Author Topic: Indefectibility: Game Over  (Read 13163 times)

Offline Kreuzritter

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 940
  • Thanked: 705 times
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Indefectibility: Game Over
« Reply #570 on: September 24, 2018, 12:59:08 PM »
God, in the brilliance of His wisdom, has built in a 100%, absolutely fail-safe means by which His glorious and beautiful Catholic Church cannot ever, ever, defect.  It's so simple that a lot of people miss it, although some may choose to.

The only way the Catholic Church can defect is if a Pope preaches or teaches heresy and remains a Pope
....
The moment heretical teachings come out of the mouth or pen of a Pope, he is gone.   This is God's guarantee that the Church cannot fail. 

This is assuring that no combination of epistemological facts would ever be consistent with the Church's defection; IOW, making it empirically unfalsifiable.

If the Church's indefectibility is taken as a logical consequence of the aforegoing statements, obviously given their truth no set of facts could be consistent with her defection. But that is true of all logical consequences of some set of statements and isn't a particularly astute or interesting observation. The statements, however, remain "falsifiable".
 

Offline Kreuzritter

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 940
  • Thanked: 705 times
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Indefectibility: Game Over
« Reply #571 on: September 24, 2018, 01:19:10 PM »

3.  Semi-trad.  This involves straining to the maximum extent possible to show a real continuity between the teachings.  It is a very good question as to why this should be necessary.  But it's a moot point after the reversal on the death penalty.  If Francis is wrong, it's game over.  If he's right, it's also game over, for it means the Church officially sanctioned a grave evil for centuries.

Talk about a non sequitur. It's entirely conceivable for the "semi-trad" that Jorge Bergoglio, having been a heretic from before his conclave, was invalidly elected as per Cum ex Apostolatus Officio and was therefore never a pope to begin with. This is a sensible possibility and is one recognised both by doctrine and, at least privately, by an increasing number of these "semi-trads".

But it does not even imply that the seat is empty, much less that it has been empty since Pius XII's reign ended, and your aforegoing critique of Sedevacantism is therefore not appicable to it.
 
The following users thanked this post: Prayerful, Xavier

Offline Prayerful

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Hauptmann
  • ****
  • Posts: 6321
  • Thanked: 2691 times
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Indefectibility: Game Over
« Reply #572 on: September 24, 2018, 06:32:14 PM »

3.  Semi-trad.  This involves straining to the maximum extent possible to show a real continuity between the teachings.  It is a very good question as to why this should be necessary.  But it's a moot point after the reversal on the death penalty.  If Francis is wrong, it's game over.  If he's right, it's also game over, for it means the Church officially sanctioned a grave evil for centuries.

Talk about a non sequitur. It's entirely conceivable for the "semi-trad" that Jorge Bergoglio, having been a heretic from before his conclave, was invalidly elected as per Cum ex Apostolatus Officio and was therefore never a pope to begin with. This is a sensible possibility and is one recognised both by doctrine and, at least privately, by an increasing number of these "semi-trads".

But it does not even imply that the seat is empty, much less that it has been empty since Pius XII's reign ended, and your aforegoing critique of Sedevacantism is therefore not appicable to it.

Yes, the change held the Death Penalty to be inadmissible in the modern context, and does not hold Popes of the past to be wrong. It means little or nothing. It isn't that much different from the JP2 changes, which were more cautiously expressed and clear. Cathars who opposed the death penalty, remain wrong. Like everything Bergoglian, it is horribly vague wording, but an obviously false dilemma cannot be made to pivot on it.
Padre Pio: Pray, hope, and don't worry. Worry is useless. God is merciful and will hear your prayer.
 
The following users thanked this post: Xavier

Offline Vetus Ordo

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 1973
  • Thanked: 1510 times
  • Religion: The Way
Re: Indefectibility: Game Over
« Reply #573 on: September 25, 2018, 01:16:34 PM »
Yes, the change held the Death Penalty to be inadmissible in the modern context, and does not hold Popes of the past to be wrong.

"The death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person," reads the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

If the death penalty is "an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person," those who sanctioned its use before this recent development did attack, by logical necessity, the inviolability and dignity of the person, thus committing a sin by today's teaching. If they didn't commit a sin back then when executing criminals, one infers, it was because they didn't know any better.

According to Cardinal Ladaria, this new formulation of the Catechism expresses "an authentic development of doctrine that is not in contradiction with the prior teachings of the Magisterium."

How so? The Cardinal proceeds to explain that the previous Church teaching with regards to the death penalty can be explained in a social context in which the penal sanctions were understood differently, and "had developed in an environment in which it was more difficult to guarantee that the criminal could not repeat his crime." In other words, we could attack the inviolability and dignity of the person, and adopt a practice that is now considered to be contrary to the Gospel, because the social and intellectual context was different.

This is development of doctrine at its finest.

Francis added that the death penalty is "in itself, contrary to the Gospel, because a decision is voluntarily made to suppress a human life, which is always sacred in the eyes of the Creator and of whom, in the last analysis, only God can be the true judge and guarantor." That is to say, the whole Church and Christendom adopted a practice that is, in itself, in its essence, contrary to the Gospel. And maintained it for almost two thousand years.

Roma locuta, causa finita. Until the next bump in the road.
DISPOSE OUR DAYS IN THY PEACE, AND COMMAND US TO BE DELIVERED FROM ETERNAL DAMNATION, AND TO BE NUMBERED IN THE FLOCK OF THINE ELECT.
 
The following users thanked this post: Pon de Replay, Oatmeal, TPC, aquinas138

Offline Arvinger

  • Vizekorporal
  • **
  • Posts: 250
  • Thanked: 257 times
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Indefectibility: Game Over
« Reply #574 on: October 13, 2018, 12:02:12 PM »
As usual, Quare is inconsistent with his own epistemological principles and changes them in different cases. We see it very clearly here:

I haven't gone anywhere yet.  The doctrine of Indefectibility must line up with the reality and the hard facts however.  If the traditional understanding is empirically falsified, then it isn't true.

"Must line up with reality and hard facts" is a nice way of saying it must line up with your personal judgment. You set yourself as the final authority by privately judging whether current situation does or does not constitute defection of the Church. Of course, this is contrary to Catholic epistemology.

In Catholic epistemology, we start with a priori knowledge given us by dogmatic teachings of the Church. I know a priori that the Church cannot defect, therefore whatever happens, no matter what it is, I know it cannot and does not constitute defection of the Church, because the Church is indefectible. Even if I cannot explain how current events align with indefectibility of the Church, that does not place me in epistemological position to judge that the Church has defected, because my knowledge of indefectibility of the Church is epistemologically prior to that.

Lets take Sacred Scripture. We know a priori that it is inerrant. Therefore, when an atheist tries to demonstrate that there are errors and contradictions in Scripture, before he even opens his mouth we know he is wrong whatever he says and whatever arguments/examples he brings up, because we know that Scripture is inerrant. Even if I cannot find a solution to a specific example of alleged contradiction in Scripture brought up by an atheist, I know that a solution to this exists for sure and it cannot be an error. Same with indefectibility of the Church - whatever happens, I know there is an explanation for that which aligns with indefectibility of the Church, because defection of the Church is impossible.
 
The following users thanked this post: Frank, Michael Wilson, awkwardcustomer, Xavier

Offline Christe Eleison

  • Mary Garden
  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 1035
  • Thanked: 812 times
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Indefectibility: Game Over
« Reply #575 on: October 13, 2018, 12:05:15 PM »
 

Pope St Gregory the Great:

"And so we should consider whether we may, without sin, avoid scandalizing our neighbour.

 If scandal can come from telling the truth, it is more fitting to give rise to scandal,

 than that the truth should be concealed."       

 :pray2: :pray3:
           



 :pray2: :pray3:
 
The following users thanked this post: Xavier

Offline Bonaventure

  • Oberstleutnant
  • Hauptmann
  • *****
  • Posts: 9047
  • Thanked: 1635 times
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Indefectibility: Game Over
« Reply #576 on: February 10, 2019, 12:02:18 PM »
When it comes to indefectibility, and the refusal of traditional Catholics to admit it, surely the best and most appropriate Monty Python reference is the Black Knight:


“It’s just a flesh wound!”

Well, to Whom shall we go?

Going to the 'dox doesn't solve anything. Becoming "reformed" doesn't solve anything. High Church Protestantism, nah.

If we do take this route, it is an admittance that Christianity itself has defected. That is a path I am unwilling to take. The Church is an utter joke and in shambles right now. Perhaps this is how they felt on that first Holy Saturday. Any notion of Christendom and a Christian society no longer exist. Vacant see theories solve nothing, as this interregnum slouches towards 70 years in length.

My path is the same as before: live out my vocation, my marriage, and try to have some fun along the way. I can do no other.
« Last Edit: February 10, 2019, 12:06:54 PM by Bonaventure »
 
The following users thanked this post: Heinrich, mikemac, Gardener, Xavier

Offline Kreuzritter

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 940
  • Thanked: 705 times
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Indefectibility: Game Over
« Reply #577 on: June 12, 2019, 07:21:23 AM »
Man is a rational animal.  All our experiences are mediated by reason.  This includes propositions of Faith.

But talking about faith as subject to reason gives and unclear/ misleading sense of their relationship.  Faith is the superior.

Faith is hardly the superior. Every proposition, even those taken on faith, must conform with reason. They must be both internally and externally coherent. As Vetus has stated several times, no proposition (even those made by "God" or the Church) can contradict logic.

This argument is asinine. Of course no proposition can contradict logic, for such becomes nonsensical when logic is something that follows from the meanings of the constitutents of conceptual language and thought. Logic is of course kign of its own domain. But Faith is not something merely operating on the level of and expressed in conceptual language and making propositions within a conceptual system placed over the world. Logic and reason do not even touch the essence of Faith and are no more superior to it than they are to the raw reality of the image of the sun setting over the ocean, which they also, in its essence, cannot touch.
 

Offline Kreuzritter

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 940
  • Thanked: 705 times
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Indefectibility: Game Over
« Reply #578 on: June 12, 2019, 07:23:53 AM »
Yes, the change held the Death Penalty to be inadmissible in the modern context, and does not hold Popes of the past to be wrong.

"The death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person," reads the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

If the death penalty is "an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person," those who sanctioned its use before this recent development did attack, by logical necessity, the inviolability and dignity of the person, thus committing a sin by today's teaching. If they didn't commit a sin back then when executing criminals, one infers, it was because they didn't know any better.

According to Cardinal Ladaria, this new formulation of the Catechism expresses "an authentic development of doctrine that is not in contradiction with the prior teachings of the Magisterium."

How so? The Cardinal proceeds to explain that the previous Church teaching with regards to the death penalty can be explained in a social context in which the penal sanctions were understood differently, and "had developed in an environment in which it was more difficult to guarantee that the criminal could not repeat his crime." In other words, we could attack the inviolability and dignity of the person, and adopt a practice that is now considered to be contrary to the Gospel, because the social and intellectual context was different.

This is development of doctrine at its finest.

Francis added that the death penalty is "in itself, contrary to the Gospel, because a decision is voluntarily made to suppress a human life, which is always sacred in the eyes of the Creator and of whom, in the last analysis, only God can be the true judge and guarantor." That is to say, the whole Church and Christendom adopted a practice that is, in itself, in its essence, contrary to the Gospel. And maintained it for almost two thousand years.

Roma locuta, causa finita. Until the next bump in the road.

This is moral relativism at its finest.

Except you, and the Cardinal, both ignore the fact that Yahweh not only directly sanctioned but commanded the penalty of death under the Law of Moses. Apparently God was unaware of this essential cotnradiction of his Gospel when we made the Israelites violate human dignity; I guess God himself is subject to human social and intellectual context in determinign whethe ror not he has committed an evil, and he didn't sin in commandign a sin, because he didn't know any better.
« Last Edit: June 12, 2019, 07:33:36 AM by Kreuzritter »
 

Offline bigbadtrad

  • Korporal
  • **
  • Posts: 427
  • Thanked: 585 times
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Indefectibility: Game Over
« Reply #579 on: June 12, 2019, 09:11:50 AM »
Kreuz I don't think Vetus is agreeing with the position, just pointing out the absurdity of it.
"God has proved his love to us by laying down his life for our sakes; we too must be ready to lay down our lives for the sake of our brethren." 1 John 3:16
 

Offline Sempronius

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 559
  • Thanked: 301 times
Re: Indefectibility: Game Over
« Reply #580 on: June 12, 2019, 11:42:23 AM »
Kreuz I don't think Vetus is agreeing with the position, just pointing out the absurdity of it.

He’s pointing out the flaws of the Catholic Churchs ”model”.