Author Topic: Michael Voris banned from liberal diocese.... (Read 8762 times)

SJB · « **Reply #45 on:** April 15, 2011, 06:50:15 AM »

Quote from: Caminus

Quote from: SJB
Quote from: Caminus
How do you know that a heretic isn't "occult"?

Because you can only know what is external. You CAN'T "know" about a specific occult heretic, because his heresy is hidden. IT IS NOT PUBLIC BY DEFINITION.

Maybe somebody else can help you understand this.

The sources you've cited have contradicted this assertion. Beyond that, until you address my other points, I see no reason to continue.

I assume you knew I meant to say "can't". You are arguing with a definition from Bouscaren (and that directly from the CIC) and providing nothing to support your own assertions.

stevusmagnus · « **Reply #46 on:** April 15, 2011, 01:02:32 PM »

Rev. Garrigou-Lagrange - Treatise on Christ the Savior

http://www.ewtn.com/library/theology/christ1.htm

Quote

St. Robert Bellarmine's objection. The pope who becomes a secret heretic is still an actual member of the Church, for he is still the head of the Church, as Cajetan, Cano, Suarez, and others teach.

Reply. This condition is quite abnormal, hence no wonder that something abnormal results from it, namely, that the pope becoming secretly a heretic would no longer be an actual member of the Church, according to the teaching as explained in the body of the article, but would still retain his jurisdiction by which he would influence the Church in ruling it. Thus he would still be nominally the head of the Church, which he would still rule as head, though he would no longer be a member of Christ, because he would not receive that vital influx of faith from Christ, the invisible and primary head. Thus in quite an abnormal manner he would be in point of jurisdiction the head of the Church, though he would not be a member of it.

This condition could not apply to the natural head in its relation to the body, but such a condition is not repugnant in the case of the moral and secondary head. The reason is that, whereas the natural head must receive a vital influx from the soul before it can influence the members of its body, the moral head, such as the pope is, can exercise his jurisdiction over the Church, although he receives no influx of interior faith and charity from the soul of the Church. More briefly, as Billuart says, the pope is constituted a member of the Church by his personal faith, which he can lose, and his headship of the visible Church by jurisdiction and power is compatible with private heresy. The Church will always consist in the visible union of its members with its visible head, namely, the pope of Rome, although some, who externally seem to be members of the Church, may be private heretics. Thus the conclusion we must come to is, that occult heretics are only apparent members of the Church, which they externally and visibly profess to be the true Church.

Caminus · « **Reply #47 on:** April 15, 2011, 01:10:47 PM »

The texts you cited admit that people can know about a heresy (presuming it is heresy) without contradicting the notion that it still can remain occult. You're too myopic on this. First, you're equivocating on the term 'public' as it relates to a heretic among Catholics in contradistinction to a 'public' heretic as it relates to being associated to an heretical body. Secondly, you're not taking into account the entirety of the Church legislation. If you are correct, that upon the mere fact that a few people know about the heresy, they are absolutely cut off from membership, then there is absolutely no rational basis for authority to admonish an errant cleric. Even St. Paul states that one ought to avoid a heretic after the second admonition. That is a simple restatement of the legislative process of the Church. Finally, you are confusing the Divine sentence with the Church's judgment. In the abstract and in God's sight, the errant cleric may be entirely cut off from the Church, but the Church judges according to the external forum because it is an external society. This is how all of her judgments must necessarily proceed. And this in turn goes back to the notion of the basic requirements for membership in the Church.

SJB · « **Reply #48 on:** April 15, 2011, 09:35:08 PM »

Quote

...that the pope becoming secretly a heretic would no longer be an actual member of the Church, according to the teaching as explained in the body of the article...

This is NOT Bellarmine's teaching nor that of Mystici Corporis.