compared your posting style in this thread to the protestants who had annoyed me in the past.

I apologize for my uncharitableness.

s2srea · « **Reply #56 on:** May 28, 2011, 12:23:49 PM »

Quote from: gladius_veritatis

Quote from: s2srea
I don't think anyone has ever been condemned for not being sedevecantist in the history of the church, have they? Can you find that in any catechism?

Has anyone been condemned for being a sedevacantist? Can you find that in any catechism?

No.

Luther, Calvin, The Orthodox, Old Catholics (sort of)... of course these are extreme differences, but fundamentally, they were (are) and extreme which I believe the enemy can use sedevecantism as a cloak to lead people dangerously close to spiritual danger.

Its very sad- there is a gentleman at the chapel I go to who is dating a young lady. She is a convert from protestantism (in the process). When she started coming to mass, she was very kind and cheerful. This gentleman made the mistake (imo of course) of sending her to the CMRI in Santa Clarita since she lived so far away from our chapel. She went a few times without him and ever since, in Catechism with the priest, her whole personality and approach with our priest has been morphed. I do not want to slander any priest or society, however it seems as if someone at the CMRI has convinced her that our priest, since he isn't sede, is invalid. I will clarify that she hasn't said this, but it is what I can gather from her actions and from other experiences of friends who have been to other local CMRI chapels and have been told this by the priest and laity.

How sad to be a convert and rush into sedevecantism. Its such a deep intellectual opinion I would believe requires so much prayer and theological study...

Let me clarify, I am not anti CMRI, I only hold a different opinion. I believe they are valid and good willed, but some of the experiences I have had, directly and indirectly, have been unfortunate; the same with SSPX. I can only pray for their priests and faithful.

SJB · « **Reply #57 on:** May 28, 2011, 12:47:27 PM »

Quote from: LordPhan

Quote from: SJB
Quote from: LordPhan
Quote from: SJB
Quote from: Mortalium Animos
But, all the same, although many non-Catholics may be found who loudly preach fraternal communion in Christ Jesus, yet you will find none at all to whom it ever occurs to submit to and obey the Vicar of Jesus Christ either in His capacity as a teacher or as a governor.

The point is that Pius XI here is clearly saying submission and obedience to the Roman Pontiff is necessary.

Reading into statements, cutting out the parts you want and using them out of context is something a protestant would do.

Do you have any idea what you just said?

On reflection, I was very uncharitable in my statement.

So please take it like this: I was arguing with neo-caths and protestants in the past, they would constantly take little snippets of quotes and use them out of context so when I saw you taking snippets from an attack on ecuмanism and using it in relation to what was asked regarding whether sedecavantism or sedeplantism would or should be dogmatic I became annoyed.

What I should have said was "I believe that quote is out of context and not relative to what was asked" but I got snippy and compared your posting style in this thread to the protestants who had annoyed me in the past.

I apologize for my uncharitableness.

No need to apologize to me. The point I was making was Pius XI was expressing the Dogma that everybody must be subject to the Roman Pontiff. That's why it's not out of context. Remember what Pius XII said in Humani Generis:

Quote from: Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis

20. Nor must it be thought that what is expounded in Encyclical Letters does not of itself demand consent, since in writing such Letters the Popes do not exercise the supreme power of their Teaching Authority. For these matters are taught with the ordinary teaching authority, of which it is true to say: "He who heareth you, heareth me";[3] and generally what is expounded and inculcated in Encyclical Letters already for other reasons appertains to Catholic doctrine. But if the Supreme Pontiffs in their official docuмents purposely pass judgment on a matter up to that time under dispute, it is obvious that that matter, according to the mind and will of the same Pontiffs, cannot be any longer considered a question open to discussion among theologians.

This totally exposes the post V2 encyclicals as frauds, as well.

SJB · « **Reply #58 on:** May 28, 2011, 12:51:19 PM »

Quote from: LP

Everyone must obey the Roman Pontiff under normal circuмstances, but not if something heretical or contrary to the faith is said from Rome.

Except heresy does not flow from the First See. This is a dogma of the Faith.

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #59 on:** May 28, 2011, 02:06:20 PM »

Quote from: s2srea

Quote from: gladius_veritatis
Quote from: s2srea
I don't think anyone has ever been condemned for not being sedevecantist in the history of the church, have they? Can you find that in any catechism?

Has anyone been condemned for being a sedevacantist? Can you find that in any catechism?

No.

Luther, Calvin, The Orthodox, Old Catholics (sort of)...

To believe that the See of Peter is THE seat of power but is, at this time, vacant (which happens all the time) does not line up in any way, shape, or form with Luther, Photius, Calvin, etc.

There is a difference of KIND, not merely one of degree.