Author Topic: Distinguishing between material heresy, hypocrisy, blasphemous mockery (Read 1007 times)

Telesphorus · « **on:** December 05, 2011, 11:54:55 PM »

There are undoubtedly many Novus Ordites who believe the fundamentals of the Catholic Faith and divine revelation, are in great ignorance and confusion on many issues that would have been commonly known to Catholics to the past, and who therefore mistakenly adhere to positions that are in many respects modernist, even though they still believe in the miracles of the Gospel, in Divine Revelation, etc.

Then there are those who do not believe, or who believe very imperfectly, but who sincerely wish people to think they believe and who are very eager to only hold publicly to positions they believe to be the correct Catholic position, and who genuinely wish to avoid causing any scandal.

Finally there are those, who make statements that are clearly, intentionally heretical, while maintaining the pretense of being Catholic. They know very well their position is not Catholic, and will purposefully say things that are outrageously against Catholic teachings, cynically calculating that their audience will accept it because they maintain the pose of Catholic. I would argue that such a thing is a form of blasphemy, particularly from modernists who do not believe in the religion of Christ in any meaningful way.

It is, I think, merely a more sophisticated form of the blasphemy of someone who engages in smirking, condescending sanctimony almost with an ironic and sarcastic attitude, doing so intentionally for the infidels in the audience, while trusting the suckers to "not get it."

Yes, I think it's a form of intentional public blasphemy.

Jim · « **Reply #1 on:** December 06, 2011, 03:29:35 AM »

Hi Tele,

I hope you read my post on the other thread. This quote, from John Lane, also relates to our discussion:

Quote

3. There are a great many things not certain at present; things which are important for Catholics to know, and which have practical implications. For example, there is the question of whether Karol Wojtyla is pope. While I hold that it is possible to be morally certain that he is not, I also recognise that this conclusion requires two things which are "preambles" so to speak, and which many find very difficult, through no apparent fault of their own. The first is that much very bad theology (not heresy, as such, but error) has been taught for a long time, even by so-called "traditionalists", and this error needs to be uprooted from people's minds. The second is that the true nature of Holy Church as a perfect, visible society with an unbreakable unity founded on both faith and government needs to be understood by the faithful. Once these two things are achieved, then it is easily seen that Wojtyla is an impostor. But those who do not yet see it are not, for that reason, non-Catholics. If they adhere to his errors, then that is a different matter. Another example is the question of the validity of the Thuc line of Orders. While it is simple Catholic theology that the validity of a sacrament is presumed until the sacrament is proven invalid, there has been so much misinformation spread about that many laymen are in no position to achieve certainty regarding this matter. But instead of recognising this fact, many presume to "excommunicate" others with whom they differ. This is simply wrong, and contrary to St. Augustine's immortal saw, given above. A third example is the issue of the liceity (lawfulness) of various sacred functions being performed without the approval required by canon law (such as setting up chapels, ordaining priests, etc.). These actions are perfectly legitimate in fact, and the justification is the proper application of the principle of "Epikeia". But if some do not agree, or do not understand, then that is no reason for charity to be sacrificed. Certainty can definitely be questioned in these matters, so liberty ought to be granted. In other words, differences of opinion in things such as these cannot be legitimate bases for mutual "excommunication."

pax · « **Reply #2 on:** December 06, 2011, 07:25:15 AM »

Then there are us Novus Ordoites who see what you see and feel what you feel but who remember the words of Blessed Peter: "Where shall we go, Lord?"

And, yes, there is much blasphemy and error being preached from the ambos these days. There is even the wholesale denial of previously defined dogmas, and the spirit of religious indifferentism seems to reign supreme in some quarters. Every Lent, we are forced to watch while the parish sponsers seder meals from the 11the century and utterly ignores the rich heritage they have received as the People of God.

The mystery of iniquity. When it has reached its full measure there will be a great cleansing.

Roman Catholic · « **Reply #3 on:** December 06, 2011, 07:31:40 PM »

Quote from: pax

Then there are us Novus Ordoites ......

....Every Lent, we are forced to watch while the parish sponsers seder .

You are not forced to do anything. You can choose to stay away from Judaic practices that offend Almighty God, but you chose to return to the vomit.

Roman Catholic · « **Reply #4 on:** December 06, 2011, 07:49:29 PM »

Quote from: pax

Then there are us Novus Ordoites who see what you see and feel what you feel but who remember the words of Blessed Peter: "Where shall we go, Lord?"

There are those Novus Ordites like you, who like Protestants interpret the words of Scripture to suit themselves, and then apply them as they see fit.

It is permissable to hold that Ratzinger is not a legitimate pope due to his heresy.

Ratzinger is not Our Lord.

Sigismund · « **Reply #5 on:** December 06, 2011, 09:48:42 PM »

Quote from: Roman Catholic

Quote from: pax
Then there are us Novus Ordoites who see what you see and feel what you feel but who remember the words of Blessed Peter: "Where shall we go, Lord?"

There are those Novus Ordites like you, who like Protestants interpret the words of Scripture to suit themselves, and then apply them as they see fit.

It is permissable to hold that Ratzinger is not a legitimate pope due to his heresy.

Ratzinger is not Our Lord.

Indeed.

I am, as most know, a semi-trad who has no theological problem with the NO when celebrated properly. Bur for Heaven's sake, man. St Peter was asking Jesus where he could go other than the source of all light and life. I believe Benedict XVI is the pope, the Vicar of Christ. He is most certainly not Christ Himself, however.

Roman Catholic · « **Reply #6 on:** December 06, 2011, 09:53:37 PM »

But for Heaven's sake, man, certainly you can grasp why many traditional Catholics (not semi-trads like you - whatever they are) do not do not think that "pope" Ratzinger is source of all light and life, let alone a true pope and Vicar of Christ.

Roman Catholic · « **Reply #7 on:** December 06, 2011, 09:56:02 PM »

Quote from: Sigismund

Quote from: Roman Catholic
Quote from: pax
Then there are us Novus Ordoites who see what you see and feel what you feel but who remember the words of Blessed Peter: "Where shall we go, Lord?"

There are those Novus Ordites like you, who like Protestants interpret the words of Scripture to suit themselves, and then apply them as they see fit.

It is permissable to hold that Ratzinger is not a legitimate pope due to his heresy.

Ratzinger is not Our Lord.

Indeed.

I am, as most know, a semi-trad who has no theological problem with the NO when celebrated properly. Bur for Heaven's sake, man. St Peter was asking Jesus where he could go other than the source of all light and life. I believe Benedict XVI is the pope, the Vicar of Christ. He is most certainly not Christ Himself, however.

Traditional Catholics who are not "semi-trads" don't celebrate the Novus Mess or attend it, even when it is "celebrated properly" as you put it.

Surely you get that?

Real Tradition precludes anything known as semi-Tradition.

Roman Catholic · « **Reply #8 on:** December 06, 2011, 10:24:54 PM »

Sigismund,

So you would attend The Novus Ordo and actively participate in the offering?

Jim · « **Reply #9 on:** December 07, 2011, 12:04:36 AM »

Quote from: Roman Catholic

Sigismund,

So you would attend The Novus Ordo and actively participate in the offering?

Even though I have sedevacantist leanings, I do when there is no traditional Mass. I feel that I have to. I also even actively participate in a traditional Mass where, according to the sede belief that the 1968 Pauline Rite of Consecration is invalid per se, the priest is not a priest.

Jim · « **Reply #10 on:** December 07, 2011, 12:05:28 AM »

I know many probably disagree with me on the above, but this situation is so complex I hope you can at least see it in the best possible light.

Intellectually and on paper, I'm a very hardline SSPXer and even sede. In practice, a SSPX sympathetic indultarian.