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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9

Author Topic: +Vigano Equates Vatican II with False Council of Pistoia  (Read 8002 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline forlorn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2529
  • Reputation: +1041/-1108
  • Gender: Male
Re: +Vigano Equates Vatican II with False Council of Pistoia
« Reply #105 on: September 25, 2020, 09:18:52 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Struthio on September 25, 2020, 09:07:14 PM
    Why not go through Trent line by line, to find out whether there are inner contradictions or contradictions against earlier Church teaching? Paul IV did warn: false shepherds ahead!

    Because:
    Quote
    CANON 1323 § 1. All of those things are to be believed with a divine and catholic faith that are contained in the written word of God or in tradition and that the Church proposes as worthy of belief, as divinely revealed, whether by solemn judgment or by its ordinary and universal magisterium. § 2. It belongs to an Ecuмenical Council or to the Roman Pontiff speaking from the chair to pronounce solemnly this sort of judgment. § 3. A thing is not understood as dogmatically defined or declared unless this is manifestly established.

    Rejecting an Ecuмenical Council, in whole or in part, is a rejection of the Catholic faith. I mean sure, if you want to validate your faith in Catholicism by verifying that no contradictions exist, then go ahead. But you can't start talking about rejecting ecuмenical councils, in whole or in part, and call yourself a Catholic.

    I'm not making an argument against sedevacantism here. Arguing that Vatican 2 isn't an Ecuмenical Council in the first place is a whole different story. But you said that even knowing a true pope approved the Council of Trent, that a Catholic must go through it and determine for himself that it's consistent with Catholic dogma to accept it. That's nonsense. If the pope approves of an Ecuмenical Council, it's an Ecuмenical Council and any dogma that it defines is infallible. No need to second-check on the pope's behalf.
    Logged

    Offline Struthio

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1650
    • Reputation: +454/-366
    • Gender: Male
    Re: +Vigano Equates Vatican II with False Council of Pistoia
    « Reply #106 on: September 25, 2020, 09:19:52 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: forlorn on September 25, 2020, 08:56:56 PM
    You and Sean should get in touch sometimes. You're both two sides of the same coin. Whenever he can't defend his position, he screams about sedevacantism. Whenever you can't defend yourself, you scream about "Jorge".

    It doesn't matter that I quoted you regarding Trent, to which the V2 popes are completely irrelevant. You still resort to your usual way of dodging an argument regardless.

    I didn't dodge your command to abstain from private judgment. I just returned it to you.
    Logged

    Offline Struthio

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1650
    • Reputation: +454/-366
    • Gender: Male
    Re: +Vigano Equates Vatican II with False Council of Pistoia
    « Reply #107 on: September 25, 2020, 09:28:21 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: forlorn on September 25, 2020, 09:18:52 PM
    Rejecting an Ecuмenical Council, in whole or in part, is a rejection of the Catholic faith. I mean sure, if you want to validate your faith in Catholicism by verifying that no contradictions exist, then go ahead. But you can't start talking about rejecting ecuмenical councils, in whole or in part, and call yourself a Catholic.

    I don't reject any general Council of the Church. I reject the heresies of those false apostles of that 1960s robber council.

    And I do this based on using my own upper storey, that the robber council contradicts infallible Church teaching. As an aside: Ratzinger, Schillebeeckx and more of those heretics openly admitted the contradictions ("french revolution of the Church", "antisyllabus", "non catholics now can be saved ", ...)

    But: my using of my own upper storey is based on the Church's rule of faith. It's not private judgment. It's judgment based on the Church's rule of faith.
    Logged

    Offline DecemRationis

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 2359
    • Reputation: +885/-147
    • Gender: Male
    Re: +Vigano Equates Vatican II with False Council of Pistoia
    « Reply #108 on: September 25, 2020, 09:29:18 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: forlorn on September 25, 2020, 09:10:16 PM
    I don't, and clearly you haven't read the argument at all, because I never brought up "interpreting dogma" at all.

    You don't have a Magisterium?

    Please tell us how you reached that judgment?
    Logged
    Rom. 3:25 Whom God hath proposed to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to the shewing of his justice, for the remission of former sins" 

    Apoc 17:17 For God hath given into their hearts to do that which pleaseth him: that they give their kingdom to the beast, till the words of God be fulfilled.

    Offline forlorn

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2529
    • Reputation: +1041/-1108
    • Gender: Male
    Re: +Vigano Equates Vatican II with False Council of Pistoia
    « Reply #109 on: September 25, 2020, 09:33:06 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Struthio on September 25, 2020, 09:28:21 PM
    I don't reject any general Council of the Church. I reject the heresies of those false apostles of that 1960s robber council.

    And I do this based on using my own upper storey, that the robber council contradicts infallible Church teaching. As an aside: Ratzinger, Schillebeeckx and more of those heretics openly admitted the contradictions ("french revolution of the Church", "antisyllabus", "non catholics now can be saved ", ...)

    But: my using of my own upper storey is based on the Church's rule of faith. It's not private judgment. It's judgment based on the Church's rule of faith.
    Once again, I quoted you regarding TRENT and I specifically said I'm not talking about Vatican 2. You said that a Catholic, even knowing that Trent was approved by a pope, has to look through Trent and confirm the dogma defined therein don't contradict previously defined dogma. That is wrong. Once you accept that a council is a true Ecuмenical Council, i.e you accept it was approved by a true pope, then you MUST accept everything it teaches.
    Logged

    Offline forlorn

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2529
    • Reputation: +1041/-1108
    • Gender: Male
    Re: +Vigano Equates Vatican II with False Council of Pistoia
    « Reply #110 on: September 25, 2020, 09:35:04 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: DecemRationis on September 25, 2020, 09:29:18 PM
    You don't have a Magisterium?

    Please tell us how you reached that judgment?
    You implied I was a sedeplenist in some weird and irrelevant ad hominem attack. I am not. Stop trying to turn an argument about Trent into an argument about Vatican 2. It's blindingly obvious you haven't actually read the argument. 
    Logged

    Offline DecemRationis

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 2359
    • Reputation: +885/-147
    • Gender: Male
    Re: +Vigano Equates Vatican II with False Council of Pistoia
    « Reply #111 on: September 25, 2020, 09:37:08 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: forlorn on September 25, 2020, 09:35:04 PM
    You implied I was a sedeplenist in some weird and irrelevant ad hominem attack. I am not. Stop trying to turn an argument about Trent into an argument about Vatican 2. It's blindingly obvious you haven't actually read the argument.

    You're accusing Struthio of private judgment. My question is very relevant and not weird or ad hominem at all. Stop being evasive.

    How, pray tell, did you come to the conclusion you do not have a Magisterium today?
    Logged
    Rom. 3:25 Whom God hath proposed to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to the shewing of his justice, for the remission of former sins" 

    Apoc 17:17 For God hath given into their hearts to do that which pleaseth him: that they give their kingdom to the beast, till the words of God be fulfilled.

    Offline Struthio

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1650
    • Reputation: +454/-366
    • Gender: Male
    Re: +Vigano Equates Vatican II with False Council of Pistoia
    « Reply #112 on: September 25, 2020, 09:37:23 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: forlorn on September 25, 2020, 09:33:06 PM
    Once again, I quoted you regarding TRENT and I specifically said I'm not talking about Vatican 2. You said that a Catholic, even knowing that Trent was approved by a pope, has to look through Trent and confirm the dogma defined therein don't contradict previously defined dogma. That is wrong. Once you accept that a council is a true Ecuмenical Council, i.e that you accept it was approved by a true pope, then you MUST accept everything it teaches.

    History teaches: you better read it line by line before accepting it as a true Ecuмenical Council.
    Logged

    Offline forlorn

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2529
    • Reputation: +1041/-1108
    • Gender: Male
    Re: +Vigano Equates Vatican II with False Council of Pistoia
    « Reply #113 on: September 25, 2020, 09:47:30 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: DecemRationis on September 25, 2020, 09:37:08 PM
    You're accusing Struthio of private judgment. My question is very relevant and not weird or ad hominem at all. Stop being evasive.

    How, pray tell, did you come to the conclusion you do not have a Magisterium today?
    Private judgment refers to the concept of picking and choosing one's own dogma based on their own interpretations, rather than accepting the dogma of the Church. Not really relevant to the question of finding where the Church is in the first place. If you want to get into an argument about sedevacantism, go ahead and make a thread, but I'm not about to go off on another huge detour here.

    Do you or do you not agree that if a true pope(let's assume we know this with certainty) approves an Ecuмenical Council, that all the dogma defined by that Council are infallibly true?
    Logged

    Offline DecemRationis

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 2359
    • Reputation: +885/-147
    • Gender: Male
    Re: +Vigano Equates Vatican II with False Council of Pistoia
    « Reply #114 on: September 25, 2020, 09:59:34 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: forlorn on September 25, 2020, 09:47:30 PM
    Private judgment refers to the concept of picking and choosing one's own dogma based on their own interpretations, rather than accepting the dogma of the Church. Not really relevant to the question of finding where the Church is in the first place. If you want to get into an argument about sedevacantism, go ahead and make a thread, but I'm not about to go off on another huge detour here.

    Do you or do you not agree that if a true pope(let's assume we know this with certainty) approves an Ecuмenical Council, that all the dogma defined by that Council are infallibly true?

    No, forlorn. Private judgment refers to substituting your judgment for that of the Magisterium, of placing your authority above that of the Magisterium in any and all instances where the Magisterium should be decisive and controlling.

    Like many, both Sedes and R & R, you hurl the accusation "private judgment" when it suits you. Most of them do it with a huge beam of "private judgment" in their eye, and I suspect you do too, and am testing the suspicion.

    So, since you don't like my direct question "how did you decide you don't have a Magisterium?," I'll rephrase it in a way that you seem to be more comfortable with: how did you "find" that the hierarchy of the Conciliar Church is not "where the Church is"?

    Unfortunately for you, this is not a "detour." It's an arrow pointed at your heart.  

    You'll likely dodge again and that will be as good as a direct answer.

    Go ahead.
    Logged
    Rom. 3:25 Whom God hath proposed to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to the shewing of his justice, for the remission of former sins" 

    Apoc 17:17 For God hath given into their hearts to do that which pleaseth him: that they give their kingdom to the beast, till the words of God be fulfilled.

    Offline forlorn

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2529
    • Reputation: +1041/-1108
    • Gender: Male
    Re: +Vigano Equates Vatican II with False Council of Pistoia
    « Reply #115 on: September 25, 2020, 10:07:09 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: DecemRationis on September 25, 2020, 09:59:34 PM
    No, forlorn. Private judgment refers to substituting your judgment for that of the Magisterium, of placing your authority above that of the Magisterium in any and all instances where the Magisterium should be decisive and controlling.
    Which is exactly what Struthio did, subjecting Trent to his private judgement. As you'd know if you actually read the argument instead of rushing in to make some half-hearted insult about "doctrinal interpretation", when I never mentioned or alluded to that concept at all.

    Now you want to run off on some tangent about sedevacantism because it's easier for you to play sidekick by changing the subject than it is by defending what Struthio actually said, since it's completely indefensible.

    Quote from: DecemRationis on September 25, 2020, 09:59:34 PM
    So, since you don't like my direct question "how did you decide you don't have a Magisterium?," I'll rephrase it in a way that you seem to be more comfortable with: how did you "find" that the hierarchy of the Conciliar Church is not "where the Church is"?

    Unfortunately for you, this is not a "detour." It's an arrow pointed at your heart.  

    You'll likely dodge again and that will be as good as a direct answer.

    Go ahead.
    We've been through this before. The question of where the Church is is entirely different to the question of whether or not the Church has authority to teach dogmatically, and it(the former) is one I don't claim to know the answer to. Yes, one has to use their private judgement to find the Church in the first place, and yes the presumption in normal times is that the man who everyone says is the pope, is indeed the pope. We could argue for hours about why he is or he isn't and the theological implications of that.

    But none of that defends the proposition that one does not have to accept the dogma of an Ecuмenical Council by a true pope. Whether I'm right or wrong re: the pope is completely irrelevant to this discussion(regarding Trent, which we all agree had a true pope). So I ask, yet again, do you or do you not agree that if a true pope(let's assume we know this with certainty) approves an Ecuмenical Council, that all the dogma defined by that Council are infallibly true?
    Logged

    Offline Clemens Maria

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2246
    • Reputation: +1485/-605
    • Gender: Male
    Re: +Vigano Equates Vatican II with False Council of Pistoia
    « Reply #116 on: September 25, 2020, 10:15:00 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: forlorn on September 25, 2020, 09:47:30 PM
    Private judgment refers to the concept of picking and choosing one's own dogma based on their own interpretations, rather than accepting the dogma of the Church. Not really relevant to the question of finding where the Church is in the first place. If you want to get into an argument about sedevacantism, go ahead and make a thread, but I'm not about to go off on another huge detour here.

    Do you or do you not agree that if a true pope(let's assume we know this with certainty) approves an Ecuмenical Council, that all the dogma defined by that Council are infallibly true?

    You are correct.  Once we have moral certainty that we have correctly identified the Roman Pontiff and the hierarchy in communion with him, we have only to give our assent to their teachings.  But I think Struthio’s concern has to do with how we could legitimately come to the conclusion that we have been following a false pope.  How can we justify a refusal of assent to the teachings of a man who we believed to be a true pope?  We would have to be allowed (or at least well-trained clergy would have to be allowed) to make assessments about fidelity to the traditional doctrines of the Church.  That could also include non-theological evidence such as evidence of membership in forbidden societies, etc.  Those kind of assessments ought to be done carefully because getting it wrong could cost you your soul.  But nevertheless cuм Ex Apostolatus implies those kind of assessments are permitted (assuming they are well-founded and not rash).
    Logged

    Offline Struthio

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1650
    • Reputation: +454/-366
    • Gender: Male
    Re: +Vigano Equates Vatican II with False Council of Pistoia
    « Reply #117 on: September 25, 2020, 10:20:42 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Clemens Maria on September 25, 2020, 10:15:00 PM
    Those kind of assessments ought to be done carefully because getting it wrong could cost you your soul.

    Omitting such kind of assessments ought to be done carefully, too, because getting it wrong could cost you your soul, too.

    But I plead: evidence of membership in forbidden societies is secondary, more to the point is manifest heresy.
    Logged

    Offline DecemRationis

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 2359
    • Reputation: +885/-147
    • Gender: Male
    Re: +Vigano Equates Vatican II with False Council of Pistoia
    « Reply #118 on: September 25, 2020, 10:36:35 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: forlorn on September 25, 2020, 10:07:09 PM
    Which is exactly what Struthio did, subjecting Trent to his private judgement. As you'd know if you actually read the argument instead of rushing in to make some half-hearted insult about "doctrinal interpretation", when I never mentioned or alluded to that concept at all.

    Now you want to run off on some tangent about sedevacantism because it's easier for you to play sidekick by changing the subject than it is by defending what Struthio actually said, since it's completely indefensible.
    We've been through this before. The question of where the Church is is entirely different to the question of whether or not the Church has authority to teach dogmatically, and it(the former) is one I don't claim to know the answer to. Yes, one has to use their private judgement to find the Church in the first place, and yes the presumption in normal times is that the man who everyone says is the pope, is indeed the pope. We could argue for hours about why he is or he isn't and the theological implications of that.

    But none of that defends the proposition that one does not have to accept the dogma of an Ecuмenical Council by a true pope. Whether I'm right or wrong re: the pope is completely irrelevant to this discussion(regarding Trent, which we all agree had a true pope). So I ask, yet again, do you or do you not agree that if a true pope(let's assume we know this with certainty) approves an Ecuмenical Council, that all the dogma defined by that Council are infallibly true?

    Forlorn,


    Quote
    Yes, one has to use their private judgement to find the Church in the first place . . .

    Very good. Thank you.


    Quote
    But none of that defends the proposition that one does not have to accept the dogma of an Ecuмenical Council by a true pope. Whether I'm right or wrong re: the pope is completely irrelevant to this discussion(regarding Trent, which we all agree had a true pope). So I ask, yet again, do you or do you not agree that if a true pope(let's assume we know this with certainty) approves an Ecuмenical Council, that all the dogma defined by that Council are infallibly true?


    You're standing on a circle and you don't see it.

    Let's concede that one has to accept the dogma of an Ecuмenical Council by a true pope. Paul VI certainly appeared to be a true pope, and was recognized as such. He continued the V2 council of John XXIII, and confirmed most of its decrees. According to you, the game should have been over then, and any true Catholic, not exercising "private judgment," should have accepted the teaching of V2.

    But it was the false and erroneous teaching of V2 which prompted and prompts (at least in part) most Trads, both Sede and R & R, to conclude that Paul VI was not a true pope. The decrees of the V2 council were necessarily weighed in reaching that judgment. Yet that is improper "private judgment" according to you.

    How was it determined that Paul VI was not a true pope? Did that determination occur before or after he approved the decrees of the V2 ecuмenical council? If after, why were they not accepted to avoid "private judgment"?

    Apparently the whole Trad movement rests upon "private judgment" by your lights. You should regard Struthio therefore in very good company.

    And yes, I noticed your use of the word "dogma." Your limitation is no good. This concerns the indefectibility of the Church, the possibility of an ecuмenical council approved by the pope teaching error to the Church. Whether it is formulating dogma is irrelevant to its coming from the "loving Mother" that is "spotless" in her teaching and discipline (Pius XII, Mystici Corporis). And you know this from your argument with Sean Johnson.

    A  "true pope" is known by the soundness of his teaching, it's conformity with Tradition and previously defined dogma, it's conformity with the rule of faith. A false pope is often only known by his departure from it - Paul VI, JPII, BXVI, Francis.

    If that were not the case, there would be no foundation or legitimate basis for the Trad movement.  
    Logged
    Rom. 3:25 Whom God hath proposed to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to the shewing of his justice, for the remission of former sins" 

    Apoc 17:17 For God hath given into their hearts to do that which pleaseth him: that they give their kingdom to the beast, till the words of God be fulfilled.

    Offline Clemens Maria

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2246
    • Reputation: +1485/-605
    • Gender: Male
    Re: +Vigano Equates Vatican II with False Council of Pistoia
    « Reply #119 on: September 25, 2020, 11:06:48 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • It wasn’t V2 that gave birth to the trad movement, it was the new “Mass” and to a lesser extent the new “Holy Orders”.  V2 caused controversy but that’s all it would have been if the sacraments had been untouched.  But how do you explain the concoction of fake sacraments?  R&R traced it back only to V2.  Sedes trace it back to the 1958 and 1963 elections.  Also, the trad movement was not driven by laymen.  It was the clergy who got it going.  There were some prominent laymen involved but they would have went nowhere without the clergy.  So this really is all about identifying the true Catholic hierarchy.  Even some R&R folks will admit that at least practically Frank is not a pope.
    Logged
    Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9
    « previous next »