Author Topic: ELEISON COMMENTS CCCLXVI (366) July 19,2014 A.D. (Read 41851 times)

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #55 on:** August 01, 2014, 07:05:29 PM »

...the whole point of +W's mentioning him, the rising up of the people, is found near the middle of this Wiki article. It is here within the words of Nestorius himself, and it is perhaps telling that he accuses "the followers of Cyril" of having "roused up a disturbance and discord among the people with an outcry, as though the emperor were opposed to God." I guess you could say those were the days when people took their religion seriously, unlike today! To be honest, if not for +W's reference to this, I dare say that in my reading of this Wiki article, I would likely have missed the import of this "uprising" entirely.

Please do not miss the innuendo, for it has been precisely on this matter alone, that Bishop Richard Willliamson has been dragged over the coals the past 6 (six) years because in Germany, it is precisely the matter of INCITING RACIAL UNREST over which his reputation has been smeared by the Zionists who hate him with a passion akin to that of Our Lord's.

...

Nestorius
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

.
.
.
Cyril took charge of the First Council of Ephesus in 431, opening debate before the long-overdue contingent of Eastern bishops from Antioch arrived. The council deposed Nestorius and declared him a heretic.

In Nestorius' own words,

When the followers of Cyril saw the vehemence of the emperor... they roused up a disturbance and discord among the people with an outcry, as though the emperor were opposed to God; they rose up against the nobles and the chiefs who acquiesced not in what had been done by them and they were running hither and thither. And... they took with them those who had been separated and removed from the monasteries by reason of their lives and their strange manners and had for this reason been expelled, and all who were of heretical sects and were possessed with fanaticism and with hatred against me. And one passion was in them all, Jews and pagans and all the sects, and they were busying themselves that they should accept without examination the things which were done without examination against me; and at the same time all of them, even those that had participated with me at table and in prayer and in thought, were agreed... against me and vowing vows one with another against me... In nothing were they divided.

But while the council was in progress, John I of Antioch and the eastern bishops arrived, and were furious to hear that Nestorius had already been condemned. They convened their own synod, at which Cyril was deposed. Both sides then appealed to the emperor. Initially, the imperial government ordered both Nestorius and Cyril deposed and exiled. Nestorius was bidden to return to his monastery at Antioch, and Maximian was consecrated Archbishop of Constantinople in his place. Cyril was eventually allowed to return after bribing various courtiers.[6]
Later events

In the following months, 17 bishops who supported Nestorius' doctrine were removed from their sees. Eventually, John I of Antioch was obliged to abandon Nestorius in March 433. On August 3, 435, Theodosius II issued an imperial edict that exiled Nestorius from the monastery in Antioch in which he had been staying to a monastery in the Great Oasis of Hibis (al-Khargah), in Egypt, securely within the diocese of Cyril. The monastery suffered attacks by desert bandits, and Nestorius was injured in one such raid. Nestorius seems to have survived there until at least 450 (given the evidence of The Book of Heraclides), though we have no knowledge of when after this date he died.[7]
Writings

Very few of Nestorius' writings survive. There are several letters preserved in the records of the Council of Ephesus, and fragments of a few others; about thirty sermons are extant, mostly in fragmentary form. The only complete treatise we have is the lengthy defence of his theological position, called The Book of Heraclides, written in exile at the Oasis, which survives in Syriac translation. This must have been written after 450, as he knows of the death of the Emperor Theodosius II (29 July 450).[8][9]
Legacy

Though Nestorius had been condemned by the church, including by Assyrians[citation needed], there remained a faction loyal to him and his teachings. Following the Nestorian Schism and the relocation of many Nestorian Christians to Persia, Nestorian thought became ingrained in the native Christian community, known as the Church of the East, to the extent that it was often known as the "Nestorian Church". In modern times the Assyrian Church of the East, a modern descendant of the historical Church of the East, reveres Nestorius as a saint, although the modern church does not subscribe to the entirety of the Nestorian doctrine as it has traditionally been understood in the West. Parts of the doctrine were explicitly repudiated by Patriarch Mar Dinkha IV on the occasion of his accession in 1976.[10]

In the Roman Empire, the doctrine of Monophysitism developed in reaction to Nestorianism. This new doctrine asserted that Christ had but one nature, his human nature being absorbed into his divinity. This doctrine was condemned at the Council of Chalcedon, and misattributed to the non-Chalcedonian Churches. Today it is condemned as heresy in the modern Oriental Orthodox churches.
Bazaar of Heracleides

In 1895, a 16th-century book manuscript containing a copy of a text written by Nestorius was discovered by American missionaries in the library of the Nestorian patriarch in the mountains at Konak, Hakkari. This book had suffered damage during Muslim raids, but was substantially intact, and copies were taken secretly. The Syriac translation had the title of the Bazaar of Heracleides.[11] The original 16th-century manuscript was destroyed in 1915 during the Turkish massacres of Assyrian Christians.

In the Bazaar, written about 451, Nestorius denies the heresy for which he was condemned and instead affirms of Christ "the same one is twofold"—an expression that some consider similar to the formulation of the Council of Chalcedon. Nestorius' earlier surviving writings, however, including his letter written in response to Cyril's charges against him, contain material that suggest that at that time he held that Christ had two persons.

.

peterp · « **Reply #56 on:** August 01, 2014, 08:35:28 PM »

Drew,

What you copied is really irrelevant and your assertions of me lying and your comments about Bp. Fellay are themselves calumnious.

A bishop's flock has meaning; it denotes a territorial jurisdiction. That is why I qualified what I wrote with "If", "truly" viz. do you really understand what you are saying? Only a diocesan bishop has a flock. His auxiliaries do not, the Society bishops do not and Bp. Williamson does not. Indeed, both Bp. Tissier de Mallarias and Abp. Lefebvre have both made it clear that no jurisdiction was ever conferred and that any jurisdiction which does exist is only with the individual.

A bishop's flock includes a clerical-flock as well as a lay-flock. This obviously implies a hierarchy. Fr. Chazel has already hinted at this a priest is nothing without a bishop [or words to that effect] and it is clear that resistance priests do regard him as their head (even if only informally). Whereas the Society and Bp. Lefebvre always made clear that they were not establishing a parallel hierarchy. Indeed not only is, for example, Bp. Tissier de Mallarias subject to the authority of the US District Superior, but also the prior of the Chicago priory.

Bp. Williamson has already stated "It seems that, today, God wants a loose network of independent pockets of Catholic Resistance, gathered around the Mass, freely contacting one another, but with no structure of false obedience, which served to sink the mainstream Church ..."; he is clearly telling everyone to abandon and refuse any link to the hierarchy. Presuming he believes what he says: there ought to be no hierarchy and I'll do my best to dismantle it.

I do not believe for one minute, anyone with a basic grounding - yes even a N.O. Grounding - in Catholicism cannot fail to smell the stench of protestantism in what Bp. Williamson has done and is doing.

So yes, if you all believe that Bp. Williamson has a flock, in the true sense, that is schismatic.

"Bishop Fellay has put the SSPX on the express train to Rome."
Calumny: You know Bp. Fellay has already stated there will be no agreement soon.

"For the sake of obtaining some limited form of ordinary jurisdiction that he covets"
Calumny: You know that This has never been the motive for discussion or seeking an agreement with Rome.

"accommodations of doctrine and worship to fit the "hermeneutic of continuity."
Calumny: You know he has already reject HoC.

Charity, justice etc. I won't hold my breath waiting...

JPaul · « **Reply #57 on:** August 01, 2014, 09:03:58 PM »

Columba,

Quote

How do I know Drew's initial introduction of the term "reformulate" was misleading? Because it had that effect on me. Initially it appeared that J.Paul and Cantarella were similarly misled, although J.Paul appears to have subsequently denied this for himself.

To eliminate all speculation, I was not misled at all. I agreed with his use of the term due to the fact that it characterized what the Bishop said perfectly, and thus I commented using his term. Drew's meaning and intent was very clear. It was not confusing and it was not misleading, to me, and while I cannot speak for Canterella, I believe that she too, grasped his intended point as well.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #58 on:** August 01, 2014, 11:01:33 PM »

Quote

Please do not miss the innuendo, for it has been precisely on this matter alone, that Bishop Richard Willliamson has been dragged over the coals the past 6 (six) years because in Germany, it is precisely the matter of INCITING RACIAL UNREST over which his reputation has been smeared by the Zionists who hate him with a passion akin to that of Our Lord's.
...

IOW, what the enemies of the Faith are doing to +W of late is the same kind of thing the heretic Nestorius was attempting to do 15 centuries ago. The tables have turned, though, and the outcry in ancient times to defend Tradition when the common man had the faith, has devolved into a state of affairs today whereby the mere threat or insinuation of "racial unrest" is sufficient to render judicial sanctions against a good bishop when he dares to say what is verifiable but also happens to be most politically incorrect.

As the courts say, "historical truth has nothing to do with it." What they cannot deny is that "political incorrectness" has become grounds for court action against anyone who 'offends' the Modernist status quo by way of same.

.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #59 on:** August 01, 2014, 11:37:55 PM »

.

Sorry, but this one is too good to pass up. Father Alain Lorans' intro to the new DICI 299 (it heads the new email version but it's from January - Bis repetita non placent - 1-08-2014) -- provides an example of an alternative phrasing for:

The "Church needs living Masters to vary all the time the presentation and explanation of the unvarying truths."

Drum roll, please...............

He is "in a very delicate situation. He ceaselessly has to correct, reframe, nuance…. He must constantly explain with infinitesimal subtleties…."

.