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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 20 21 [22] 23 24 ... 26

Author Topic: Are there any anti una cuм people on cathinfo?  (Read 28671 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline SeanJohnson

Re: Are there any anti una cuм people on cathinfo?
« Reply #105 on: May 05, 2021, 10:38:41 AM »
Quote from: Ladislaus on May 05, 2021, 09:45:00 AM
:facepalm: doubt is opposed logically to certainty.  When you say it is not impossible, that means there is no certainty, ergo there's doubt.

I thought you spent time at STAS, and the first course that used to be taught there was logic.

Ahem, allow me to introduce you to the concept of "moral certitude."

Moral certitude does not dismiss all possibility of error, but is so overwhelmingly probable, that theoretical plausibility of error is dismissed by the prudent man.

Hence, the unanimous consent of every single bishop over the last 60 years (10,000+ of them) rendering the legitimacy of the conciliar pontificates dogmatic fact, suffices to exclude any reasonable doubt, and provide moral certitude.

This appears to be the source of your error:

You are considering logical certitude where the Church only requires moral certitude.  Consequently, you are actually paradoxically equating moral certitude with doubt!

Lefebvre was morally certain of the legitimacy of the popes, despite his few admissions that they were not infallibly legitimate/certain.
Logged

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Are there any anti una cuм people on cathinfo?
« Reply #106 on: May 05, 2021, 11:04:10 AM »
Quote from: SeanJohnson on May 05, 2021, 10:38:41 AM
Ahem, allow me to introduce you to the concept of "moral certitude."

Moral certitude does not dismiss all possibility of error, but is so overwhelmingly probable, that theoretical plausibility of error is dismissed by the prudent man.

Right, so you're only morally certain that Our Lady was assumed into Heaven, since you can only be morally certain that Pius XII was the legitimate pope.

You completely misunderstand what is meant by DOGMATIC fact.

Look into the logical maxim "peiorem partem sequitur conclusion".  If the legitimacy of a Pope is not known with the certainty of faith, then any dogmas he promulgates cannot be known with the certainty of faith either.

So you're claiming that in all these quotes by +Lefebvre he was merely expressing hypothetical negative doubts when he's saying that he may be obliged to come out as a sedevacantist.  Just keep telling yourself that, Sean.
Logged

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Are there any anti una cuм people on cathinfo?
« Reply #107 on: May 05, 2021, 11:13:02 AM »
Quote from: DecemRationis on May 04, 2021, 12:19:38 PM
If you followed your "proper formal motive of faith" you wouldn't be here but on Catholic Answers defending the Conciliar Church. If not, tell us why not? On what basis do you reject the magisterium of the Conciliar Church?

Just FYI, your "inline" responses make it very difficult to respond to you.  I had to copy-paste your response in after having found another place where you actually wrote some text in the body of your response.

I've already explained this a few times.  I find that the Conciliar Church lacks the marks of the Catholic Church, and therefore its purported magisterium is not the Catholic Magisterium.

As per the teaching of Vatican I, the one place where there's room for reason and private judgment is in actually discerning the notes or authority of the Church in the first place.  Once that is known, the assent of faith is given to the Church's teaching.  Once one recognizes, based on the natural motives of credibility, that the Catholic Church has the authority of Christ, then one submits to that teaching authority, which authority becomes the formal motive of faith, as per the famous maxim of St. Augustine that he would not believe in the Scriptures themselves had the Church not proposed them to him.

Whether or not one understands theologically what exactly is going on, that is in fact the genesis and the raison d'etre of the entire Traditional movement.  This thing over here which calls itself the Conciliar Church, this is not the Catholic Church.  It is unrecognizable.  Thus even the simple faithful can make that discernment.  No theology degrees are needed.
Logged

Offline DecemRationis

  • Supporter
Re: Are there any anti una cuм people on cathinfo?
« Reply #108 on: May 05, 2021, 11:30:50 AM »
Quote from: Ladislaus on May 05, 2021, 11:13:02 AM
Just FYI, your "inline" responses make it very difficult to respond to you.  I had to copy-paste your response in after having found another place where you actually wrote some text in the body of your response.

I've already explained this a few times.  I find that the Conciliar Church lacks the marks of the Catholic Church, and therefore its purported magisterium is not the Catholic Magisterium.

As per the teaching of Vatican I, the one place where there's room for reason and private judgment is in actually discerning the notes or authority of the Church in the first place.  Once that is known, the assent of faith is given to the Church's teaching.  Once one recognizes, based on the natural motives of credibility, that the Catholic Church has the authority of Christ, then one submits to that teaching authority, which authority becomes the formal motive of faith, as per the famous maxim of St. Augustine that he would not believe in the Scriptures themselves had the Church not proposed them to him.

Whether or not one understands theologically what exactly is going on, that is in fact the genesis and the raison d'etre of the entire Traditional movement.  This thing over here which calls itself the Conciliar Church, this is not the Catholic Church.  It is unrecognizable.  Thus even the simple faithful can make that discernment.  No theology degrees are needed.

Then you are a Sedevacantist, and the seat is vacant.

Quote
As per the teaching of Vatican I, the one place where there's room for reason and private judgment is in actually discerning the notes or authority of the Church in the first place.

Where do you see this "one place" limitation in Vatican I?



Logged

Offline SeanJohnson

Re: Are there any anti una cuм people on cathinfo?
« Reply #109 on: May 05, 2021, 11:42:00 AM »
Quote from: Ladislaus on May 05, 2021, 11:04:10 AM
Right, so you're only morally certain that Our Lady was assumed into Heaven, since you can only be morally certain that Pius XII was the legitimate pope.

You completely misunderstand what is meant by DOGMATIC fact.

Look into the logical maxim "peiorem partem sequitur conclusion".  If the legitimacy of a Pope is not known with the certainty of faith, then any dogmas he promulgates cannot be known with the certainty of faith either.

So you're claiming that in all these quotes by +Lefebvre he was merely expressing hypothetical negative doubts when he's saying that he may be obliged to come out as a sedevacantist.  Just keep telling yourself that, Sean.

On the contrary:

It is only the conciliar papacies which are merely "morally certain" (i.e., because of their teaching of error).

But regarding the preconciliar popes, there is no doubt as to their legitimacy at all (i.e., because they never attempted to teach doctrinal error to the universal Church).
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 20 21 [22] 23 24 ... 26
« previous next »