Author Topic: VII's religious liberty -- heresy, error, changing discipline -- (Read 6978 times)

Telesphorus · « **Reply #20 on:** July 06, 2010, 03:51:50 PM »

Dignitatis Humanae is opposed to the First Commandment.

If the legitimate authority of laws comes from God it is not possible to make a principle of the "right" to violate the First Commandment.

Alexandria · « **Reply #21 on:** July 06, 2010, 03:55:42 PM »

Quote from: Telesphorus

Dignitatis Humanae is opposed to the First Commandment.

If the legitimate authority of laws comes from God it is not possible to make a principle of the "right" to violate the First Commandment.

This is what I was told by a sedevacantist priest, but they are the only ones who have said this. You will not hear this from a novus ordo priest. And, if you ask them about it, they deny it.

So, who is right?

Dawn · « **Reply #22 on:** July 06, 2010, 04:03:25 PM »

I wonder, though, is what Pius IX and Leo XIII talked about part of the Deposit of Faith? Can it be traced back to the Apostles? And which concepts can be traced back to the Apostles? Is it that we must wish for all governments to be Catholic, even when they aren't? Is it that we must say that the government should punish those who offend against Catholicism? Obviously that can't be traced back to the Apostles, since they knew nothing of Catholic governments.

I say yes it can. Whast about the instance of old what's the husband and wife who were sold their property and did not turn over all the money. God struck them dead. So, yes the apostles would have seen right there exactly what God meant to happen with persons not following the law. And, that means Dogma not suggestion that can be changed.
And, yes if you are living in a Catholic Country and break the laws of the Church darn right you can be punished it has happened in the past and will again under the Great Monarch.
Am I understanding your or not.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #23 on:** July 06, 2010, 04:03:43 PM »

Quote from: Raoul76

If DH is heretical, it's because it contradicts that truth. On top of this, you have the peculiarity that Dignitatis Humanae demands religious liberty from ALL STATES, so that a Catholic state would be disobeying the Church! Absolutely absurd!

Yes, that's a red flag and it tends to discredit all those who try to reconcile Dignitatis Humanae with the teaching of the Church. The Church approved of civil laws contrary to Dignitatis Humanae right up to the time Dignitatis Humanae was enacted. Dignitatis Humanae does implicitly accuse the Church of teaching error until suddenly in the 60s liberal theologians supposedly expressed its true teachings.

Dawn · « **Reply #24 on:** July 06, 2010, 04:06:18 PM »

Quote from: Belloc

Quote from: Raoul76
Belloc said:
Quote
I ignore V2 by and large...someday, we may have it only as a bad memory.....

We can't ignore it, because we need to know if what sits in Rome is the Church or not. If it is, the VII docuмents have to be free from error, let alone heresy.

understandable, but what sits in Rome is largely not Catholic, many liek B16 try to straddle both, so in a sense we ahve a rampaging heresy, with some wanting to be on both sides of the team....far more honest was Luther,really.....

I ignore the docuмents maybe is what I should have said, other than to show V2 was crappola. :barf:

You are right. The spoke plainly nothing was couched. They meant what they said. Not like these VII vipers. They purposely wove rings around everything so that you can look at it this way and maybe event hat way.
And I agree when you say atleast Luther was an honest heretic. He had the dare I say decency to take his slimy trails to his own Church.