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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4

Author Topic: Archbishop Vigano's tribute to Bishop Williamson  (Read 41904 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 46216
  • Reputation: +27189/-5030
  • Gender: Male
Re: Archbishop Vigano's tribute to Bishop Williamson
« Reply #15 on: February 05, 2025, 10:06:51 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on February 05, 2025, 09:36:58 AM
    Johannes, why isn't Pius XII a pope?  Most sedes don't go this far.

    Because Johannes is a radical schismatic who deposes popes on his whim.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46216
    • Reputation: +27189/-5030
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Archbishop Vigano's tribute to Bishop Williamson
    « Reply #16 on: February 05, 2025, 10:11:58 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Johannes on February 05, 2025, 09:53:33 AM
    Who are the post-V2 trads who hold him "suspect of heresy" vs. actually "heretical"?

    CatholicKnight (slavish follower of Fr. Kramer, so much so that I suspect they're one and the same individual, though he's denied it) desperately tries to avoid the conclusion that B16 is a manifest heretic, holding that when Bergoglio declared the Old Covenant is salvific for the Jews (as Fr. Kramer rightly points out, a heresy against the Council of Florence), when Bergoglio denied that dogma, he really meant it, whereas Ratzinger didn't really mean it and was just confused, i.e. in material error.  Problem of course is that if EITHER man knew what he was doing, it would be Ratzinger, who, despite his heresies, actually is a brilliant man and knows what Florence teaches, whereas Bergoglio is a dummy by comparison.

    CatholicKnight, you're not actually TradCathKnight, aka GaJEWski, aka Great Monarch, by any chance, are you?
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46216
    • Reputation: +27189/-5030
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Archbishop Vigano's tribute to Bishop Williamson
    « Reply #17 on: February 05, 2025, 10:15:32 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Johannes on February 05, 2025, 10:10:38 AM
    I think he was pope, albeit not a very good one.

    Well, at least we agree on that.  Yes, despite some who rather worship Pius XII, his was the watershed papacy that enabled and set into motion the forces that brought us Vatican II shortly after his demise.  I have a list of about a dozen points of failure during his reign.  In fact, it was downhill immediately after the death of St. Pius X, as the saint's body was still warm when his successor began at once to dismantle the anti-Modernist apparatuses St. Pius X had put into place as a bulwark against the spread of Modernism, considering St. Pius X to be "not nithe" (to quote Bishop Williamson).  In fact the devil's advocate at his canonization hammered on the fact that St. Pius X was mean and not nice to Modernists.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46216
    • Reputation: +27189/-5030
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Archbishop Vigano's tribute to Bishop Williamson
    « Reply #18 on: February 05, 2025, 10:18:58 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Johannes on February 05, 2025, 10:16:43 AM
    I have wondered the same... Doesn't he believe he is the leader of some kind of chivalric "Eagle" order (Knight uses an eagle coat-of-arms)

    Well, there are threads where the actual TradCathKnight, Eric Gajewski, was exposed not only for his fake (purchased followers) but where evidence was presented that he fancies himself to be THE Great Monarch of Catholic prophecy.

    It just occurred to me now to wonder if CatholicKnight here is Gajewski, since I THINK (though not sure) that Gajewski follows Fr. Kramer also.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46216
    • Reputation: +27189/-5030
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Archbishop Vigano's tribute to Bishop Williamson
    « Reply #19 on: February 05, 2025, 10:25:24 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Johannes on February 05, 2025, 10:23:52 AM
    The Dimond's exposed him over a decade ago.



    Right, and some of their links were posted on that CathInfo thread, along with some additional material.

    That old thread was actually bumped recently (or, rather, a collection of old threads compiled by Matthew into one place) ...
    https://www.cathinfo.com/catholic-living-in-the-modern-world/tradcatknight-76053/
    Logged

    Offline Everlast22

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 772
    • Reputation: +676/-187
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Archbishop Vigano's tribute to Bishop Williamson
    « Reply #20 on: February 05, 2025, 11:15:36 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Johannes on February 05, 2025, 11:10:40 AM
    But, even if BXVI was only a material public heretic - the "more common opinion of the theologians is that material public heretics are NOT members of the Church." (Van Noort).

    Is Van Noort wrong in stating that this is the more common opinion?
    Do you know the difference b/w material and formal when it comes to heresy? lol
    Logged

    Offline Catholic Knight

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 797
    • Reputation: +238/-79
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Archbishop Vigano's tribute to Bishop Williamson
    « Reply #21 on: February 05, 2025, 11:23:29 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on February 05, 2025, 10:11:58 AM
    CatholicKnight (slavish follower of Fr. Kramer, so much so that I suspect they're one and the same individual, though he's denied it) desperately tries to avoid the conclusion that B16 is a manifest heretic, holding that when Bergoglio declared the Old Covenant is salvific for the Jews (as Fr. Kramer rightly points out, a heresy against the Council of Florence), when Bergoglio denied that dogma, he really meant it, whereas Ratzinger didn't really mean it and was just confused, i.e. in material error.  Problem of course is that if EITHER man knew what he was doing, it would be Ratzinger, who, despite his heresies, actually is a brilliant man and knows what Florence teaches, whereas Bergoglio is a dummy by comparison.

    CatholicKnight, you're not actually TradCathKnight, aka GaJEWski, aka Great Monarch, by any chance, are you?

    I am not Eric Gajewski, but I do appreciate some of his work.
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 11970
    • Reputation: +7517/-2254
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Archbishop Vigano's tribute to Bishop Williamson
    « Reply #22 on: February 05, 2025, 11:34:54 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Material heretic <> material public heretic. 

    There’s material vs formal.  These are related to the person's understanding of the error/guilt as it is related to sin. 

    Then there’s also public vs occult.  Then also manifest.  These are canon law terms related to guilt by law. 

    You added the word “public” to the ‘material’ label, which is not correct.  You can’t mix n match labels. 
    Logged

    Offline Catholic Knight

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 797
    • Reputation: +238/-79
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Archbishop Vigano's tribute to Bishop Williamson
    « Reply #23 on: February 05, 2025, 11:38:40 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Johannes on February 05, 2025, 11:28:45 AM
    That is not the point.

    Is Van Noort wrong about material public heretics NOT being members according to the more common opinion?

    Yes or No?

    (You can actually disagree with the more common opinion of the theologians though I wouldn't advise it).

    Define the term "material public heretic".
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46216
    • Reputation: +27189/-5030
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Archbishop Vigano's tribute to Bishop Williamson
    « Reply #24 on: February 05, 2025, 12:07:25 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Johannes on February 05, 2025, 11:36:47 AM

    There are thus four kinds of heretics:
    • Formal public heretics – who openly and guiltily refuse submission to the rule of faith proposed by the magisterium
    • Material public heretics – who openly but innocently refuse submission to the rule of faith proposed by the magisterium. This does not include Catholics who are in error in good faith. [this stuck out portion is a private opinion. The more common opinion of the theologians disagrees. WM Review added it in because of the unique situation we are in - but no theologian ever taught it]



    Yet another epic fail out of the gate.  NO.  IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH "innocence" or lack thereof.  :facepalm:  How many times do I have to re-explain this to your damaged brain.

    Logged

    Offline Catholic Knight

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 797
    • Reputation: +238/-79
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Archbishop Vigano's tribute to Bishop Williamson
    « Reply #25 on: February 05, 2025, 12:10:24 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Johannes on February 05, 2025, 11:48:23 AM
    Material public heretics – One who openly but innocently refuse submission to the rule of faith proposed by the magisterium.

    This definition does not include Catholics who err innocently.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46216
    • Reputation: +27189/-5030
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Archbishop Vigano's tribute to Bishop Williamson
    « Reply #26 on: February 05, 2025, 12:16:40 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Catholic Knight on February 05, 2025, 11:23:29 AM
    I am not Eric Gajewski, but I do appreciate some of his work.

    OK, I'll take your word for it.  :laugh1:

    Gajewski does seem to have Father Kramer on all the time, and you practically hold Fr. to be a rule of faith, where you won't dare disagree with him on even the smallest point.
    Logged

    Offline Catholic Knight

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 797
    • Reputation: +238/-79
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Archbishop Vigano's tribute to Bishop Williamson
    « Reply #27 on: February 05, 2025, 12:23:59 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Johannes on February 05, 2025, 12:14:02 PM
    Quote from: Johannes on Today at 11:48:23 AM:facepalm:


    The "rule" of faith and a "heresy" against a specific "teaching" of the Church are not the same thing.  A Catholic who hold a heresy innocently does not reject the "rule" of faith.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46216
    • Reputation: +27189/-5030
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Archbishop Vigano's tribute to Bishop Williamson
    « Reply #28 on: February 05, 2025, 12:39:57 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Catholic Knight on February 05, 2025, 12:23:59 PM
    The "rule" of faith and a "heresy" against a specific "teaching" of the Church are not the same thing.  A Catholic who hold a heresy innocently does not reject the "rule" of faith.

    :facepalm:
    Logged

    Offline October1917

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 6
    • Reputation: +5/-0
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Archbishop Vigano's tribute to Bishop Williamson
    « Reply #29 on: February 05, 2025, 12:47:16 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on February 05, 2025, 12:16:40 PM
    OK, I'll take your word for it.  :laugh1:

    Gajewski does seem to have Father Kramer on all the time, and you practically hold Fr. to be a rule of faith, where you won't dare disagree with him on even the smallest point.

    "Father" Kramer was "ordained" in the new-rite and has yet to be ordained sub conditione.

    When it comes to the sacraments, Catholics are under obligation to avoid positive doubt.

    Calling him "Father" ignores the positive doubt of his suspect ordination.
    Logged
    Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
    « previous next »