Proud to be a Fool

Started by VeraeFidei, April 16, 2013, 06:34:38 PM

Previous topic - Next topic
Print
Go Down Pages 1 2
User actions

Dominica

#15
May 16, 2013, 04:35:19 PM Last Edit: May 16, 2013, 04:37:07 PM by Dominica
Quote from: VeraeFidei on May 16, 2013, 04:14:23 PM
Quote from: Dominica on May 16, 2013, 03:59:56 PM
QuoteThe Council was a beautiful work of the Holy Spirit. Think of Pope John: he looked like a good parish priest, and he was obedient to the Holy Spirit, and he did that. But, after 50 years, have we done everything that the Holy Spirit told us in the Council? In the continuity of the growth of the Church that the Council was? No. We celebrate this anniversary, we make a monument, but do not bother. We do not want to change. And there is more: there are calls [voci, also 'voices'] wanting to move back. This is called being stubborn, this is called wanting to tame the Holy Spirit, this is called becoming fools and slow of heart.

I find this offensive and goading.  This is the same type of thing that we heard in the sixties when everyone was complaining about the changes in the Church.  It was always some form of intimidation to get us to go along and accept what our Catholic sense told us was dead wrong.
Agreed on the goading. It is goading and it is insidious, because it stubbornly mocks those who "do not want change" or do not "want to move back." As Fr. Rippberger has said, the Magisterium of the Church has an obligation to clarify and fix with the plenitude of Her Authority the contradictions in VII and the positions and actions of the hierarchy after the blasted council. But that does not happen, perhaps because the Pontiffs are afraid of submitting these novelties to the fire of infallibility (not my phrase, but a good one!), or perhaps because they do not really believe in Papal infallibility and unchanging dogma.

Kyrie Eleison.

Either the Church was right then or She wasn't.  If She got it wrong prior to VII, there is no use listening to Her now.    It used to be a sin against the 1st Commandment to do what the VII popes have done (Assisi and other such things).  Now it is not a sin.  I thought that was Divine Law?  Or has that changed too?

If I sound disgusted, it is because I am disgusted. 

Dominica

#16
May 16, 2013, 04:38:45 PM Last Edit: May 16, 2013, 04:42:08 PM by Dominica
Modernists don't believe in unchanging doctrine.  For them, everything evolves.  Nothing is stable.

Gottmitunsalex

#17
May 16, 2013, 05:07:25 PM
"Nothing is more miserable than those people who never failed to attack their own salvation. When there was need to observe the Law, they trampled it under foot. Now that the Law has ceased to bind, they obstinately strive to observe it. What could be more pitiable that those who provoke God not only by transgressing the Law but also by keeping it? But at any rate the Jews say that they, too, adore God. God forbid that I say that. No Jew adores God! Who say so? The Son of God say so. For he said: "If you were to know my Father, you would also know me. But you neither know me nor do you know my Father". Could I produce a witness more trustworthy than the Son of God?"  St. John Chrysostom  Sunday Homily

"The two goals of the Jews: The universal domination of the world and the destruction of Catholicism, out of hatred for Christ" --Mgr. Jouin

dueSicilie

#18
May 19, 2013, 06:42:15 PM
 From Our Lord:

QuoteAnd whosoever shall say, Thou Fool, shall be in danger of hell fire

SouthpawLink

#19
May 19, 2013, 06:55:50 PM
Quote from: dueSicilie on May 19, 2013, 06:42:15 PM
From Our Lord:

QuoteAnd whosoever shall say, Thou Fool, shall be in danger of hell fire

Our Lord: 1
Pope Francis: 0

:P
"Is there no exception to the rule forbidding the administration of the Sacraments to baptized non-Catholics who are in good faith? In the case of those who are in good health, the prohibition is absolute; no dispute on this point is possible in view of the repeated explicit declarations of the Holy Office" (Rev. S. Woywod, A Practical Commentary on the Code of Canon Law, vol. I, sec. 625, p. 322ff.).

Contrast the above with the 1983 CIC, Can. 844 §3 & 4: "Catholic ministers administer the sacraments of penance, Eucharist, and anointing of the sick licitly to members of Eastern Churches which do not have full communion with the Catholic Church. . . .  If the danger of death is present or if, in the judgment of the diocesan bishop or conference of bishops, some other grave necessity urges it, Catholic ministers administer these same sacraments licitly also to other Christians not having full communion with the Catholic Church." — The phrase "properly disposed" does not save the canon from error, because the context shows that no conversion is expected on the part of non-Catholics ("manifest Catholic faith in respect to these sacraments" is the sole requirement).
Print
Go Up Pages 1 2
User actions