http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php?a=topic&t=16006&min=70&num=10

Reading from page 8 and on of this thread, it has been demonstrated that Santo Subito is a dangerous heretic, perfidious viper, child of perdition, liar and is deeply involved with Satan. This person has denied many revealed teachings of the Catholic Church. Among his many heresies are these in particular:

- Muslims worship the one God

- There is such a thing as Catholic heresy

- Invincible ignorance applies to those who are not invincibly ignorant

- Someone is always Catholic and is not capable of being outside the Church, even if they are a heretic or schismatic

- Non-Catholics can elect a Pope

- Atheists can be saved as atheists and it's not their fault that they completely and willingly reject the faith

- Atheists who reject all religion as the result of their own choice are good-willed

- One can be completely ignorant of the existence of God (which is impossible, because God writes His law on the hearts of all men, so even if they aren't consciously aware of His existence, subconsciously they DO know it)

- Denying the dogma Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus in multiple ways

- Saying that the Catholic Church can esteem false religions

- Saying that those who profess the truth are raving lunatics for doing so

- Denying that all who do not believe in the Trinity will be condemned

- Anti-Catholic Protestants can be saved as Protestants because they've been "fed lies" all their lives and they are erring in "good faith"

- Dogmas must be understood to have "deeper meanings" (condemned by Pope Pius IX in the First Vatican Council)

- Asserting that you're somehow automatically not guilty for shooting a man if you intended to shoot a deer simply because your intent was to shoot a deer.

- There can be salvation in false religions/they are a means of salvation.

In the aforementioned thread is proof that he believes in all of the things I've mentioned. This man is very dangerous and I advise all those who are striving to be true Catholics to avoid his posts in particular. He is an agent of the Devil and is an ally of the evil forces against the Catholic Faith.

New members, please be warned of this poster. It is possible that this man is possessed and he certainly does need prayers so that he will relinquish his bad will and adhere to the Catholic Faith as it has been traditionally taught.

I am worried that people might actually listen to his errors and believe them, which is why I am posting this thread. I have tried, over and over and over to correct him but he refuses to accept the Truth. If this is to be the case, we cannot support him and be in communion with him.

Thank you for your patience and time.

Sincerely,
Daegus.

I expect someone will eventually suggest that he is Dave Hobson.

This man is not an heretic.  He is simply a confused Catholic relying on poor sources that only aggravate his confusion.  I think he is trying to be a good, faithful Catholic but has drunk the poison of error and consequently cannot seem to grasp certain matters in their proper light.

I most certainly agree. It is not his fault.

Quote from: Caminus

This man is not an heretic.  He is simply a confused Catholic relying on poor sources that only aggravate his confusion.  I think he is trying to be a good, faithful Catholic but has drunk the poison of error and consequently cannot seem to grasp certain matters in their proper light.

I most certainly agree. It is not his fault.

This is completely wrong and I've already explained why.

How anyone can hold that someone can deny the Catholic Faith over and over and over again and somehow be Catholic despite having the Truth revealed to him is an absurd notion.

All heretics are sincere in their beliefs and believe that their errors are true.. which is exactly why they'll be condemned if they do not repent of their errors prior to death. Simply earnestly believing in something wrong will not save you. Quite the opposite actually: it will condemn you if you refuse to correct yourself upon knowing the Truth.

In this time of crisis, I think the culpability of the average laymen, who is honestly trying to live out his faith, is diminished. It is not 1955, where if anyone said something heretical, he would be called before his bishop, etc. It's 1964, and good ol' Monsignor, along with Fr. X, Sister Y, and Pope Z, who have married you and your children, confirmed and ordained your friends and family, taught you, etc, are now telling you everything is changing and different. They changed everything little by little. Second graders came back to school after the Summer and now sister no longer wears the habit she has always worn. It is quite a difficult thing to question those who cultivated and garnished the faith, now in favor of revolutionary changes. I once heard Bishop Fellay say in a talk "you are here because you have been shocked." In a way, this is true. Caminus can probably phrase what I am trying to say in a better way.

In this time of crisis, I think the culpability of the average laymen, who is honestly trying to live out his faith, is diminished. It is not 1955, where if anyone said something heretical, he would be called before his bishop, etc. It's 1964, and good ol' Monsignor, along with Fr. X, Sister Y, and Pope Z, who have married you and your children, confirmed and ordained your friends and family, taught you, etc, are now telling you everything is changing and different. They changed everything little by little. Second graders came back to school after the Summer and now sister no longer wears the habit she has always worn. It is quite a difficult thing to question those who cultivated and garnished the faith, now in favor of revolutionary changes. I once heard Bishop Fellay say in a talk "you are here because you have been shocked." In a way, this is true. Caminus can probably phrase what I am trying to say in a better way.

You are not taking into account the fact that we live in an age where vitually anyone who lives in the civilized world can find out what the Catholic Church teaches. It's not that hard. It's actually VERY easy if you have internet access, which Santo does and yet he does not correct himself. Just because there aren't bishops to correct people that means that their culpability is diminished.. That's interesting. So even though they actually have an easier (much, much easier) time of finding out the Truth their culpability is somehow diminished. I find that strange.

Reading from page 8 and on of this thread, it has been demonstrated that Santo Subito is a dangerous heretic, perfidious viper, child of perdition, liar and is deeply involved with Satan.

 

I must admit this was quite an impressive list of presumptuous condemnatory judgment!

Daegus,

Since you have seen fit to reproduce, yet again, your list of mischaracterizations, calumny, and lies, I feel obligated to post my response here as well.

Quote from: Daegus

- Muslims worship the one God

Indeed they do. This is common sense. They worship the god of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob AND Jesus Christ, therefore obviously they worship God the Father who is fully God even though He is one of three Persons.

Quote

- There is such a thing as Catholic heresy

You are playing word games. Obviously Catholicism is not a heresy. I meant to say that Islam is a heretical offshoot of Catholicism. I already presented evidence in this regard. You also admitted Islam was heretical.

Quote

- Invincible ignorance applies to those who are not invincibly ignorant

This is absurd and, of course, I never said it.

Quote

- Someone is always Catholic and is not capable of being outside the Church, even if they are a heretic or schismatic

When did I say this?

Quote

- Non-Catholics can elect a Pope

When did I say this? Are you sure you have the right person?

Quote

- Atheists can be saved as atheists and it's not their fault that they completely and willingly reject the faith

This is a ridiculous parody of what I said. Of course there are atheists who are culpable for their positions. Those atheists would not be acting in good faith, would they? The ones who are have a shot at being saved because they are not culpable under basic moral theology.

Quote

- Atheists who reject all religion as the result of their own choice are good-willed

Absurd. I never said this.

Quote

- One can be completely ignorant of the existence of God (which is impossible, because God writes His law on the hearts of all men, so even if they aren't consciously aware of His existence, subconsciously they DO know it)

This is simply untrue as a majority of modern man has their mind clouded by philosophocal errors that impede the recognition of the Truth, even basic Truths.

Quote

- Denying the dogma Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus in multiple ways

Never denied it once.

Quote

- Saying that the Catholic Church can esteem false religions

When did I say this? I said that we shouldn't be afraid to encourage what is true in other religions. Of course we don't praise the other religions as alternate paths to God, that would be indifferentism.

Quote

- Saying that those who profess the truth are raving lunatics for doing so

Your tone in that particular post was indeed one of a lunatic. I prefer not to engage with people who are in a state of rage or who are otherwise psychologically compromised.

Quote

- Denying that all who do not believe in the Trinity will be condemned

Of course I deny that because it is a ridiculous statement that flies in the face of Catholic teaching on invincible ignorance.

Quote

- Anti-Catholic Protestants can be saved as Protestants because they've been "fed lies" all their lives and they are erring in "good faith"

They can be saved indeed, but it would not be because of their Protestantism, but in spite of it.

Quote

- Dogmas must be understood to have "deeper meanings" (condemned by Pope Pius IX in the First Vatican Council)

When did I say this? Nevertheless, have you ever read Newman's "development of doctrine"? There is authentic development you know.

Quote

- Asserting that you're somehow automatically not guilty for shooting a man if you intended to shoot a dear simply because your intent was to shoot a dear.

A dear what? Oh, you meen a "deer".  :wink:

So you are saying a man who was hunting and shot at what he thought was a deer, who instead shoots and kills a man is guilty of murder and should face life in prison or capital punishment? This is absurd. The hunter has no moral culpability for shooting the man even though shooting a man (obviously) is objectively sinful.

Quote

- There can be salvation in false religions/they are a means of salvation..

There can be salvation in other religions, but not by other religions. I believe even ABL held this view.

Indeed other religions can be a means of salvation as they contain certain sacraments, elements of truth, morality, etc. that coincide with Catholic truth. Thus these means of sanctification can be used in good faith in a person's ignorance for them to find salvation in their false religion. However, the false religion, as a whole, has errors in it and thus the false religion itself cannot save.