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

Author Topic: Una cuм mortal sin?  (Read 2518 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Sgt Rock USMC

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 58
  • Reputation: +46/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Christ the King Militia
Re: Una cuм mortal sin?
« Reply #15 on: December 02, 2022, 10:53:21 AM »
  • Thanks!6
  • No Thanks!0
  • Only speaking from my point of view here...Not pushing my belief on anyone.

    As a Catholic who believes we are in a state of Sede Vacante, I think it's unacceptable to place the name of false popes in the Te Igitur prayer of the Mass.  

    However, that would never stop me from attending a valid Mass.

    I have been attending Mass as SSPX chapels for over 25 years, and I have no qualms receiving the sacraments from their priests.  All 12 of my children have been baptized by SSPX priests and 2 of my children have been married by them.  In fact my 10th child was baptized by Bishop Tissier.    

    I don't agree with the SSPX on numerous issues, but they have valid orders (for now) and provide my family with valid sacraments (for now).        

    I have the option to attend Masses by the SSPV, and Saint Gertrude's but they have "requirements" for receiving communion, and I don't meet those requirements.    

    The Una cuм issue has led many down the road of schism...


    Offline Gunter

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 239
    • Reputation: +76/-38
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Una cuм mortal sin?
    « Reply #16 on: December 02, 2022, 11:01:19 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • How would you feel about the Bishop of Covington being invited to a meet and greet at your child's school?  But I understand your position.  Most of us have family in many traditional camps.


    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13825
    • Reputation: +5568/-865
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Una cuм mortal sin?
    « Reply #17 on: December 02, 2022, 11:29:10 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • It is most definitely charitable to pray for the conversion of sinners before their end. 
    The heresies of modernism are not static.  This evil is ongoing and pernicious.  A House divided shall not stand.  If you and I are both United in faith, but the modernists are not united to the same standard vis-à-vis Catholicism, how am I outside of Christ's Church unity? 
    The Modernists have no religion at all really. I quoted Ex Quo because it states this issue plain and gives clear answers to your question. Find the time to read it when you can.

    This non-una cuм is repeatedly condemned by the Church and always without any mention or qualifications as to the sanctity or sinfulness of the pope - the simple reason for this is because that does not matter.

    I cannot remember which encyclical, but there's one that says something along the lines of, "even if the pope is evil itself, his name must still be mentioned in the canon."
    "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: 10060
    • Reputation: +5256/-916
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Una cuм mortal sin?
    « Reply #18 on: December 02, 2022, 11:38:21 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!1
  • The Modernists have no religion at all really. I quoted Ex Quo because it states this issue plain and gives clear answers to your question. Find the time to read it when you can.

    This non-una cuм is repeatedly condemned by the Church and always without any mention or qualifications as to the sanctity or sinfulness of the pope - the simple reason for this is because that does not matter.

    I cannot remember which encyclical, but there's one that says something along the lines of, "even if the pope is evil itself, his name must still be mentioned in the canon."
    Evil does not equal heretic.

    OP: I don't believe it is a mortal sin, but I also don't think it's something easily poo-pooed.  If someone thinks he really is the pope, then obviously they will assist at a una cuм mass. I prefer not to have anything to do with the Heretic in Charge.
    For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect. (Matthew 24:24)

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13825
    • Reputation: +5568/-865
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Una cuм mortal sin?
    « Reply #19 on: December 02, 2022, 11:41:13 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Evil does not equal heretic.
    How so?

    Evil = sin
    Heresy = sin
    Heretic = sinner

    "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: 10060
    • Reputation: +5256/-916
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Una cuм mortal sin?
    « Reply #20 on: December 02, 2022, 11:42:15 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • How so?

    Evil = sin
    Heresy = sin
    Heretic = sinner
    Evil people can still be Catholic.  I'm not arguing with you Stubborn.  You know the difference.
    For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect. (Matthew 24:24)

    Offline Sgt Rock USMC

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 58
    • Reputation: +46/-7
    • Gender: Male
    • Christ the King Militia
    Re: Una cuм mortal sin?
    « Reply #21 on: December 02, 2022, 11:44:44 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • How would you feel about the Bishop of Covington being invited to a meet and greet at your child's school?  But I understand your position.  Most of us have family in many traditional camps.
    Gunter, you pose an interesting question....

    It just so happens that I attend the Chapel you speak of.  I think it was 2 or 3 years ago this happened..."bishop" Foys, I believe. 

    Fortunately, we homeschool our children, as I would never expose them to the SSPX school system.  So, your question does not apply as I'd never invite a NO "bishop" to our school. 

    I was surprised by the fallout, to be honest.  There were a lot of folks that were pretty upset when they found out about it.  The fallout was so bad that Father Muscha had to address it from the pulpit. 

    From my own perspective, it didn't keep me from attending the chapel.  The presence of a heretic doesn't mean anything in the grand scheme of things... 

    How would you feel about it?

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13825
    • Reputation: +5568/-865
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Una cuм mortal sin?
    « Reply #22 on: December 02, 2022, 11:50:05 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Evil people can still be Catholic.  I'm not arguing with you Stubborn.  You know the difference.
    Heresy is a sin, a heretic is a sinner. No one has the right to omit the name of the pope heretic or holy, everyone is obligated to include the name of the pope, heretic or holy. The Church even gives us a very good and clear reason for this. 
    "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 Jimmy

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 29
    • Reputation: +16/-5
    • Gender: Male
    • Normal Catholic dude
    Re: Una cuм mortal sin?
    « Reply #23 on: December 02, 2022, 12:02:21 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Heresy is a sin, a heretic is a sinner. No one has the right to omit the name of the pope heretic or holy, everyone is obligated to include the name of the pope, heretic or holy. The Church even gives us a very good and clear reason for this.

    So, can a pope be an open heretic? I think that kind of defeats the purpose of head of the Church, but what do I know?

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13825
    • Reputation: +5568/-865
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Una cuм mortal sin?
    « Reply #24 on: December 02, 2022, 12:32:26 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • So, can a pope be an open heretic? I think that kind of defeats the purpose of head of the Church, but what do I know?
    We will know for sure when a future pope lets us know. Until then, for unity we err on the side of caution by not omitting his name from the canon. We need unity. 
    "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 Gunter

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 239
    • Reputation: +76/-38
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Una cuм mortal sin?
    « Reply #25 on: December 02, 2022, 12:54:00 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • If that happened to me I would probably leave.  Good will doesn't dictate sending bad signals.  
    Remember, how can we be united until the errors of Vatican ll are rejected.


    Offline Sgt Rock USMC

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 58
    • Reputation: +46/-7
    • Gender: Male
    • Christ the King Militia
    Re: Una cuм mortal sin?
    « Reply #26 on: December 02, 2022, 01:06:23 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • So, can a pope be an open heretic? I think that kind of defeats the purpose of head of the Church, but what do I know?
    Saint Robert Bellarmine has some interesting thoughts...

    Saint Robert Bellarmine, De Romano Pontifice, Book IV

    Chapter VI: On the Pope as a Particular Person

    The fourth proposition. It is probable and may piously be believed that not only as ‘Pope’ can the Supreme Pontiff not err, but he cannot be a heretic even as a particular person by pertinaciously believing something false against the faith.

    It is proved:

    1) because it seems to require the sweet disposition of the providence of God. For the Pope not only should not, but cannot preach heresy, but rather should always preach the truth. He will certainly do that, since the Lord commanded him to confirm his brethren, and for that reason added: “I have prayed for thee, that thy faith shall not fail,” that is, that at least the preaching of the true faith shall not fail in thy throne. How, I ask, will a heretical Pope confirm the brethren in faith and always preach the true faith? Certainly God can wrench the confession of the true faith out of the heart of a heretic just as he placed the words in the mouth of Balaam’s ass. Still, this will be a great violence, and not in keeping with the providence of God that sweetly disposes all things.

    2) It is proved ab eventu. For to this point no [Pontiff] has been a heretic, or certainly it cannot be proven that any of them were heretics; therefore it is a sign that such a thing cannot be.

    Offline Sgt Rock USMC

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 58
    • Reputation: +46/-7
    • Gender: Male
    • Christ the King Militia
    Re: Una cuм mortal sin?
    « Reply #27 on: December 02, 2022, 01:11:41 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • If that happened to me I would probably leave.  Good will doesn't dictate sending bad signals. 
    Remember, how can we be united until the errors of Vatican ll are rejected.

    Of course, that's your call...I can respect that.  

    You should read Satis Cognitum, by Pope Leo XIII.  It is a most excellent read on the Unity of the Church.  Here is a Link   

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13825
    • Reputation: +5568/-865
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Una cuм mortal sin?
    « Reply #28 on: December 02, 2022, 01:32:30 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Saint Robert Bellarmine has some interesting thoughts...

    Saint Robert Bellarmine, De Romano Pontifice, Book IV

    Chapter VI: On the Pope as a Particular Person

    The fourth proposition. It is probable and may piously be believed that not only as ‘Pope’ can the Supreme Pontiff not err, but he cannot be a heretic even as a particular person by pertinaciously believing something false against the faith.

    It is proved:

    1) because it seems to require the sweet disposition of the providence of God. For the Pope not only should not, but cannot preach heresy, but rather should always preach the truth. He will certainly do that, since the Lord commanded him to confirm his brethren, and for that reason added: “I have prayed for thee, that thy faith shall not fail,” that is, that at least the preaching of the true faith shall not fail in thy throne. How, I ask, will a heretical Pope confirm the brethren in faith and always preach the true faith? Certainly God can wrench the confession of the true faith out of the heart of a heretic just as he placed the words in the mouth of Balaam’s ass. Still, this will be a great violence, and not in keeping with the providence of God that sweetly disposes all things.

    2) It is proved ab eventu. For to this point no [Pontiff] has been a heretic, or certainly it cannot be proven that any of them were heretics; therefore it is a sign that such a thing cannot be.
    The argument against the idea of sedeism here is that St. Robert's interpretation in the 1500s is at odds with V1's in 1870.

    V1 quoting the same Scripture applies those words of Our Lord only to those times when the pope speaks ex cathedra.
    "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 Sgt Rock USMC

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 58
    • Reputation: +46/-7
    • Gender: Male
    • Christ the King Militia
    Re: Una cuм mortal sin?
    « Reply #29 on: December 02, 2022, 02:03:20 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The argument against the idea of sedeism here is that St. Robert's interpretation in the 1500s is at odds with V1's in 1870.

    V1 quoting the same Scripture applies those words of Our Lord only to those times when the pope speaks ex cathedra.

    Interestingly enough, the Church recognizes the infallible Magisterium of the Pontiff speaking ex cathedra actually came from Saint Robert Bellarmine...   

    Providentissimus Deus, Acts of Pius XI, AAS 23 (1931) 433-438
    Saint Robert Bellarmine, Cardinal of the Roman Church, of the Society of Jesus, is Declared Doctor of the Universal Church
    But it is an outstanding achievement of St Robert, that the rights and privileges divinely bestowed upon the Supreme Pontiff, and those also which were not yet recognized by all the children of the Church at that time, such as the infallible Magisterium of the Pontiff speaking ex cathedra, he both invincibly proved and most learnedly defended against his adversaries.


    Saint Robert Bellarmine is recognized by the Church as the first and foremost authority on the papacy...

    Providentissimus Deus, Acts of Pius XI, AAS 23 (1931) 433-438
    Saint Robert Bellarmine, Cardinal of the Roman Church, of the Society of Jesus, is Declared Doctor of the Universal Church
    Moreover he appeared even up to our times as a defender of the Roman Pontiff of such authority that the Fathers of the [1870] Vatican Council employed his writings and opinions to the greatest possible extent.