Author Topic: BREAKING: Archbishop Viganò Summoned to Vatican Tribunal on Charge of Schism (Read 28608 times)

Ladislaus · « **Reply #95 on:** June 25, 2024, 10:44:35 AM »

Quote from: Pax Vobis on June 25, 2024, 10:35:53 AM

p.s. The openness/flamboyance of Francis vs the quiet/stealth-ness of Benedict are irrelevant to heresy. (No one was more flamboyant in error than JP2...I assume you're to young to remember). Crafty/subtle heresy is just as damning as Loud/proud heresy. John23/Benedict are the former. Paul6/JP2/Francis are the later.

I actually hold that craft/subtle hereys is much more dangerous and pernicious. You're not going to get someone to swallow a spoonful of poison. But if you diguise it in a spoonful of sugar, it's much easier to get people to swallow it. Most Catholics of good will can reject the heresies/errors of Bergoglio, but many have bought those of "Saint" John Paul II the Great Wojtyla ... due to his greatness and sanctity.

Catholic Knight · « **Reply #96 on:** June 25, 2024, 11:22:49 AM »

Quote from: Pax Vobis on June 25, 2024, 10:35:53 AM

Only the church can decide pertinacity, in regards to formal/sinful heresy.

You don't know what you are writing about. Leaving aside latae sententiae excommunication for heresy, only the Church can judge in a canonical trial that one is guilty of the DELICT of heresy and impose that judgment on the consciences of the faithful. HOWEVER, that Church judgment must be based on the SIN of heresy. If there is no sin, there can be no delict. Whether one has committed the SIN of heresy is determined by his external acts of heresy. These external acts can be observed AND be judged as a SIN by anyone IF there is sufficient evidence to attain moral certitude. In this case, it would be a private judgment that cannot be imposed on another under pain of sin. HOWEVER, if the other becomes convinced of the same, then his own conscience would bind him.

Pax Vobis · « **Reply #97 on:** June 25, 2024, 01:48:54 PM »

Quote

You don't know what you are writing about. Leaving aside latae sententiae excommunication for heresy, only the Church can judge in a canonical trial that one is guilty of the DELICT of heresy and impose that judgment on the consciences of the faithful. HOWEVER, that Church judgment must be based on the SIN of heresy. If there is no sin, there can be no delict.

Right, this is where the Church corrects one who espouses error (i.e. material heresy)...if they persist (i.e. are pernicious in error) in error, then they are judged guilty of sin/formal heresy.

Quote

Whether one has committed the SIN of heresy is determined by his external acts of heresy. These external acts can be observed AND be judged as a SIN by anyone IF there is sufficient evidence to attain moral certitude.

Absolutely not. One can judge the external forum to decide if a person is wrong/in error (i.e. materially wrong). For an individual to judge another guilty of sin, one would be judging their internal motives that this isn't allowed, based on charity. The Church is the only judge of this.

Also, no one but the Church can claim moral certitude. Because She's the teacher of humanity. Individuals can only claim moral certitude IF...they follow rules/laws which the Church has laid down.

Quote

In this case, it would be a private judgment that cannot be imposed on another under pain of sin.

And private judgement is worthless, except to warn the individual to avoid person a, b or c (i.e. a person who speaks error/material heresy). But as to the question of formal heresy, no private person can have 'moral certitude' about that.

Quote

HOWEVER, if the other becomes convinced of the same, then his own conscience would bind him.

But this solves nothing, except creates the protestant problem of "individuality" and "private judgement". The whole point of Catholicism is to oppose such things and to tell everyone that "if the Church has (or hasn't spoken), then the case is decided." When the case hasn't been decided, then it's up for debate.

Catholic Knight · « **Reply #98 on:** June 26, 2024, 07:01:57 AM »

Quote from: Pax Vobis on June 25, 2024, 01:48:54 PM

Absolutely not. One can judge the external forum to decide if a person is wrong/in error (i.e. materially wrong). For an individual to judge another guilty of sin, one would be judging their internal motives that this isn't allowed, based on charity. The Church is the only judge of this.

Here you go again stating that only the Church can judge one guilty of sin. We argued this point on another thread a while ago and you were not able to provide any evidence from Church teaching or moral theology of your assertion.

The Baltimore Catechism of 1891 teaches us the following:

“Question: What is rash judgement?
“Answer: Rash judgment is believing a person guilty of sin without a sufficient cause.”

Fr. Dominic M. Prummer, O.P., in his Handbook of Moral Theology, No. 301, teaches us the following:

“Rash judgment is the firm assent of the mind (whether manifested externally or not) to the existence of sin in another without sufficient reason.”

Note that both the Baltimore Catechism and Fr. Prummer place a qualifier that makes one guilty of rash judgment, that is, without a sufficient cause or reason. However, what if one does have a sufficient cause or reason? Then he is not guilty of rash judgment.

Fr. Thomas Slater, S.J., in his A Manual of Moral Theology, Page 285, is more direct:

“It is no sin to think that another is wicked or has committed a sin if we know it to be a fact.”

The following is from Fr. Paul Kramer's Volume I of To Deceive the Elect:

“The opinion that only the Church authorities are able to judge in matters of heresy, and that we cannot know if someone is a heretic by the application of human reason without a pronouncement of Church authority, is patently absurd, since it is by the application of human reason to the matters of faith that ecclesiastical judges reach their conclusions in heresy cases and pronounce judgment.”

Pax Vobis, your assertion is of your own invention.

Catholic Knight · « **Reply #99 on:** June 26, 2024, 08:00:15 AM »

Quote

“Jorge Bergoglio is absolutely and most certainly a manifest formal heretic – one who has publicly defected from the Catholic faith. In conscience one has the right to make such a judgment because it is a legitimate matter of conscience, and can be known with certitude. All the canons, and teachings against privately judging superiors and prelates do not refer to judgments of conscience, such as the judgment concerning the manifest heresy of one’s superior, when it can be known with certitude; but rather, they prohibit judgments that require jurisdiction; and explain that private individuals do not possess the requisite jurisdiction for rendering an official judgment, and therefore they may not presume to judge their superiors juridically, and depose them with force of law. However, the right of conscience to judge privately as a matter of conscience in such cases as that of manifest heresy pertains to divine law, since such judgments of conscience are sometimes necessary for salvation;”

Kramer, Paul. To deceive the elect: The catholic doctrine on the question of a heretical Pope . Kindle Edition.

CathInfo.com

Author Topic: BREAKING: Archbishop Viganò Summoned to Vatican Tribunal on Charge of Schism (Read 28608 times)

Ladislaus

Re: BREAKING: Archbishop Viganò Summoned to Vatican Tribunal on Charge of Schism

Catholic Knight

Re: BREAKING: Archbishop Viganò Summoned to Vatican Tribunal on Charge of Schism

Pax Vobis

Re: BREAKING: Archbishop Viganò Summoned to Vatican Tribunal on Charge of Schism

Catholic Knight

Re: BREAKING: Archbishop Viganò Summoned to Vatican Tribunal on Charge of Schism

Catholic Knight

Re: BREAKING: Archbishop Viganò Summoned to Vatican Tribunal on Charge of Schism