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

« previous next »
Pages: [1]

Author Topic: Una cuм Question: An AI Bug, or Catholic Teaching?  (Read 630 times)

0 Members and 7 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline SkidRowCatholic

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 70
  • Reputation: +15/-5
  • Gender: Male
Una cuм Question: An AI Bug, or Catholic Teaching?
« on: Yesterday at 03:59:18 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Logged

    Offline Angelus

    • Supporter
    • ***
    • Posts: 1379
    • Reputation: +615/-115
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Una cuм Question: An AI Bug, or Catholic Teaching?
    « Reply #1 on: Yesterday at 05:05:07 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Not a bug. 100% true. But don't get your hopes up that SSPX and Resistance types will accept it. 

    Sadly, their rule of Faith is not what the Church has always taught. It is, instead, what Archbishop Lefebvre taught or their local "pastor" teaches.
    Logged

    Offline SkidRowCatholic

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 70
    • Reputation: +15/-5
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Una cuм Question: An AI Bug, or Catholic Teaching?
    « Reply #2 on: Yesterday at 05:36:00 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Angelus on Yesterday at 05:05:07 PM
    Not a bug. 100% true. But don't get your hopes up that SSPX and Resistance types will accept it.
    Thanks Angelus,

    If true, what does that say for those who claim that the "Una cuм issue" is just some "pet" of Fr. Cekada's that he made it up to grift?
    Is that really fair and just towards him?
    I wonder...

    On a somewhat related manner;

    what do you think of coping mechanism of "intellectual blinders", where one gets so entrenched in their own view that regardless of what counter arguments/sources are brought forth NOTHING will sway them from their own perceived course of action as being justified, or even just rethinking their position on a given issue?



    not listening stephen colbert GIF
    Logged

    Offline Angelus

    • Supporter
    • ***
    • Posts: 1379
    • Reputation: +615/-115
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Una cuм Question: An AI Bug, or Catholic Teaching?
    « Reply #3 on: Yesterday at 05:47:22 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SkidRowCatholic on Yesterday at 05:36:00 PM
    Thanks Angelus,

    If true, what does that say for those who claim that the "Una cuм issue" is just some "pet" of Fr. Cekada's that he made it up to grift?
    Is that really fair and just towards him?
    I wonder...

    On a somewhat related manner;

    what do you think of coping mechanism of "intellectual blinders", where one gets so entrenched in their own view that regardless of what counter arguments/sources are brought forth NOTHING will sway them from their own perceived course of action, or even just rethinking their position on a given issue?

    I think you might be conflating two different things: 1) the Church's position on the una cuм and 2) Cekada's invention of refusing Holy Communion to confused Catholics who are not theologians.

    The Church also teaches that Holy Communion is not to be denied to a Catholic in good standing.

    • Canon 853 states that all the baptized who are not forbidden by law must be allowed to receive Holy Communion. This is the foundational principle affirming the right of a Catholic in good standing to the sacrament.
    • Canon 854 concerns those who are "public sinners". It implicitly distinguishes between public and secret sins.
    • Canon 855 explicitly lists the individuals who must be denied Holy Communion publicly:
      • Those who are excommunicated or interdicted after a declaratory or condemnatory sentence.
      • Anyone who is a "manifest sinner to whom ecclesiastical burial cannot be granted without the public scandal of the faithful". The denial in this case is not just due to the sin itself, but to avoid public scandal and sacrilege.
     

    Logged

    Offline SkidRowCatholic

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 70
    • Reputation: +15/-5
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Una cuм Question: An AI Bug, or Catholic Teaching?
    « Reply #4 on: Yesterday at 05:49:01 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Angelus on Yesterday at 05:47:22 PM
    I think you might be conflating two different things: 1) the Church's position on the una cuм...
    No, it is still floating around that the Una cuм "issue" was started by Fr. Cekada, but as we can see above that is simply not true at all.
    Logged

    Offline Angelus

    • Supporter
    • ***
    • Posts: 1379
    • Reputation: +615/-115
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Una cuм Question: An AI Bug, or Catholic Teaching?
    « Reply #5 on: Yesterday at 06:14:09 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SkidRowCatholic on Yesterday at 05:49:01 PM
    No, it is still floating around that the Una cuм "issue" was started by Fr. Cekada, but as we can see above that is simply not true at all.

    Agreed. Fr. Cekada did not invent the teaching that a priest should not pray una cuм with a heretic. That is just traditional Catholic teaching.

    But Cekada did invent the teaching that Catholics, who attend Masses where the priest prays una cuм with a heretic, should be denied Holy Communion at Sede chapels. Can we agree on that?


    Logged

    Offline IndultCat

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 295
    • Reputation: +203/-110
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Una cuм Question: An AI Bug, or Catholic Teaching?
    « Reply #6 on: Yesterday at 07:03:09 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Angelus on Yesterday at 06:14:09 PM
    Agreed. Fr. Cekada did not invent the teaching that a priest should not pray una cuм with a heretic. That is just traditional Catholic teaching.

    But Cekada did invent the teaching that Catholics, who attend Masses where the priest prays una cuм with a heretic, should be denied Holy Communion at Sede chapels. Can we agree on that?
    Yes we can agree on that.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 47544
    • Reputation: +28131/-5258
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Una cuм Question: An AI Bug, or Catholic Teaching?
    « Reply #7 on: Yesterday at 07:19:37 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • As in so many other areas, the dogmatic non-una-cuм crowd engage in false dichotomy.

    Yes, if you deliberately put an Anti-Pope into the Canon where it's tantamount to a profession of adherence to a man you know to be a non-Catholic, that's a grave thing and puts you outside the Church.  That might even invalidate the Mass actually.

    But the simple material / objective act of putting the name of some guy in the Canon who happens to not be the Pope (due to your mistake in judgment) is NOT the same thing.

    I argued on X with one of Bishop Sanborn's top priests about the matter, and he insisted that putting "una cuм Leo" (I pointed out that it should be "una cuм Leone") in the Canon is the same thing as saying "una cuм diabolo", where both defile the Mass.  He's basically saying there's no difference between a priest who puts Leo in there because he thinks Leo is the pope, or probably is the pope, or perhaps just might be the pope, or just because he's a "material pope", and a Satanist who professes allegiance to the devil.  This is so absurdly in violation of even basic common sense that it leads to neuroses and psychological issues where the mind becomes severed from any attachment to reality.

    St. Vincent Ferrer, who just happened to get the identity of the Pope wrong, he might as well have been a Satanist, and those Masses were sacrileges, displeasing to God.  Or some guy in the Middle Ages who didn't know until a year later that the previous pope he had been putting in the Canon had died.  And on and on.

    Those are all MATERIAL error.  NOBODY who puts Leo's name in the Canon does so thinking, "Yeah, I know Leo's not the Pope but I'm putting his name in there to profess my allegiance to the Conciliar Church rather than the Catholic Church."  NOBODY!

    Even with his "una cuм diabolo", let's say there was a poorly educated Italian priest in the Middle Ages who after the election of a new Pope heard a priest say "Papa Diabolo", where he's saying that the newly-elected Pope is a devil, but the not-so-bright mistakenly concludes that the new Pope's NAME is "Diabolo" and offers Mass "una cuм Diabolo".  So even with that example, it's completely different than Anton Lavey getting himself ordained and offering Mass "una cuм diabolo".

    FAILURE TO MAKE DISTINCTIONS ... the cause of nearly all Trad errors, whereas making the proper distinctions is key to solving them.  They talk about St. Thomas all the time, but how many have actually learned his method of thinking (his and that of the other scholastics)?
    Logged

    Offline JeanBaptistedeCouetus

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 31
    • Reputation: +15/-8
    Re: Una cuм Question: An AI Bug, or Catholic Teaching?
    « Reply #8 on: Yesterday at 07:22:46 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on Yesterday at 07:19:37 PM
    As in so many other areas, the dogmatic non-una-cuм crowd engage in false dichotomy.

    Yes, if you deliberately put an Anti-Pope into the Canon where it's tantamount to a profession of adherence to a man you know to be a non-Catholic, that's a grave thing and puts you outside the Church.  That might even invalidate the Mass actually.

    But the simple material / objective act of putting the name of some guy in the Canon who happens to not be the Pope (due to your mistake in judgment) is NOT the same thing.

    I argued on X with one of Bishop Sanborn's top priests about the matter, and he insisted that putting "una cuм Leo" (I pointed out that it should be "una cuм Leone") in the Canon is the same thing as saying "una cuм diabolo", where both defile the Mass.  He's basically saying there's no difference between a priest who puts Leo in there because he thinks Leo is the pope, or probably is the pope, or perhaps just might be the pope, or just because he's a "material pope", and a Satanist who professes allegiance to the devil.  This is so absurdly in violation of even basic common sense that it leads to neuroses and psychological issues where the mind becomes severed from any attachment to reality.

    St. Vincent Ferrer, who just happened to get the identity of the Pope wrong, he might as well have been a Satanist, and those Masses were sacrileges, displeasing to God.  Or some guy in the Middle Ages who didn't know until a year later that the previous pope he had been putting in the Canon had died.  And on and on.

    Those are all MATERIAL error.  NOBODY who puts Leo's name in the Canon does so thinking, "Yeah, I know Leo's not the Pope but I'm putting his name in there to profess my allegiance to the Conciliar Church rather than the Catholic Church."  NOBODY!

    Even with his "una cuм diabolo", let's say there was a poorly educated Italian priest in the Middle Ages who after the election of a new Pope heard a priest say "Papa Diabolo", where he's saying that the newly-elected Pope is a devil, but the not-so-bright mistakenly concludes that the new Pope's NAME is "Diabolo" and offers Mass "una cuм Diabolo".  So even with that example, it's completely different than Anton Lavey getting himself ordained and offering Mass "una cuм diabolo".

    FAILURE TO MAKE DISTINCTIONS ... the cause of nearly all Trad errors, whereas making the proper distinctions is key to solving them.  They talk about St. Thomas all the time, but how many have actually learned his method of thinking (his and that of the other scholastics)?
    According to Bishop Williamson, Father Sanborn has already been excommunicated from tradition.
    Logged

    Offline SkidRowCatholic

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 70
    • Reputation: +15/-5
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Una cuм Question: An AI Bug, or Catholic Teaching?
    « Reply #9 on: Yesterday at 07:42:10 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on Yesterday at 07:19:37 PM
    As in so many other areas, the dogmatic non-una-cuм crowd engage in false dichotomy.
    Ahhhh no.

    I made the distinction in the AI post - "IF YOU ARE CONVICTED HE IS A HERETIC SHOULD YOU ADD HIM IN THE CANON?"
    That is where it goes from material to formal. Where say, you could not be aware of Francis or Leo's, et nal. heresies' and then would not be personally at fault. 

    For such a one who was not CONVICTED of the truth of those heretics being heretics that one would only be acting in a state of doubt and that would NOT suffice for someone to remove the name from the Canon of the Mass (all this was in the post above).

    Why do you go straight for the "throat" rather than address the principles that the chat put forth as either valid or invalid, I.e. not sharing communion with those outside the faith.
    I am thinking you really didn't read it all the way through (or at least skipped over the parts that defeat your non sequitur where you changed tracks by omitting/erasing I made in the post between:

    1) Those who are aware, convicted, witnesses before God and man, of the heresy of the post-concilliar claimants.
    VERSUS
    2) Those who do not think they are heretics and merely "doubt" them to be true popes.

    Additionally, I do not subscribe to labeling of "dogmatic non-una-cuм crowd".

    I am asking questions, since it has been going on decades of people disagreeing about this subject.
    I think it merits more investigation.

    No honest person can just gloss over all the above as if it bears absolutely ZERO meaning at all. 

    Yes, distinctions are important. 

    So, here is two;

    If you are truly CONVICTED that Leo is a heretic then why do you not act on your convictions and separate from his communion in sacred things?

    If you are NOT convicted of him being a heretic but only doubting the truth of his faith, then I would say YOU MUST GO TO UNA cuм MASSES ONLY. 

    At least that is how I am reading the above.
    Logged

    Offline SkidRowCatholic

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 70
    • Reputation: +15/-5
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Una cuм Question: An AI Bug, or Catholic Teaching?
    « Reply #10 on: Yesterday at 07:52:50 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on Yesterday at 07:19:37 PM
    St. Vincent Ferrer, who just happened to get the identity of the Pope wrong, he might as well have been a Satanist, and those Masses were sacrileges, displeasing to God.  Or some guy in the Middle Ages who didn't know until a year later that the previous pope he had been putting in the Canon had died.  And on and on.
     
    No one is claiming that.
    The AI post did not claim that.
    The distinction was made - you just flat out missed it.

    St. Vincent was not CONVICTED that Luna was a heretic.
    None of the those papal claimant's were thought of as heretics.
    Then it was only a material error about WHO WAS POPE not if this one or that one was a raging heretic.

    You are comparing the material "apples" of that time/crisis to the "oranges" of this one.

    Who is or is not named in the Mass as the Pope and Ordinary is something that should matter to all honest Catholics.
    Maybe someone is honestly just mistaken or they didn't get the "memo" about who was now Pope, or they thought it was the wrong guy, etc.

    THAT is WAYYYYY different then someone saying,

    "I think Leo is a raging heretic and the Pope and now I shall go to Mass to worship God in communion with Leo united together in faith and in subordination to him."

    Those are 2 TOTALLY different things.

    But a nice cope goes something like this, "I think Leo is a raging heretic, I mean I see it daily with my own eyes he is really the dumps! Now I shall go to Mass to "pray" for Leo as the Pope NOT because I am united to him in faith, but because I think we should pray for him to be a good and Catholic Pope."

    Now, is the above what many are doing without being aware that it MAY be a cope? Perhaps, that is for them to decide, based on the TEACHING (which did not just start with Fr. Cekeda on this issue, or even +De Lauiers, but the teaching predates them and the principle goes back centuries that one should NOT name heretics in the Canon, even if they are personally convicted only and no formal declaration has been made (as the above AI post denotes). 
    Logged

    Offline SkidRowCatholic

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 70
    • Reputation: +15/-5
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Una cuм Question: An AI Bug, or Catholic Teaching?
    « Reply #11 on: Yesterday at 08:19:13 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Angelus on Yesterday at 06:14:09 PM
    But Cekada did invent the teaching that Catholics, who attend Masses where the priest prays una cuм with a heretic, should be denied Holy Communion at Sede chapels. Can we agree on that?
    Yeah, the idea that many do (or feels the need to) to "vet" everyone before being given the Sacraments is a sad outcome of the situation.
     
    I think that if everything above is simply explained to someone, I really don't know why they would still disagree and even then WANT those Sacraments offered by Fr. Cekeda.

    I mean, what sort of person could care less about who his own priest thinks his lawful superiors are (you might as well go get some Eastern Orthodox Sacraments).

    I am grateful I am not the one who has to decide such things as who gets the Sacraments and who doesn't. 

    I would not want to get Sacraments from a priest that expected me to hold his position on the current crisis without qualification (if that was indeed how Fr. Cekeda operated - I know not). 
    Logged
    Pages: [1]
    « previous next »