Author Topic: The Recusant - Issue 17 - June 2014  (Read 2979 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ecclesia Militans

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 984
  • Reputation: +14/-35

Offline peterp

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 202
  • Reputation: +0/-14
The Recusant - Issue 17 - June 2014
« Reply #1 on: June 02, 2014, 05:54:45 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: The Recusant
    Following up on the question of the recent so-called “canonisations,” please remember to ask yourself the following question. Has
    your local SSPX properly condemned them? Has he made it clear that John-Paul II and John XXIII are not saints, and why they can-not be Saints? If not, why not?

    We have heard much talk about the canoni-sations being “problematic”, and so forth. But what does that mean in real terms? Where does that leave us? Does that mean that you just don’t like them being canon-ised, even though you accept that they are so? Grumbling and hand-wringing aside, where is the simple message for the simple man? Are JPII and John XXIII Saints, yes or no?


    This is absolutely ridiculous.

    A saint is person in heaven. Canonization is the public declaration by the Church that a person is in heaven. The Church has NEVER declared anyone (not even Judas) not to be in heaven.

    How can the society do something that the Church thoughout her entire history has never dared do?  The Church reserves all judgment to God.





    Offline Centroamerica

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2557
    • Reputation: +1545/-428
    • Gender: Male
    The Recusant - Issue 17 - June 2014
    « Reply #2 on: June 02, 2014, 06:26:21 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: peterp


    This is absolutely ridiculous.

    A saint is person in heaven. Canonization is the public declaration by the Church that a person is in heaven. The Church has NEVER declared anyone (not even Judas) not to be in heaven.



    What about Martin Luther or Joseph Stalin?

    Why not canonize everyone, even Buddah, they you can pray to Buddah and claim that the Church never condemned him to hell.


    The logic of the Novus ordos behooves me..


    Go pray to Judas then.
    We conclude logically that religion can give an efficacious and truly realistic answer to the great modern problems only if it is a religion that is profoundly lived, not simply a superficial and cheap religion made up of some vocal prayers and some ceremonies...

    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 18173
    • Reputation: +8257/-638
    • Gender: Male
    The Recusant - Issue 17 - June 2014
    « Reply #3 on: June 02, 2014, 07:30:21 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Ecclesia Militans
    http://www.ecclesiamilitans.com/2014/06/01/the-recusant-issue-17-june-2014/


    Ahh!  Another refreshing voice from the wilderness.  The world would not be the same without TheRecusant, a most noble work!  Whataya say we have a peek at what the deluded Modernist petwerp is so worked up about?  Hmmm?


    .
    .
    .

    FROM THE DESK OF THE EDITOR:


    Dear Reader,

    Following up on the question of the recent so-called “canonisations,” please remember to ask yourself the following question(s):  Has your local SSPX properly condemned them?  Has he made it clear that John-Paul II and John XXIII are not saints, and why they cannot be Saints? If not, why not?

    We have heard much talk about the canonisations being “problematic”, and so forth.  But what does that mean in real terms?  Where does that leave us?  Does that mean that you just don’t like them being canonised, even though you accept that they are so?  Grumbling and hand-wringing aside, where is the simple message for the simple man?  Are JPII and John XXIII Saints, yes or no?

    And if, as it seems, this latest modernist abomination has come and gone with little more than a moan of discontent from “the world of Tradition,” is this not just one more rather significant ‘line-in-the-sand’ which has been crossed?  And if one fails to act whenever such a line is crossed, what was the point of drawing it in the first place?  Will there ever be a line drawn by “the good” priests and faithful (the ’internal resistance’) which will not simply be re-drawn elsewhere the moment it is crossed?  Are a couple of us correct in recalling that a certain District Superior, not so very long ago, indicated to us that these canonisations would for him be the line-in-the-sand?  And yet, that being so, how has he acted now that those ‘canonisations’ have taken place?  In what way is his situation different from the way it was, say, six months or a year ago?  Perhaps our memories are deceiving us.

    Either way, we can rest assured that this will not be the last, nor the nastiest insult to be hurled at God by the conciliar sect.  There will be more in due course.  And whilst it is possible to deceive most of the people most of the time, God will not allow there to be nobody left on earth as a witness.

    That is why a Catholic resistance exists, and will exist. Even if, in ten years time, you and I and all the priests we know between us had lost the Faith and lapsed (perish the thought!), there would still be a Resistance.  God would find someone and raise them up.  People may come and go, of that I have no doubt, but the Resistance is necessary and it is here to stay.  To the extent that it is about principles and not personalities, the future of the Resistance is secure.

    The start of this month of June marks the anniversary of many of us deciding to leave the SSPX, a decision which to this day we do not regret one bit.  Over the past year we have had some disappointments and some frustrations, but also a great many consolations.  Beyond that, one must try not to see the situation only in terms of tangible benefits received:  As Fr. Chazal points out elsewhere in this issue, there can be a time when we are called on to confess the Faith, for: “When the Catholic Faith is attacked there is no other remedy than confessing it.”

    And furthermore, that “...those who burn out gradually lose the sense of the confession of the Faith.” There is a great danger in allowing oneself to lose the Faith slowly, by degrees. Therefore, if we have one thing above all to be grateful for to Our Lord, it is that He allows us to confess His Integral Truth, and by doing so, prevent ourselves from succumbing to the slow process of spiritual lobotomy which is affecting so many erstwhile colleagues.


    It was probably the "spiritual lobotomy" part, because it strikes too close to home.  What other than spiritual lobotomy could be the precursor to this kind of talk? :  "This is absolutely ridiculous... The Church has NEVER declared anyone (not even Judas) not to be in heaven."  Yes, petwerp, absolutely.

    I've told Modernists this very thing many times:  You have 12 decent and holy Apostles to choose from, 13 if you count THE Apostle, and you choose whom?  Judas Iscariot?  That speaks volumes.


    .
    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.

    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 18173
    • Reputation: +8257/-638
    • Gender: Male
    The Recusant - Issue 17 - June 2014
    « Reply #4 on: June 02, 2014, 07:41:01 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • .

    FYI there have been many exorcisms where one of the demons that possessed a person upon divulging his name, said (the only time a devil can be believed, when under the power of Jesus to speak the truth in the process of exorcism) that his name is Judas Iscariot.

    Maybe you need an exorcist, petwerp.


    .
    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.


    Offline peterp

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 202
    • Reputation: +0/-14
    The Recusant - Issue 17 - June 2014
    « Reply #5 on: June 05, 2014, 06:01:34 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Centroamerica
    Quote from: peterp


    This is absolutely ridiculous.

    A saint is person in heaven. Canonization is the public declaration by the Church that a person is in heaven. The Church has NEVER declared anyone (not even Judas) not to be in heaven.



    What about Martin Luther or Joseph Stalin?

    Why not canonize everyone, even Buddah, they you can pray to Buddah and claim that the Church never condemned him to hell.


    The logic of the Novus ordos behooves me..


    Go pray to Judas then.


    Centroamerica, please point me to one declaration by the Catholic Church that person X is not in heaven. Just one from anytime during her 2000 year history.

    And if you cannot (which you can't so don't bother wasting your time) explain why the SSPX is now expect to do something the Church herself has never done.


    Offline Mithrandylan

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3560
    • Reputation: +4170/-322
    • Gender: Male
      • The Trad Forum
    The Recusant - Issue 17 - June 2014
    « Reply #6 on: June 05, 2014, 06:06:43 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: peterp
    Quote from: The Recusant
    Following up on the question of the recent so-called “canonisations,” please remember to ask yourself the following question. Has
    your local SSPX properly condemned them? Has he made it clear that John-Paul II and John XXIII are not saints, and why they can-not be Saints? If not, why not?

    We have heard much talk about the canoni-sations being “problematic”, and so forth. But what does that mean in real terms? Where does that leave us? Does that mean that you just don’t like them being canon-ised, even though you accept that they are so? Grumbling and hand-wringing aside, where is the simple message for the simple man? Are JPII and John XXIII Saints, yes or no?


    This is absolutely ridiculous.

    A saint is person in heaven. Canonization is the public declaration by the Church that a person is in heaven. The Church has NEVER declared anyone (not even Judas) not to be in heaven.

    How can the society do something that the Church thoughout her entire history has never dared do?  The Church reserves all judgment to God.





    It's pretty obvious that Judas is in Hell from Christ's words.  Unless it would be better to not have been born than to be in Heaven?
    More Catholic Discussion: http://thetradforum.com

    Offline shin

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1489
    • Reputation: +753/-3
    • Gender: Male
    The Recusant - Issue 17 - June 2014
    « Reply #7 on: June 05, 2014, 06:40:18 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 'But if our Lord do a new thing, that the earth opening her mouth swallow them down, & all things that pertain to them, and they descend quick into Hell, you shall know that they have blasphemed our Lord. '

    Numbers 16:30

    'As Sodom and Gomorrha, and the neighbouring cities, in like manner, having given themselves to fornication, and unnatural vice, were made an example, suffering the punishment of eternal fire.'

    Jude 7

    'And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom. And the rich man also died: and he was buried in hell. And lifting up his eyes when he was in torments, he saw Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom: And he cried, and said: Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, to cool my tongue: for I am tormented in this flame. And Abraham said to him: Son, remember that thou didst receive good things in thy lifetime, and likewise Lazareth evil things, but now he is comforted; and thou art tormented.

    And besides all this, between us and you, there is fixed a great chaos: so that they who would pass from hence to you, cannot, nor from thence come hither.'

    Luke 16:22-26

    'Penance Proved To Be A Virtue

    That this inward penance is, as we have already said, a virtue, the various commands which have been given regarding it clearly show; for the law commands only those actions that are virtuous.

    Furthermore, no one can deny that it is a virtue to be sorrowful at the time, in the manner, and to the extent which are required. To regulate sorrow in this manner belongs to the virtue of penance. Some conceive a sorrow which bears no proportion to their crimes. Nay, there are some, says Solomon, who are glad when they have done evil. Others, on the contrary, give themselves to such melancholy and grief, as utterly to abandon all hope of salvation. Such, perhaps, was the condition of Cain when he exclaimed: My iniquity is greater than that I may deserve pardon. Such certainly was the condition of Judas, who, repenting, hanged himself, and thus lost soul and body. Penance, therefore, considered as a virtue, assists us in restraining within the bounds of moderation our sense of sorrow.'

    The Catechism of the Council of Trent (Roman Catechism)

    'The Pope, St. Leo the Great, says that the thieves were crucified, one on either side of Him, so that in the very appearance of the scene of His suffering there might be set forth that distinction which should be made in the judgment of each one of us. St. Augustine has the same thought. "The cross itself," he says, " was a tribunal. In the centre was the judge. To the one side a man who believed and was set free, to the other side a scoffer and he was condemned." Already there was made clear the final fate of the living and the dead, the one class placed at His right, the other on His left.'
    St. Thomas Aquinas


    'Poor Judas! Above seventeen hundred years have elapsed since he has been in Hell, and his Hell is still only beginning.'

    St. Alphonsus Maria de Liguori, Doctor of the Church

    'Three sects take their origin from Valentine. . . The second sect were called Cainites : These venerated as saints all those who the Scripture tells us were damned -- as Cain, Core, the inhabitants of Sodom, and especially Judas Iscariot.'

    St. Alphonsus Maria de Liguori, 'History of Heresies'

    . . . 100 + Quotations on Hell.
    Sincerely,

    Shin

    'Flores apparuerunt in terra nostra. . . Fulcite me floribus.' (The flowers appear on the earth. . . stay me up with flowers. Sg 2:12,5)'-


    Offline Magna opera Domini

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 107
    • Reputation: +261/-10
    • Gender: Male
    The Recusant - Issue 17 - June 2014
    « Reply #8 on: June 05, 2014, 08:07:57 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Good work, shin!

    Offline MarylandTrad

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 201
    • Reputation: +216/-49
    • Gender: Male
    The Recusant - Issue 17 - June 2014
    « Reply #9 on: June 05, 2014, 08:33:36 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: shin
    'But if our Lord do a new thing, that the earth opening her mouth swallow them down, & all things that pertain to them, and they descend quick into Hell, you shall know that they have blasphemed our Lord. '

    Numbers 16:30

    'As Sodom and Gomorrha, and the neighbouring cities, in like manner, having given themselves to fornication, and unnatural vice, were made an example, suffering the punishment of eternal fire.'

    Jude 7

    'And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom. And the rich man also died: and he was buried in hell. And lifting up his eyes when he was in torments, he saw Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom: And he cried, and said: Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, to cool my tongue: for I am tormented in this flame. And Abraham said to him: Son, remember that thou didst receive good things in thy lifetime, and likewise Lazareth evil things, but now he is comforted; and thou art tormented.

    And besides all this, between us and you, there is fixed a great chaos: so that they who would pass from hence to you, cannot, nor from thence come hither.'

    Luke 16:22-26

    'Penance Proved To Be A Virtue

    That this inward penance is, as we have already said, a virtue, the various commands which have been given regarding it clearly show; for the law commands only those actions that are virtuous.

    Furthermore, no one can deny that it is a virtue to be sorrowful at the time, in the manner, and to the extent which are required. To regulate sorrow in this manner belongs to the virtue of penance. Some conceive a sorrow which bears no proportion to their crimes. Nay, there are some, says Solomon, who are glad when they have done evil. Others, on the contrary, give themselves to such melancholy and grief, as utterly to abandon all hope of salvation. Such, perhaps, was the condition of Cain when he exclaimed: My iniquity is greater than that I may deserve pardon. Such certainly was the condition of Judas, who, repenting, hanged himself, and thus lost soul and body. Penance, therefore, considered as a virtue, assists us in restraining within the bounds of moderation our sense of sorrow.'

    The Catechism of the Council of Trent (Roman Catechism)

    'The cross itself, was a tribunal. In the centre was the judge. To the one side a man who believed and was set free, to the other side a scoffer and he was condemned.'

    Pope St. Leo the Great

    'Poor Judas! Above seventeen hundred years have elapsed since he has been in Hell, and his Hell is still only beginning.'

    St. Alphonsus Maria de Liguori, Doctor of the Church

    'Three sects take their origin from Valentine. . . The second sect were called Cainites : These venerated as saints all those who the Scripture tells us were damned -- as Cain, Core, the inhabitants of Sodom, and especially Judas Iscariot.'

    St. Alphonsus Maria de Liguori, 'History of Heresies'

    . . . 100 + Quotations on Hell.


    Nice post. Is amazing how bold the wicked are who claim we can't know if anyone is in hell.

    Numbers 16:30 is interesting. I have seen many news reports in the last year of sinkholes taking people down.
    "The Blessed Eucharist means nothing to a man who thinks other people can get along without It. The Blessed Eucharist means nothing to a communicant who thinks he needs It but someone else does not. The Blessed Eucharist means nothing to a communicant who offers others any charity ahead of this Charity of the Bread of Life." -Fr. Leonard Feeney, Bread of Life

    Offline peterp

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 202
    • Reputation: +0/-14
    The Recusant - Issue 17 - June 2014
    « Reply #10 on: June 05, 2014, 09:48:40 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Mithrandylan
    Quote from: peterp
    Quote from: The Recusant
    Following up on the question of the recent so-called “canonisations,” please remember to ask yourself the following question. Has
    your local SSPX properly condemned them? Has he made it clear that John-Paul II and John XXIII are not saints, and why they can-not be Saints? If not, why not?

    We have heard much talk about the canoni-sations being “problematic”, and so forth. But what does that mean in real terms? Where does that leave us? Does that mean that you just don’t like them being canon-ised, even though you accept that they are so? Grumbling and hand-wringing aside, where is the simple message for the simple man? Are JPII and John XXIII Saints, yes or no?


    This is absolutely ridiculous.

    A saint is person in heaven. Canonization is the public declaration by the Church that a person is in heaven. The Church has NEVER declared anyone (not even Judas) not to be in heaven.

    How can the society do something that the Church thoughout her entire history has never dared do?  The Church reserves all judgment to God.





    It's pretty obvious that Judas is in Hell from Christ's words.  Unless it would be better to not have been born than to be in Heaven?

    It may be obvious or deduced from biblical passage but that is irrelavent. The Church does not go around declaring people not to be in heaven.


    Offline peterp

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 202
    • Reputation: +0/-14
    The Recusant - Issue 17 - June 2014
    « Reply #11 on: June 05, 2014, 09:50:38 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: shin
    'But if our Lord do a new thing, that the earth opening her mouth swallow them down, & all things that pertain to them, and they descend quick into Hell, you shall know that they have blasphemed our Lord. '

    Numbers 16:30

    'As Sodom and Gomorrha, and the neighbouring cities, in like manner, having given themselves to fornication, and unnatural vice, were made an example, suffering the punishment of eternal fire.'

    Jude 7

    'And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom. And the rich man also died: and he was buried in hell. And lifting up his eyes when he was in torments, he saw Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom: And he cried, and said: Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, to cool my tongue: for I am tormented in this flame. And Abraham said to him: Son, remember that thou didst receive good things in thy lifetime, and likewise Lazareth evil things, but now he is comforted; and thou art tormented.

    And besides all this, between us and you, there is fixed a great chaos: so that they who would pass from hence to you, cannot, nor from thence come hither.'

    Luke 16:22-26

    'Penance Proved To Be A Virtue

    That this inward penance is, as we have already said, a virtue, the various commands which have been given regarding it clearly show; for the law commands only those actions that are virtuous.

    Furthermore, no one can deny that it is a virtue to be sorrowful at the time, in the manner, and to the extent which are required. To regulate sorrow in this manner belongs to the virtue of penance. Some conceive a sorrow which bears no proportion to their crimes. Nay, there are some, says Solomon, who are glad when they have done evil. Others, on the contrary, give themselves to such melancholy and grief, as utterly to abandon all hope of salvation. Such, perhaps, was the condition of Cain when he exclaimed: My iniquity is greater than that I may deserve pardon. Such certainly was the condition of Judas, who, repenting, hanged himself, and thus lost soul and body. Penance, therefore, considered as a virtue, assists us in restraining within the bounds of moderation our sense of sorrow.'

    The Catechism of the Council of Trent (Roman Catechism)

    'The cross itself, was a tribunal. In the centre was the judge. To the one side a man who believed and was set free, to the other side a scoffer and he was condemned.'

    Pope St. Leo the Great

    'Poor Judas! Above seventeen hundred years have elapsed since he has been in Hell, and his Hell is still only beginning.'

    St. Alphonsus Maria de Liguori, Doctor of the Church

    'Three sects take their origin from Valentine. . . The second sect were called Cainites : These venerated as saints all those who the Scripture tells us were damned -- as Cain, Core, the inhabitants of Sodom, and especially Judas Iscariot.'

    St. Alphonsus Maria de Liguori, 'History of Heresies'

    . . . 100 + Quotations on Hell.


    Shin, nice try but none of these quotes show the Church making a declaration that someone is not in heaven.

    Offline shin

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1489
    • Reputation: +753/-3
    • Gender: Male
    The Recusant - Issue 17 - June 2014
    « Reply #12 on: June 05, 2014, 10:05:28 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • So you don't consider the declarations of the Catechism of the Council of Trent, bishops, Holy Scripture, etc. declarations of the Church?

    Actually I must correct an apparent error with the Pope St. Leo the Great quote, forgive me, this is the quote of St. Thomas Aquinas, referring to him and St. Augustine:

    'The Pope, St. Leo the Great, says that the thieves were crucified, one on either side of Him, so that in the very appearance of the scene of His suffering there might be set forth that distinction which should be made in the judgment of each one of us. St. Augustine has the same thought. "The cross itself," he says, " was a tribunal. In the centre was the judge. To the one side a man who believed and was set free, to the other side a scoffer and he was condemned." Already there was made clear the final fate of the living and the dead, the one class placed at His right, the other on His left.'
    Sincerely,

    Shin

    'Flores apparuerunt in terra nostra. . . Fulcite me floribus.' (The flowers appear on the earth. . . stay me up with flowers. Sg 2:12,5)'-

    Offline peterp

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 202
    • Reputation: +0/-14
    The Recusant - Issue 17 - June 2014
    « Reply #13 on: June 05, 2014, 10:28:52 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: shin
    So you don't consider the declarations of the Catechism of the Council of Trent, bishops, Holy Scripture, etc. declarations of the Church?

    Actually I must correct an apparent error with the Pope St. Leo the Great quote, forgive me, this is the quote of St. Thomas Aquinas, referring to him and St. Augustine:

    'The Pope, St. Leo the Great, says that the thieves were crucified, one on either side of Him, so that in the very appearance of the scene of His suffering there might be set forth that distinction which should be made in the judgment of each one of us. St. Augustine has the same thought. "The cross itself," he says, " was a tribunal. In the centre was the judge. To the one side a man who believed and was set free, to the other side a scoffer and he was condemned." Already there was made clear the final fate of the living and the dead, the one class placed at His right, the other on His left.'


    No, not in the sense that The Recusant is demanding from the SSPX leadership. The Church authorites have never done this, so why expect this of the society.

    It may be that it can be deduced from biblical passage(s), and, I think, all your non-scripture references are biblical glosses by their authors. Even your Catechism of the Council of Trent quote carries a reference to a footnote: Matt 27:3.

    You (and Mithrandylan) could argue that it is so obvious that no declaration is needed, fair enough, but it doesn't alter the fact that there hasn't been one.

    Offline Mithrandylan

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3560
    • Reputation: +4170/-322
    • Gender: Male
      • The Trad Forum
    The Recusant - Issue 17 - June 2014
    « Reply #14 on: June 05, 2014, 11:33:44 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: peterp
    Quote from: Mithrandylan
    Quote from: peterp
    Quote from: The Recusant
    Following up on the question of the recent so-called “canonisations,” please remember to ask yourself the following question. Has
    your local SSPX properly condemned them? Has he made it clear that John-Paul II and John XXIII are not saints, and why they can-not be Saints? If not, why not?

    We have heard much talk about the canoni-sations being “problematic”, and so forth. But what does that mean in real terms? Where does that leave us? Does that mean that you just don’t like them being canon-ised, even though you accept that they are so? Grumbling and hand-wringing aside, where is the simple message for the simple man? Are JPII and John XXIII Saints, yes or no?


    This is absolutely ridiculous.

    A saint is person in heaven. Canonization is the public declaration by the Church that a person is in heaven. The Church has NEVER declared anyone (not even Judas) not to be in heaven.

    How can the society do something that the Church thoughout her entire history has never dared do?  The Church reserves all judgment to God.





    It's pretty obvious that Judas is in Hell from Christ's words.  Unless it would be better to not have been born than to be in Heaven?

    It may be obvious or deduced from biblical passage but that is irrelavent. The Church does not go around declaring people not to be in heaven.


    You do realize that the Church composed the canons of scripture, yes?  And infallibly so, yes?  That there were more books for consideration than the canon we have been passed down on, and that the Holy Ghost guided the Church in infallibly composing the scriptures, which are in turn infallibly true?  Her approval of the scriptures IS declaring everything within them to be true, especially (not to imply that any of scripture is untrue, of course) the words of Christ Himself!

    And you're a bit off the mark with canonizations, too.  A canonization is more than merely a declaration that N. is in Heaven, it is a prescription to venerate them.  Have you read the text of the canonization formula used to canonize JPII and JXXIII?  That's not a rhetorical question, please answer.
    More Catholic Discussion: http://thetradforum.com

     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16