Author Topic: Why can't trads get along?  (Read 56276 times)

Offline voxxpopulisuxx

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Hauptmann
  • ****
  • Posts: 5410
  • Thanked: 112 times
  • If I agreed with you, we'd both be wrong.
  • Religion: duhhhhh
Re: Why can't trads get along?
« Reply #90 on: August 16, 2014, 01:24:30 PM »
No one asserts Jp2 hasnt been saved...notorious public sinners who havent publically repented of those sins can still get to heaven...but proclaiming a notorious sinner a saint is another. The question is was assisi...providibg cover for devient priests...kissing(venerating) the koran are notorious sins. Seems to me they are
Lord Jesus Christ Most High Son of God have Mercy On Me a Sinner (Jesus Prayer)

“You can never cross the ocean until you have the courage to lose sight of the shore.” – Christopher Columbus
911!
"Let my name stand among those who are willing to bear ridicule and reproach for the truth's sake, and so earn some right to rejoice when the victory is won. "— Louisa May Alcott

“From man’s sweat and God’s love, beer came into the world.”St. Arnold (580-640)

Geocentrism holds no possible atheistic downside.
 

Offline tradical

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 1022
  • Thanked: 189 times
    • Tradicat
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Why can't trads get along?
« Reply #91 on: August 16, 2014, 01:38:01 PM »
No one asserts Jp2 hasnt been saved...notorious public sinners who havent publically repented of those sins can still get to heaven...but proclaiming a notorious sinner a saint is another. The question is was assisi...providibg cover for devient priests...kissing(venerating) the koran are notorious sins. Seems to me they are

So you don't reject that actual canonization but reject the prudential decision to proceed with it?

P^3

P^3
Prayer
Penance
Patience
 

Offline voxxpopulisuxx

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Hauptmann
  • ****
  • Posts: 5410
  • Thanked: 112 times
  • If I agreed with you, we'd both be wrong.
  • Religion: duhhhhh
Re: Why can't trads get along?
« Reply #92 on: August 16, 2014, 01:40:34 PM »
No one asserts Jp2 hasnt been saved...notorious public sinners who havent publically repented of those sins can still get to heaven...but proclaiming a notorious sinner a saint is another. The question is was assisi...providibg cover for devient priests...kissing(venerating) the koran are notorious sins. Seems to me they are

So you don't reject that actual canonization but reject the prudential decision to proceed with it?

P^3
No I reject it in toto because public unrepentant sinners cannot also be venerable saints.
Lord Jesus Christ Most High Son of God have Mercy On Me a Sinner (Jesus Prayer)

“You can never cross the ocean until you have the courage to lose sight of the shore.” – Christopher Columbus
911!
"Let my name stand among those who are willing to bear ridicule and reproach for the truth's sake, and so earn some right to rejoice when the victory is won. "— Louisa May Alcott

“From man’s sweat and God’s love, beer came into the world.”St. Arnold (580-640)

Geocentrism holds no possible atheistic downside.
 

Offline Sbyvl36

  • Reichsführer of the SD Grammar Gestapo. Holy Roman Emperor in exile.
  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 1681
  • Thanked: 28 times
  • Reichsführer of the Friendly Forum Fascists.
    • Sbyvl's Blog
  • Religion: Self-absorbed Promethean Neo-Pelagian
Re: Why can't trads get along?
« Reply #93 on: August 16, 2014, 01:42:42 PM »
No one asserts Jp2 hasnt been saved...notorious public sinners who havent publically repented of those sins can still get to heaven...but proclaiming a notorious sinner a saint is another. The question is was assisi...providibg cover for devient priests...kissing(venerating) the koran are notorious sins. Seems to me they are

So you don't reject that actual canonization but reject the prudential decision to proceed with it?

P^3
No I reject it in toto because public unrepentant sinners cannot also be venerable saints.

This. 
A canonization means that the person in question is worthy of imitation.  JPII never publicly repented for his public sins.  Therefore, should we imitate his actions at Assisi, or his Koran-kissing, or his "interfaith services"? Of course not.
My blog: sbyvl.wordpress.com

"Hold firmly that our faith is identical with that of the ancients. Deny this, and you dissolve the unity of the Church."
--St. Thomas Aquinas

"Neither the true faith nor eternal salvation is to be found outside the Holy Catholic Church."
--Pope Pius IX

“That the Conciliar Church is a schismatic Church, because it breaks with the Catholic Church that has always been. It has its new dogmas, its new priesthood, its new institutions, its new worship, all already condemned by the Church in many a document, official and definitive."
--Archbishop Lefebvre

Heliocentricism is idiocy.
 

Offline tradical

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 1022
  • Thanked: 189 times
    • Tradicat
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Why can't trads get along?
« Reply #94 on: August 16, 2014, 01:43:17 PM »
No one asserts Jp2 hasnt been saved...notorious public sinners who havent publically repented of those sins can still get to heaven...but proclaiming a notorious sinner a saint is another. The question is was assisi...providibg cover for devient priests...kissing(venerating) the koran are notorious sins. Seems to me they are

So you don't reject that actual canonization but reject the prudential decision to proceed with it?

P^3
No I reject it in toto because public unrepentant sinners cannot also be venerable saints.

Why not? How do you know he didn't repent? 

This seems to be a beam and sliver type of scenario.

The end point is that there seems to be a limit on God's mercy that this canonization cannot have been legit because God could not have forgiven Pope John Paul II for his enormous mistakes.

I guess Pope Peter isn't a Saint after all.

P^3
« Last Edit: August 16, 2014, 01:58:15 PM by tradical »
P^3
Prayer
Penance
Patience
 

Offline Michael Wilson

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Hauptmann
  • ****
  • Posts: 8089
  • Thanked: 6458 times
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Why can't trads get along?
« Reply #95 on: August 16, 2014, 02:23:18 PM »
Come on tradical,
 you cannot be serious.
"The World Must Conform to Our Lord and not He to it." Rev. Dennis Fahey CSSP

"My brothers, all of you, if you are condemned to see the triumph of evil, never applaud it. Never say to evil: you are good; to decadence: you are progess; to death: you are life. Sanctify yourselves in the times wherein God has placed you; bewail the evils and the disorders which God tolerates; oppose them with the energy of your works and your efforts, your life uncontaminated by error, free from being led astray, in such a way that having lived here below, united with the Spirit of the Lord, you will be admitted to be made but one with Him forever and ever: But he who is joined to the Lord is one in spirit." Cardinal Pie of Potiers
 

Offline tradical

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 1022
  • Thanked: 189 times
    • Tradicat
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Why can't trads get along?
« Reply #96 on: August 16, 2014, 04:33:47 PM »
Come on tradical,
 you cannot be serious.
Hi Michael,

I'm exaggerating the point - however if we are traditional Catholics then we need to at a minimum follow the doctrine up to where all hell broke loose in the Church. Including what I noted concerning dogmatic facts (http://tradicat.blogspot.ca/2013/08/everything-you-wanted-to-know_23.html).

We have two elements:

1. The Church Teaching (Bishops) cannot err when they unanimously agree on who is Pope.
2. The Pope cannot err when declaring someone is enjoying the beatific vision (is a Saint).

Following the reasoning that I've seen here, some believe that it is impossible that JP2 is in Heaven, and since we have dogmatic fact #2, the logical conclusion is that Pope Francis isn't Pope.

What they ignore is the consequence that it is necessary to deny at the same time dogmatic fact #1 or at least produce a viable proof that Pope Francis has denied a de fide teaching of the Church post election.

This cascades through the entire sedevacantist theorem who in general believe that there hasn't been a Vicar of Christ since the death of Pius XII.  Even that selection is arbitrary and I know some Sede's who have found Pius XII wanting and started to look further back for a lawful Pontiff. 

So either the Sedevacantists (no offense Michael) acknowledge that they do not accept the doctrine of dogmatic facts or they cease to accept one and refuse the other.

P^3

PS. By the way - Hi! 

Also, I won't be participating for long, things are starting to pile up again so I'll be going on 'posting vacation' again in a few weeks.

Cheers!

P^3
Prayer
Penance
Patience
 

Offline voxxpopulisuxx

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Hauptmann
  • ****
  • Posts: 5410
  • Thanked: 112 times
  • If I agreed with you, we'd both be wrong.
  • Religion: duhhhhh
Re: Why can't trads get along?
« Reply #97 on: August 16, 2014, 05:55:50 PM »
Its not about whos in heaven...its about whos life was so obviously Christ like that we cannot err if we follow their example...this is the traditional understanding of veneration of saints. I am not an idol worshipper I dont worship men or women...I worship CHRIST in men or women. St Paul murdered Christians...he publically repented his public sins and THEN lived an outstanding Christian life and died a martyr s death....JP2 did nothing beyond his bare papal responsabltys...the only exceptional actions (or innactions) all HARMED the Faith...IE assisi...etc.
Lord Jesus Christ Most High Son of God have Mercy On Me a Sinner (Jesus Prayer)

“You can never cross the ocean until you have the courage to lose sight of the shore.” – Christopher Columbus
911!
"Let my name stand among those who are willing to bear ridicule and reproach for the truth's sake, and so earn some right to rejoice when the victory is won. "— Louisa May Alcott

“From man’s sweat and God’s love, beer came into the world.”St. Arnold (580-640)

Geocentrism holds no possible atheistic downside.
 

Offline tradical

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 1022
  • Thanked: 189 times
    • Tradicat
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Why can't trads get along?
« Reply #98 on: August 16, 2014, 08:32:10 PM »
No one asserts Jp2 hasnt been saved...notorious public sinners who havent publically repented of those sins can still get to heaven...but proclaiming a notorious sinner a saint is another. The question is was assisi...providibg cover for devient priests...kissing(venerating) the koran are notorious sins. Seems to me they are

So you don't reject that actual canonization but reject the prudential decision to proceed with it?

P^3
No I reject it in toto because public unrepentant sinners cannot also be venerable saints.

This. 
A canonization means that the person in question is worthy of imitation.  JPII never publicly repented for his public sins.  Therefore, should we imitate his actions at Assisi, or his Koran-kissing, or his "interfaith services"? Of course not.

Whether or not this is 'proof' that Pope Francis is not Pope is that point that was being argued.  Also, it is assumed that you would imitate his virtues not his vices and mistakes.

Taking the extreme example of St. Peter, would you imitate his betrayal or his life long repentance?

P^3
P^3
Prayer
Penance
Patience
 

Offline voxxpopulisuxx

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Hauptmann
  • ****
  • Posts: 5410
  • Thanked: 112 times
  • If I agreed with you, we'd both be wrong.
  • Religion: duhhhhh
Re: Why can't trads get along?
« Reply #99 on: August 16, 2014, 08:45:04 PM »
No one asserts Jp2 hasnt been saved...notorious public sinners who havent publically repented of those sins can still get to heaven...but proclaiming a notorious sinner a saint is another. The question is was assisi...providibg cover for devient priests...kissing(venerating) the koran are notorious sins. Seems to me they are

So you don't reject that actual canonization but reject the prudential decision to proceed with it?

P^3
No I reject it in toto because public unrepentant sinners cannot also be venerable saints.

This. 
A canonization means that the person in question is worthy of imitation.  JPII never publicly repented for his public sins.  Therefore, should we imitate his actions at Assisi, or his Koran-kissing, or his "interfaith services"? Of course not.

Whether or not this is 'proof' that Pope Francis is not Pope is that point that was being argued.  Also, it is assumed that you would imitate his virtues not his vices and mistakes.

Taking the extreme example of St. Peter, would you imitate his betrayal or his life long repentance?

P^3
You obviously have been indoctrinated with a post VAT2 understanding of the Veneration of Saints.....purgatory is part of Heaven...but no venerable saints reside there.
And your question makes my point...show me the life long repentance of JP2 and then I will venerate him as a saint. Bishop Lefevere of Bishop Sheen or even Father Gruner are better candidates (except Gruner hasnt passed away yet)
Lord Jesus Christ Most High Son of God have Mercy On Me a Sinner (Jesus Prayer)

“You can never cross the ocean until you have the courage to lose sight of the shore.” – Christopher Columbus
911!
"Let my name stand among those who are willing to bear ridicule and reproach for the truth's sake, and so earn some right to rejoice when the victory is won. "— Louisa May Alcott

“From man’s sweat and God’s love, beer came into the world.”St. Arnold (580-640)

Geocentrism holds no possible atheistic downside.
 

Offline tradical

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 1022
  • Thanked: 189 times
    • Tradicat
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Why can't trads get along?
« Reply #100 on: August 16, 2014, 08:46:40 PM »
Its not about whos in heaven...its about whos life was so obviously Christ like that we cannot err if we follow their example...this is the traditional understanding of veneration of saints. I am not an idol worshipper I dont worship men or women...I worship CHRIST in men or women. St Paul murdered Christians...he publically repented his public sins and THEN lived an outstanding Christian life and died a martyr s death....JP2 did nothing beyond his bare papal responsabltys...the only exceptional actions (or innactions) all HARMED the Faith...IE assisi...etc.

Oh I see, you want to pass judgement on his life instead of God.

Got it!

The two points still stand as Catholic pre-conciliar doctrine. Accept it or reject it as a whole, but please don't cherry pick the dogmatic facts you like and discard the ones that don't support your theories.

P^3
P^3
Prayer
Penance
Patience
 

Offline tradical

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 1022
  • Thanked: 189 times
    • Tradicat
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Why can't trads get along?
« Reply #101 on: August 16, 2014, 08:52:01 PM »
No one asserts Jp2 hasnt been saved...notorious public sinners who havent publically repented of those sins can still get to heaven...but proclaiming a notorious sinner a saint is another. The question is was assisi...providibg cover for devient priests...kissing(venerating) the koran are notorious sins. Seems to me they are

So you don't reject that actual canonization but reject the prudential decision to proceed with it?

P^3
No I reject it in toto because public unrepentant sinners cannot also be venerable saints.

This. 
A canonization means that the person in question is worthy of imitation.  JPII never publicly repented for his public sins.  Therefore, should we imitate his actions at Assisi, or his Koran-kissing, or his "interfaith services"? Of course not.

Whether or not this is 'proof' that Pope Francis is not Pope is that point that was being argued.  Also, it is assumed that you would imitate his virtues not his vices and mistakes.

Taking the extreme example of St. Peter, would you imitate his betrayal or his life long repentance?

P^3
You obviously have been indoctrinated with a post VAT2 understanding of the Veneration of Saints.....purgatory is part of Heaven...but no venerable saints reside there.
And your question makes my point...show me the life long repentance of JP2 and then I will venerate him as a saint. Bishop Lefevere of Bishop Sheen or even Father Gruner are better candidates (except Gruner hasnt passed away yet)

As per usual - the old shlick of 'indoctrinated with a post V2 ...'

I am sticking to Church doctrine on the matter concerning what is covered by the infallibility of the canonization, if you care to venture a rational opinion on them - then please do so.

P^3

P^3
Prayer
Penance
Patience
 

Offline voxxpopulisuxx

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Hauptmann
  • ****
  • Posts: 5410
  • Thanked: 112 times
  • If I agreed with you, we'd both be wrong.
  • Religion: duhhhhh
Re: Why can't trads get along?
« Reply #102 on: August 16, 2014, 08:56:18 PM »
Dont question my rationality son...you are in the dock not me...Please show me a 'Saint" who openly and unapologetic-ally escalated the auto destruction of the Church.... JP2 Clearly damaged the Church and individual Catholics....show me Just One saint who spent his life un-repentantly doing this and I will concede instantly.
Lord Jesus Christ Most High Son of God have Mercy On Me a Sinner (Jesus Prayer)

“You can never cross the ocean until you have the courage to lose sight of the shore.” – Christopher Columbus
911!
"Let my name stand among those who are willing to bear ridicule and reproach for the truth's sake, and so earn some right to rejoice when the victory is won. "— Louisa May Alcott

“From man’s sweat and God’s love, beer came into the world.”St. Arnold (580-640)

Geocentrism holds no possible atheistic downside.
 

Offline JuniorCouncilor

  • Korporal
  • **
  • Posts: 476
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • Religion: Catholic as can be
Re: Why can't trads get along?
« Reply #103 on: August 16, 2014, 08:58:36 PM »
In the final analysis, your arguments come down to the following principles:

1. An infallible dogmatic fact has been established that Pope Francis is the lawfully elected successor of Peter due to the unanimous acceptance by the bishops in union with the Catholic Church.

Respectfully, that is your argument, not mine.  I specifically argue that he is not the lawfully elected successor of Peter due to the fact that it is impossible for a public, manifest heretic to be a Catholic, much less the pope.  I agree that unanimous acceptance by the bishops would establish the dogmatic fact in any other case-- but not in this one.  Further, I quoted Cum ex Apostolatus for the specific purpose of giving you an authority for why I said unanimous acceptance does not matter in that case, so I don't think it's legitimate for you to ignore it or put off addressing it as if it were beside the main point.  You will note the operative words "obedience accorded to such by all" in Pope Paul IV's point ii.

Also, there are a number of theologians who argue that even if a pope were legitimately elected, and established as such by dogmatic fact, he could then fall from the papacy by his own personal heresy, if such heresy were publically manifested.  Bellarmine and de Sales both make this argument, I believe, and so do many others.

I happily grant you that I have no authority to bind anyone's conscience to this, but I still believe and will argue for the truth of it.  And because I believe it, it binds my own conscience.  And believe me, that belief has a cost.

Quote
Item 3 because of JP2's scandalous mistakes (read assisi etc) you believe that he did not save his soul, therefore Pope Francis can't be Pope, but simply is Cardinal Bergoglio (although perhaps you would deny even that title).

Here, too, I believe you've slightly misread my argument.  As voxx pointed out, no one is necessarily saying he didn't save his soul, but that by setting Wojtyla up for imitation, the Church would be leading souls into error, and on a question of the first commandment.  Now, since this is a universal disciplinary law that clearly and naturally tends to such a bad result (especially in a time like ours, when Catholics are almost universally ignorant of the problems with Assisi in particular and ecumenism in general), it should be impossible for the Church, the spotless Bride of Christ and our Holy Mother, to approve such a horribly destructive law.

(And yes, Bergoglio was pretty clearly a heretic at least as early as when he had hands laid on him by a Protestant minister at a public ecumenical gathering, and as such I would deny that he has any rightful authority in Holy Church.)

Quote
Note well that item 1 precedes item 2 in time and Item 3 is an inference that you have made based on your understanding (which is incorrect) as to the obligations of universal laws.  Universal laws are explicit and regulate the life of the Church.  No where is it a law that we have to hold 'Assisi' like meetings.

So Item 3 is unfounded.

Respectfully, precedence in time is irrelevant to the argument.  The question is which is better founded, premise 1, or premise 3?  I remind you that premise 1 is your own argument, not mine-- though I freely admit that I believed it to be true prior to April 27.  However, premise 3 appears to me to be very strongly established, so much so that I don't know if it's possible for me to believe that Wojtyla was validly canonized and still believe that the claims of Holy Church are true.  In fact, I'm pretty sure that's impossible for me.  You may be right, and that may be my human weakness, but you will have to convince me of that.  Theoretically, it should be possible.  I converted to the Catholic Church, and I became a sedevacantist, so I clearly have a very open mind.  But how can the Church set someone up as a model who has publically set an example of scandal against the FIRST COMMANDMENT?  If he had asked pardon of it, I would have no problem, though I might still have complaints.  But no, he set it up as the very "incarnation" of Vatican II, and thus of Church teaching.  That is what I can by no means reconcile with Pius XI's Mortalium animos, as well as 1900 years of Catholic doctrine and praxis.  I invite you to help me if you can, but I really think your facts just aren't there, or are incorrect.

Quote
More importantly is that the Church's visibility
and indefectibility are linked to the Pope who is the foundation of both unity of faith and government (search on my blog - I don't have time to look for the reference right now).  So if the Popes since Pius XII weren't / aren't Pope - then where is the Church of Christ?

Respectfully, indefectibility is precisely my problem.  I cannot see how the Church has not defected if she has genuinely made Wojtyla a saint, thus setting him and his public scandals against the First Commandment up as examples for poor sinners.

As to visibility, the Church has become more or less like the catacombs, or the time of the Arian crisis, with a few differences.  I certainly see that as a smaller and more easily reconcilable problem than the Church officially setting up public scandal against the First Commandment as an example to be followed.

Quote
In final analysis, either you accept the two dogmatic facts or you do not. They are based on the same authority / theological consensus - to reject one is to reject the other.

See above.  I believe you have constructed a false dichotomy.  Moreover, you reject the theological consensus that a pope who is a public and manifest heretic would either not be validly elected or would thereby immediately fall from office-- so as far as I can tell we're in the same boat on that point.  Or do you at least admit the possibility?
 

Offline tradical

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 1022
  • Thanked: 189 times
    • Tradicat
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Why can't trads get along?
« Reply #104 on: August 16, 2014, 09:02:17 PM »
Dont question my rationality son...you are in the dock not me...Please show me a 'Saint" who openly and unapologetic-ally escalated the auto destruction of the Church.... JP2 Clearly damaged the Church and individual Catholics....show me Just One saint who spent his life un-repentantly doing this and I will concede instantly.

Sorry, I am not in the dock,  I'm sticking to the dogmatic fact point which you (and others) seem to have difficulty accepting.

The dogmatic fact doctrine is there and it is clear.  Read it and weep until the Church makes a definitive declaration on the specific matters. 

Quote
Additional Information on Dogmatic Facts from Hunter:

Dogmatic Facts.—But besides these speculative truths, there are certain matters of fact concerning which the Church can judge with infallible certainty. These are called by many writers dogmatic facts, although others use this expression only of one class among them, which was much discussed in the course of the controversy with the Jansenists in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. These heretics were anxious to keep the name of Catholic, and finding their doctrine on grace condemned by the Church, endeavoured to escape from the condemnation by showing that the Church had misunderstood their writings, to which it was replied that the infallibility of the Church extended to the determination of the true sense conveyed by a form of words ; and the phrase  dogmatic fact " was little heard of except in regard to such determinations.

We will proceed to mention some dogmatic facts, in the wider sense, adding the reason why we hold that they come within the infallible authority of the Church. But it must be remembered that if the Church speak on any of these matters, it does not follow that she has exercised her infallibility; she may have intended to exert a merely disciplinary authority alone (n. 203), regulating the  outward conduct only, but not touching men's inward belief. The doubt that may sometimes arise in particular cases must be solved by considering the terms and circumstances of the utterance. In this part of the subject we are not writing controversially, at least as regards those who do not acknowledge the authority of the Holy See; we are merely stating the Catholic doctrine.

First, then, the Church is infallible when she declares what person holds the office of Pope ; for if the person of the Pope were uncertain, it would be uncertain what Bishops were in communion with the Pope; but according to the Catholic faith, as will be proved hereafter, communion with the Pope is a condition for the exercise of the function of teaching by the body of Bishops (n. 208) ; if then the uncertainty could not be cleared up, the power of teaching could not be exercised, and Christ's promise (St. Matt, xxviii. 20; and n. 199, II.) would be falsified, which is impossible.

This argument is in substance the same as applies to other cases of dogmatic facts. Also, it affords an answer to a much vaunted objection to the claims of the Catholic Church, put forward by writers who think that they find proof in history that the election of a certain Pope was simoniacal and invalid, and that the successor was elected by Cardinals who owed their own appointment to the simoniacal intruder; from which it is gathered that the Papacy has been vacant ever since that time. {Tradical: I find this position very similar to the sedevacantist position}

A volume might be occupied if we attempted to expose all the frailness of the argument which is supposed to lead to this startling conclusion; but it is enough to say that if the Bishops agree in recognizing a certain man as Pope, they are certainly right, for otherwise the body of the Bishops would be separated from their head, and the Divine constitution of the Church would be ruined.

In just the same way the infallibility extends to declaring that a certain Council is or is not ecumenical; that certain systems of education are, or are not, injurious to faith and morals; that the principles of certain societies are immoral; and that certain ways of life, especially in Religious  orders, are not merely free from moral evil, but are laudable. Unless the Church could judge upon these matters, she could not exercise her office of guiding and instructing her members.

P^3
P^3
Prayer
Penance
Patience