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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 11

Author Topic: Accepting Vatican II  (Read 16330 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 46600
  • Reputation: +27457/-5070
  • Gender: Male
Re: Accepting Vatican II
« Reply #105 on: May 05, 2023, 12:00:37 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: NIFH on May 04, 2023, 11:17:01 PM
    Think about the SSPX priest who misunderstands a point of doctrine and says a heresy in his sermon:  Before he understands his error and recants, is he anathema?

    Be very careful.

    You’re conflating internal forum considerations with pertinacity that is discernible in the external forum.  Your example of the priest who had a slip of the tongue is ridiculous.  There was no pertinacity’s adherence to any error and that can be clearly discerned in the external forum.  V2 papal claimants are clearly pertinacious in their errors, having repeated promoted them.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46600
    • Reputation: +27457/-5070
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Accepting Vatican II
    « Reply #106 on: May 05, 2023, 12:07:32 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: NIFH on May 04, 2023, 09:08:15 PM
    These Modernists say wrong things because they misunderstand Church doctrine, like the priest I mentioned who was corrected in the sacristy after Mass.

    You no more know that this is true than anyone knows the opposite.  You can no more ascertain their “good faith” than we can determine that they’re in bad faith.  Those are matters of the internal forum that even the Church does not judge.  What is judged is the external forum, thus the term manifest heresy.

    It’s irrelevant anyway and a distraction from the core issue, which is that the Holy Spirit guides and protects the papacy.  If V2 and the NOM had never happened, I could hardly care less about a Bergoglio spewing heresy on a daily basis.  That would not be my problem, and we would leave him to the hierarchy to deal with.

    What’s at issue here is the nature of the Church and the indefectibility of the Church.

    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46600
    • Reputation: +27457/-5070
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Accepting Vatican II
    « Reply #107 on: May 05, 2023, 12:14:59 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: NIFH on May 04, 2023, 11:50:36 PM
     But just like the SSPX priest mentioned, Benedict thought he was in harmony with Church teaching.

    And you know this how?  For all you know he is actually a Satanist who knows exactly what he’s doing.

    And your continuing to use an idiotic comparison with a Traditional priest who has a slip of the tongue is idiotic.

    If this priest had kept repeating his error over and over again, then you’re in a different situation where pertinacity would become manifest in the external forum.  Most theologians would not classify a slip of the tongue as even material heresy.  It’s not even in the same category.  Heresy even etymologically denotes pertinacity, referring into a “clinging” to error.  You also butcher the term formal heresy … but I’ll get back to that tomorrow.
    Logged

    Offline MiracleOfTheSun

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 796
    • Reputation: +344/-140
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Accepting Vatican II
    « Reply #108 on: May 05, 2023, 04:56:08 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: NIFH on May 04, 2023, 11:50:36 PM
    ...Benedict thought he was in harmony with Church teaching.

    Come on, man.
    Logged

    Offline MiracleOfTheSun

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 796
    • Reputation: +344/-140
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Accepting Vatican II
    « Reply #109 on: May 05, 2023, 05:24:26 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Tradition in Action did a nice segment on Ratzinger, et al.  He was a public and known Modernist for quite a while.

    https://www.traditioninaction.org/ProgressivistDoc/A_001_CondemnationRatzinger.htm

    Logged

    Offline MiracleOfTheSun

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 796
    • Reputation: +344/-140
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Accepting Vatican II
    « Reply #110 on: May 05, 2023, 05:27:27 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • And let us not forget he wasn't alone in his Modernism.  

    Logged

    Offline NIFH

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 214
    • Reputation: +60/-30
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Accepting Vatican II
    « Reply #111 on: May 05, 2023, 09:03:47 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on May 05, 2023, 12:00:37 AM
    You’re conflating internal forum considerations with pertinacity that is discernible in the external forum.  Your example of the priest who had a slip of the tongue is ridiculous.  There was no pertinacity’s adherence to any error and that can be clearly discerned in the external forum.  V2 papal claimants are clearly pertinacious in their errors, having repeated promoted them.
    I'm talking about the other example from the same post, sorry if I was unclear.  Not the priest who had a slip of the tongue, the other who says a heresy because he misunderstood a point of doctrine and wasn't corrected until after Mass.  Was he anathema between the sermon and the recessional?  I'll answer myself:  No.  He misunderstood something, just like Benedict misunderstood many things.  Both thought they were in harmony with Church teaching.  Purely material heresy, not formal heresy.

    Benedict continued to promote his errors, and continued to manifest his intention to agree with Church teaching.  Still material heresy, not formal.
    Logged

    Offline NIFH

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 214
    • Reputation: +60/-30
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Accepting Vatican II
    « Reply #112 on: May 05, 2023, 09:07:52 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on May 05, 2023, 12:07:32 AM
    You no more know that this is true than anyone knows the opposite.  You can no more ascertain their “good faith” than we can determine that they’re in bad faith.  Those are matters of the internal forum that even the Church does not judge.  What is judged is the external forum, thus the term manifest heresy.
    I cannot see into Benedict's soul and check if he actually does mean to contradict the Church.  I stick with the externals.  He says he means to agree with Church teaching.  I am obliged in charity to assume he's sincere, and terribly mistaken.
    Logged

    Offline NIFH

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 214
    • Reputation: +60/-30
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Accepting Vatican II
    « Reply #113 on: May 05, 2023, 09:16:57 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on May 05, 2023, 12:07:32 AM
    It’s irrelevant anyway and a distraction from the core issue, which is that the Holy Spirit guides and protects the papacy.  If V2 and the NOM had never happened, I could hardly care less about a Bergoglio spewing heresy on a daily basis.  That would not be my problem, and we would leave him to the hierarchy to deal with.

    What’s at issue here is the nature of the Church and the indefectibility of the Church.
    The Holy Ghost is promised to protect the pope in infallible pronouncements.  He does not prevent Nicholas I from saying baptism in the Name of Christ is valid.

    The indefectibility of the Church has been marvelously apparent during this crisis.  Despite the popes doing everything they could think of to impose their errors, none of them has been able to infallibly define any of them.  The Holy Ghost takes care of His Church.
    Logged

    Offline AnthonyPadua

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 2213
    • Reputation: +1124/-229
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Accepting Vatican II
    « Reply #114 on: May 06, 2023, 05:25:26 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: NIFH on May 05, 2023, 09:16:57 PM
    The Holy Ghost is promised to protect the pope in infallible pronouncements.  He does not prevent Nicholas I from saying baptism in the Name of Christ is valid.

    The indefectibility of the Church has been marvelously apparent during this crisis.  Despite the popes doing everything they could think of to impose their errors, none of them has been able to infallibly define any of them.  The Holy Ghost takes care of His Church.
    But vatican 2 taught error and meets the criteria of infallibility.
    Logged

    Offline MiracleOfTheSun

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 796
    • Reputation: +344/-140
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Accepting Vatican II
    « Reply #115 on: May 06, 2023, 09:45:17 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: NIFH on May 05, 2023, 09:07:52 PM
    I cannot see into Benedict's soul and check if he actually does mean to contradict the Church.

    If a man walks up to me, puts the barrel of a gun on my forehead and says, 'hand over your wallet', but then smiles and says he has my 'best interests' in mind, I simply believe him?  What if he does this for years in public to everyone, on every street corner in town?

    Call a spade a spade.  That's precisely why there was a Holy Office and that's what the Holy Office had been doing for years - calling warped theologians warped in their non Catholic Modernism.
    Logged

    Offline NIFH

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 214
    • Reputation: +60/-30
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Accepting Vatican II
    « Reply #116 on: May 06, 2023, 03:38:16 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: AnthonyPadua on May 06, 2023, 05:25:26 AM
    But vatican 2 taught error and meets the criteria of infallibility.
    John XXIII, Paul VI and the council itself unequivocally denied the infallibility of Vatican II.
    Logged

    Offline NIFH

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 214
    • Reputation: +60/-30
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Accepting Vatican II
    « Reply #117 on: May 06, 2023, 03:57:57 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: MiracleOfTheSun on May 06, 2023, 09:45:17 AM
    If a man walks up to me, puts the barrel of a gun on my forehead and says, 'hand over your wallet', but then smiles and says he has my 'best interests' in mind, I simply believe him?  What if he does this for years in public to everyone, on every street corner in town?

    Call a spade a spade.  That's precisely why there was a Holy Office and that's what the Holy Office had been doing for years - calling warped theologians warped in their non Catholic Modernism.
    The mugger would have to have some kind of explanation.  He might present an explanation that would lead you to think, "Wow.  This crazy guy really thinks he's helping me.  Poor dude, he's doing wrong and needs to be put in the madhouse."

    Benedict was asked to explain why he was saying the Church used to say one thing and now says another.  His explanation was fallacious, but you can see why someone with his formation would believe his explanation.  That makes him a sincere crackpot, not a formal heretic.

    Of course, it's possible he was extorting our good will, and knew perfectly well his explanation was bogus.  However we have very good reason to believe he was just a sincere crackpot.
    Logged

    Offline MiracleOfTheSun

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 796
    • Reputation: +344/-140
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Accepting Vatican II
    « Reply #118 on: May 06, 2023, 04:42:08 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: NIFH on May 06, 2023, 03:38:16 PM
    John XXIII, Paul VI and the council itself unequivocally denied the infallibility of Vatican II.

    This misses the point.  The bishops collective, in union with His Holiness, approved false doctrine for the whole Church.  His Holiness Pope Francis said as much recently:

    This is magisterium: the Council is the magisterium of the Church. Either you are with the Church and therefore you follow the Council, and if you do not follow the Council or you interpret it in your own way, as you wish, you are not with the Church.
    Logged

    Offline MiracleOfTheSun

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 796
    • Reputation: +344/-140
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Accepting Vatican II
    « Reply #119 on: May 06, 2023, 04:56:24 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: NIFH on May 06, 2023, 03:57:57 PM
    Of course, it's possible he was extorting our good will, and knew perfectly well his explanation was bogus.  However we have very good reason to believe he was just a sincere crackpot.

    You have 'good reason' to believe he was a sincere crackpot.  I have good reason to believe that birds of a feather flock together, and that if you want to know what someone thinks then listen to what he teaches.  He was under suspicion by the Holy Office, his writings are full of heresies, he rejected the Syllabus of Pius IX, he worked to bury the message of Fatima and he worked to bury the work of Lefebvre.  And that's for starters.  That isn't 'bad formation'.  That is the work of an outlaw.


    Logged
    Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 11
    « previous next »