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

Author Topic: Magisterium Does Not Teach Canonizations are Infallible  (Read 19160 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Struthio

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1650
  • Reputation: +454/-366
  • Gender: Male
Re: Magisterium Does Not Teach Canonizations are Infallible
« Reply #225 on: August 30, 2018, 06:00:56 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • What’s your point?


    Isn't the whole point of this thread to accept JXXIII, PVI, JPI, JPII, BXVI, F as popes but none of them as saints, especially not Mr. Assisi JPII?

    To accomplish this you quote the testimony of a modernist prelate of the conciliar sect (and protégé of JPII)?


    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3162
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Magisterium Does Not Teach Canonizations are Infallible
    « Reply #226 on: August 30, 2018, 06:45:14 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • Isn't the whole point of this thread to accept JXXIII, PVI, JPI, JPII, BXVI, F as popes but none of them as saints, especially not Mr. Assisi JPII?

    To accomplish this you quote the testimony of a modernist prelate of the conciliar sect (and protégé of JPII)?

    Are you talking to PV, or to me?
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."


    Offline roscoe

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7670
    • Reputation: +645/-417
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Magisterium Does Not Teach Canonizations are Infallible
    « Reply #227 on: August 30, 2018, 07:01:12 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I continue to wonder why the above poster is allowed in this Forum at all given the Templar Avatar??

    Infallible Bulls of Pope Clem V re: Condemnation of Knights Templars

    Vox In Excelso
    Ad Providam
    Considerantes
    Nuper In Consillo
    Licet Dudem
    Licet Pridam
    Untitled-- 22 March 1312
    ------------ 1 December 1312
    ------------ 31 December 1312
    ------------ 13 January  1313

    :confused:
    There Is No Such Thing As 'Sede Vacantism'...
    nor is there such thing as a 'Feeneyite' or 'Feeneyism'

    Offline Struthio

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1650
    • Reputation: +454/-366
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Magisterium Does Not Teach Canonizations are Infallible
    « Reply #228 on: August 30, 2018, 07:06:16 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Are you talking to PV, or to me?

    To PV. I commented a quote of his.

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3162
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Magisterium Does Not Teach Canonizations are Infallible
    « Reply #229 on: August 30, 2018, 07:10:58 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I continue to wonder why the above poster is allowed in this Forum at all given the Templar Avatar??

    Infallible Bulls of Pope Clem V re: Condemnation of Knights Templars

    Vox In Excelso
    Ad Providam
    Considerantes
    Nuper In Consillo
    Licet Dudem
    Licet Pridam
    Untitled-- 22 March 1312
    ------------ 1 December 1312
    ------------ 31 December 1312
    ------------ 13 January  1313

    :confused:

    Roscoe-

    I’ll make a deal with you:

    If you can ascertain the identity of the Templar pictured in my avatar, and thereby determine when he lived, and therefore that he was in fact condemned, I will change it (ie., there were many a Templar who were never condemned).

    But hey, that attempt was better than another poor (sede) attempt to defend the indefensible, though no more successful.
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."


    Offline roscoe

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7670
    • Reputation: +645/-417
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Magisterium Does Not Teach Canonizations are Infallible
    « Reply #230 on: August 30, 2018, 07:25:04 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I am aware that some(not many) Templars were absolved. :cheers:
    There Is No Such Thing As 'Sede Vacantism'...
    nor is there such thing as a 'Feeneyite' or 'Feeneyism'

    Offline Struthio

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1650
    • Reputation: +454/-366
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Magisterium Does Not Teach Canonizations are Infallible
    « Reply #231 on: August 30, 2018, 07:27:04 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0

  • Offline roscoe

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7670
    • Reputation: +645/-417
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Magisterium Does Not Teach Canonizations are Infallible
    « Reply #232 on: August 30, 2018, 07:30:00 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • BTW Sean-- what IS the name of Templar in your Avatar?? :confused:
    There Is No Such Thing As 'Sede Vacantism'...
    nor is there such thing as a 'Feeneyite' or 'Feeneyism'


    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3162
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Magisterium Does Not Teach Canonizations are Infallible
    « Reply #233 on: August 30, 2018, 07:32:33 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • BTW Sean-- what IS the name of Templar in your Avatar?? :confused:

    Waylon Jennings.
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Cantarella

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7782
    • Reputation: +4579/-579
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Magisterium Does Not Teach Canonizations are Infallible
    « Reply #234 on: August 30, 2018, 11:42:23 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The CE under the entry of Infallibility:

    Quote
    In the Vatican definition infallibility (whether of the Church at large or of the pope) is affirmed only in regard to doctrines of faith or morals; but within the province of faith and morals its scope is not limited to doctrines that have been formally revealed. This, however, is clearly understood to be what theologians call the direct and primary object of infallible authority: it was for the maintenance and interpretation and legitimate development of Christ's teaching that the Church was endowed with this charisma. But if this primary function is to be adequately and effectively discharged, it is clear that there must also be indirect and secondary objects to which infallibility extends, namely, doctrines and facts which, although they cannot strictly speaking be said to be revealed, are nevertheless so intimately connected with revealed truths that, were one free to deny the former, he would logically deny the latter and thus defeat the primary purpose for which infallibility was promised by Christ to His Church. This principle is expressly affirmed by the Vatican Council when it says that "the Church, which, together with the Apostolic office of teaching received the command to guard the deposit of faith, possesses also by Divine authority (divinitus) the right to condemn science falsely so called, lest anyone should be cheated by philosophy and vain conceit (cf. Colossians 2:8)" (Denz., 1798, old no. 1845).

    Quote
    As regards matter, only doctrines of faith and morals, and facts so intimately connected with these as to require infallible determination, fall under the scope of infallible ecclesiastical teaching. These doctrines or facts need not necessarily be revealed; it is enough if the revealed deposit cannot be adequately and effectively guarded and explained, unless they are infallibly determined


    Not everything needs to be part of the Revelation in order to be infallible.
    If anyone says that true and natural water is not necessary for baptism and thus twists into some metaphor the words of our Lord Jesus Christ" Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit" (Jn 3:5) let him be anathema.

    Offline Cantarella

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7782
    • Reputation: +4579/-579
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Magisterium Does Not Teach Canonizations are Infallible
    « Reply #235 on: August 30, 2018, 11:46:27 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Right below that paragraph it reads:

    Quote
    (c) It is also commonly and rightly held that the Church is infallible in the canonization of saints, that is to say, when canonization takes place according to the solemn process that has been followed since the ninth century. Mere beatification, however, as distinguished from canonization, is not held to be infallible, and in canonization itself the only fact that is infallibly determined is that the soul of the canonized saint departed in the state of grace and already enjoys the beatific vision.
    If anyone says that true and natural water is not necessary for baptism and thus twists into some metaphor the words of our Lord Jesus Christ" Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit" (Jn 3:5) let him be anathema.


    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12116
    • Reputation: +7644/-2307
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Magisterium Does Not Teach Canonizations are Infallible
    « Reply #236 on: August 30, 2018, 11:52:09 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    Isn't the whole point of this thread to accept JXXIII, PVI, JPI, JPII, BXVI, F as popes but none of them as saints, especially not Mr. Assisi JPII?

    To accomplish this you quote the testimony of a modernist prelate of the conciliar sect (and protégé of JPII)?
    That's not my point, but it might be others'.  I like to view questions like these in isolation and as impartially as I can.  I'm not "married" to an agenda (i.e. Sede, R&R, etc).  I try to let the facts lead me to the truth.  I'm not saying I can be 100% impartial, but I try to be.  I think many will (hopefully) have the same approach, but there are surely those who do not (and it's readily apparent who they are).

    Further, we must distinguish between 1) a canonization simply saying that person X is in heaven, vs 2) person X is in heaven because of HEROIC VIRTUE.  As even the V2 prelates have pointed out, a canonization does not necessarily mean that the "saint" is perfect.  The meaning of "worthy of veneration" in the canonization declaration does not mean we have to personally approve of person X's life, their ideas, their choices.  It doesn't mean that they didn't sin from scandals, and it doesn't condone their many quasi-heretical actions.  It simply means we have to venerate them "being in heaven".  At the end of the day, can I, as a traditional catholic, agree that JPII and John XXIII are in heaven?  Sure, if the Church says so.  

    The standards of what a post-V2 "saint" is, in regards to veneration and (what used to be understood as) "sanctity" have been quite lowered, just like the process of investigation has been corrupted.  

    ---

    p.s. I find that quoting V2 prelates is a great way to prove a point.  If a V2 official says that the canonization of JPII means that he is simply "in heaven" and is not a commentary on his life, his actions or his virtue, then this proves that the conciliar church has watered-down the idea of canonization to the point where their meaning for it is different than in pre-V2 times.  Thus, the "bar has been lowered" so that a traditional catholic can "accept" such canonizations without hesitation because V2 has changed the meaning and purpose of the entire process...just like they've done with almost everything else.  

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12116
    • Reputation: +7644/-2307
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Magisterium Does Not Teach Canonizations are Infallible
    « Reply #237 on: August 30, 2018, 11:54:56 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • Quote
    (c) It is also commonly and rightly held that the Church is infallible in the canonization of saintsthat is to say, when canonization takes place according to the solemn process that has been followed since the ninth century.
    V2 doesn't follow the "solemn process used since the 9th century" so you're comparing apples to oranges.  V2 has "changed the rules" just like with everything else, which technically, they can (in this case).

    Offline Cantarella

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7782
    • Reputation: +4579/-579
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Magisterium Does Not Teach Canonizations are Infallible
    « Reply #238 on: August 30, 2018, 11:56:22 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • What don't you understand about the term "certain truth" and it's limited assent requirements?
    What don't you understand about the term "sententia communis"?

    What don't you understand about the difference between "sententia communis"/Certain Truths and "De fide" definitions?

    What don't you understand about the penalties for each different?

    You keep ignoring ALL these distinctions and you over-generalize your argument to heap heresy on one who questions/doubts a canonization.  You're either slow-witted or bad-willed.

    There is no need for such theological distinctions in this regard. It is very simple: if Francis is Pope, then JPII is in Heaven at least since the 27 of April of 2014, and we are bound to believe it however heartbreaking may seem. 

    We do not have to like it, but it is just the way it is.
    If anyone says that true and natural water is not necessary for baptism and thus twists into some metaphor the words of our Lord Jesus Christ" Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit" (Jn 3:5) let him be anathema.

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3162
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Magisterium Does Not Teach Canonizations are Infallible
    « Reply #239 on: August 31, 2018, 05:37:24 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • The CE under the entry of Infallibility:


    Not everything needs to be part of the Revelation in order to be infallible.

    Repeatedly refuted throughout this thread: The canonizations in question are not dogmatic facts.
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."