Author Topic: Martyrdom or suicide?  (Read 2443 times)

Offline TheReturnofLive

  • Korporal
  • **
  • Posts: 324
  • Thanked: 88 times
  • Saint John Chrysostom, pray for me, a sinner!
  • Religion: Eastern Orthodox inquirer
Re: Martyrdom or suicide?
« Reply #120 on: January 13, 2019, 10:20:30 PM »
As Ott puts it, "The Fathers teach that the Church of Christ is easily recognised and distinguished as such from heretical communions. St. Irenaeus holds against the Gnostics that the adherents of the Church throughout the whole world confess the same faith, observe the same commandments and preserve the same form of Church constitution. He compares the Church, which preaches the same truth everywhere, to a seven-branched candlestick, which, visible to all, bears the light of Christ (Adv. haer. V 20, I). St. Augustine compares the Church to a city on a mountain (Mt. S, 14) : "The Church stands clear and visible before all men; for she is the city on the mountain which cannot be hidden" (Contra Cresconium, II, 36, 45)." (Funtamentals of Catholic Dogma).

Rome doesn't fit this Catholicity today though. An FSSP Church, a Liberal Novus Ordo Church, a Byzantine Catholic Church, and a Charismatic Catholic Church all teach different things. An FSSP Church will teach things like No Salvation Outside the Church, the necessity of strict liturgical praxis, will encourage Sacramentals, be repugnant towards religious freedom, will not offer communion to Orthodoxy, and talk about a State of Grace versus a State of Separation, etc. The Liberal Novus Ordo Church will talk about charity in terms of liturgical praxis, about the glories of different religions, talk about how evil the Church in the past was, and will offer communion to the Orthodox. The Byzantine Catholic Church will commemorate Saint Gregory Palamas as a Saint and reject Thomistic theology in the past, even Purgatory as it's taught in the past, some even going so far as to say they are Eastern Orthodox in communion with Rome and venerating Mark of Ephesus and Photius, and will promote Katharsis, Theoria, Theosis, etc., and the Charismatic Church will talk about how Sanctification isn't complete until they are given a gift to speak nonsense.

Rome fails the test of speaking the Same Truth, and holding the Same Faith to everyone everywhere. Therefore, according to your standards Vetus Ordo, Rome is not the Catholic Church.
« Last Edit: January 13, 2019, 10:23:47 PM by TheReturnofLive »
 

Offline Vetus Ordo

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 1547
  • Thanked: 1095 times
  • Religion: The Way
Re: Martyrdom or suicide?
« Reply #121 on: January 14, 2019, 12:08:03 AM »
Rome fails the test of speaking the Same Truth, and holding the Same Faith to everyone everywhere. Therefore, according to your standards Vetus Ordo, Rome is not the Catholic Church.

Three quick remarks:

1. It is not according to my standards. It is according to teaching of Scripture and the Fathers.

2. Your examples only show that there is doctrinal disarray in the Roman Catholic Church. Many people teach and believe different things. This, however, doesn't prove what you want it to prove. In fact, if we were to take the test of perfect doctrinal concord among all living members of a religious organization, no church on earth would pass the test. Yes, not even the Eastern Orthodox. What matters is the official teaching of the Church and, for all its shortcomings and novelties, Rome only has one catechism and one code of canon law to be followed and obeyed.

3. Rather, the heart of the matter is the doctrinal continuity (or discontinuity) between the pre-Vatican II and the post-Vatican II Church in her official documents, confessions of faith, liturgy, etc., not on the faithfulness or different religious musings of her members.
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.
 

Offline TheReturnofLive

  • Korporal
  • **
  • Posts: 324
  • Thanked: 88 times
  • Saint John Chrysostom, pray for me, a sinner!
  • Religion: Eastern Orthodox inquirer
Re: Martyrdom or suicide?
« Reply #122 on: January 14, 2019, 02:00:53 AM »
2. Your examples only show that there is doctrinal disarray in the Roman Catholic Church. Many people teach and believe different things. This, however, doesn't prove what you want it to prove. In fact, if we were to take the test of perfect doctrinal concord among all living members of a religious organization, no church on earth would pass the test. Yes, not even the Eastern Orthodox. What matters is the official teaching of the Church and, for all its shortcomings and novelties, Rome only has one catechism and one code of canon law to be followed and obeyed.

You can't argue an illicit disunity is anywhere equivalent to a licit disunity.

The Popes have solemnly allowed a very clear doctrinal, even moral disunity to exist in their Church. As Popes are the final source of epistemological knowledge on Faith and Morality, the disunity is licit by the decrees of the Popes. The Popes haven't been just silent and complacent with this disunity - they have explicitly allowed this disunity and have established the disunity themselves.

The FSSP was established by Pope John Paul II, and, according to Pope Francis on the FSSP's official website, the FSSP's existence allows a fostering of a proper implementation of the 2nd Vatican Council, by being a standard to which the non FSSP can look up to.
http://www.fssp.org/en/blessing-of-pope-francis-on-the-occasion-of-the-25th-anniversary-of-the-fssp/

The Charismatic Movement was established with explicit approval by Pope Paul VI, and has been endorsed explicitly by Pope John Paul II and Pope Francis. In fact, Pope Francis, having partaken in several Charismatic Masses, has said that the Charismatic Movement is in complete continuity with how King David worshiped God, during one of their Charismatic Jubilee's.
https://zenit.org/articles/pope-francis-comments-and-address-at-charismatic-renewal-convention/

Under the explicit approval of Pope Paul VI, the Byzantine Catholic Churches allowed the veneration of Orthodox-only Saints. Saint Gregory Palamas and others were explicitly added to the liturgical calendar by Pope Paul VI.
http://www.ewtn.com/v/experts/showmessage.asp?number=320354&Pg=&Pgnu=&recnu=


You have no authority to reject these decisions by the Pope, as he is the non-judgeable final authority. As such, he fails the definition put forward by the Fathers.


There may be an Orthodox Bishop who campaigns for LGBT rights and recognitions, but such a disunity is illicit and is disciplined by the Synod of Bishops. If the Synod of Bishops permit LGBT rights, they will be excommunicated by the other Orthodox Churches.

For instance, Father Lazar Puhalo has explicitly encouraged transgender rights in the Church in the OCA, and the OCA has forbidden him from speaking publicly about LGBT because of it, warning to defrock him if he does so.

https://orthodoxwiki.org/Lazar_(Puhalo)_of_Ottawa



Plus, let's not forget that the "One Code of Canon Law" and "One Catechism" undoubtedly contradicts previous Catechisms and previous Codes of Canon Law. The New Code of Canon Law permits Eastern and Oriental Orthodox to Communion without reconciliation, and permits Catholics to participate in non-Catholic worship - two things the Old Canon Law forbade due to it being heretical. The New Catechism explicitly does the same thing in comparison to Old Catechisms, except moreso - the Catechism of Pius X calls Muslims Infidels, while the New Catechism says Muslims together with the Catholics adore one merciful God.
« Last Edit: January 14, 2019, 02:22:52 AM by TheReturnofLive »
 

Offline Stubborn

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 918
  • Thanked: 372 times
Re: Martyrdom or suicide?
« Reply #123 on: January 14, 2019, 07:54:20 AM »
Meanwhile, the Catholic Church has not gone anywhere, her episcopal hierarchy with jurisdiction and her pope are the same as well. Just believe reality and you'll have most of your answers, and forget all the conspiracy theories that leave you with more questions and no answers.

Where is the Catholic Church? Is it the organization headed by Bergoglio?

If so, traditional Catholicism (except for Ecclesia Dei groups) has been proven false. If not, where? A few bishops with no jurisdiction, sedevacantists or otherwise, don't correspond to the fundamental and unchangeable nature of the Church.

As I said, the Catholic Church has not gone anywhere, being the sole and exclusive instrument of salvation for men on earth, it will never go anywhere until the end of the world. For me personally, I was at the Catholic Church last Sunday for Mass, same as always. I've never even been to Rome myself. Over the last 50 years or so it has moved from place to place quite a few times, but it has not ceased to exist.

It almost seems as if you don't believe God and 2000 years worth of tradition and the constant teaching from His Church that says the Church will last until the end of the world - but you do believe some theologians' opinions that are contrary to what the Church teaches and are easily and indisputably proven wrong by reality, as well as Church teachings.   


Not so. I say to forget what the theologians say about this particular issue, not everything they ever said. The point being that they are wrong on this issue - and obviously so. We have the benefit of reality which proves them to be wrong on this.

Again, I'm afraid you don't seem to fully appreciate the consequences of what you're proposing. If the teaching about the unchangeable nature of the Church is wrong, traditional Catholicism is ipso facto wrong. What sort of Tradition are you maintaining if the rock upon which Christ built His Church is an optional feature?

The unchangeable nature of the Church and traditional Catholicism is not wrong. Indeed, no faithful traditional Catholic would ever even suggest such a thing. What is wrong, as reality proves, is the opinions of theologians who claim that the indefectible Church defects when the pope does, and it is also wrong to say that that this opinion is a teaching of the Church.

Not sure who bears the greater guilt, the theologians, or those who believe that their opinions are actually a teaching of the Church.

   
Even after a long life of sin, if the Christian receives the Sacrament of the dying with the appropriate dispositions, he will go straight to heaven without having to go to purgatory. - Fr. M. Philipon; This sacrament prepares man for glory immediately, since it is given to those who are departing from this life. - St. Thomas Aquinas; It washes away the sins that remain to be atoned, and the vestiges of sin; it comforts and strengthens the soul of the sick person, arousing in him a great trust and confidence in the divine mercy. Thus strengthened, he bears the hardships and struggles of his illness more easily and resists the temptation of the devil and the heel of the deceiver more readily; and if it be advantageous to the welfare of his soul, he sometimes regains his bodily health. - Council of Trent
 

Offline awkwardcustomer

  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 2148
  • Thanked: 840 times
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Martyrdom or suicide?
« Reply #124 on: January 14, 2019, 08:32:03 AM »
3. Rather, the heart of the matter is the doctrinal continuity (or discontinuity) between the pre-Vatican II and the post-Vatican II Church in her official documents, confessions of faith, liturgy, etc., not on the faithfulness or different religious musings of her members.

Yes, okay, and ..

There have been various responses to your often repeated point.  And yet you keep making your point, which suggests that none of the responses is sufficient for you.

What is your answer to the current situation?  That the Church has defected?

Is that the answer you're really looking for?
And formerly the heretics were manifest; but now the Church is filled with heretics in disguise.  
St Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lecture 15, para 9.

And what rough beast, it's hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?
WB Yeats, 'The Second Coming'.
 

Offline Kreuzritter

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 774
  • Thanked: 610 times
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Martyrdom or suicide?
« Reply #125 on: January 14, 2019, 12:31:01 PM »
Well, you can't proclaim that the Pope has supreme jurisdiction and then implicitly deny this when things get uncomfortable.

Supreme jurisdiction includes with it the power to determine how the next Pope will be selected.  It could be via direct selection, or via selection of electors.  But however the Pope determines it, that is the only way the next Pope can be selected.  If any other way were even possible, the Pope's jurisdiction would not be supreme.

Moreover, the Church would lack legal continuity from one Pope to the next if Popes would be selected via extra-legal means.

This is not revelation. It's an argument from philsophy shaped by the language of Roman jurisprudence. The Church is the Mystical Body of Christ, not an institution dependent upon human notions of legality.
 
The following users thanked this post: awkwardcustomer

Offline awkwardcustomer

  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 2148
  • Thanked: 840 times
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Martyrdom or suicide?
« Reply #126 on: January 14, 2019, 01:11:57 PM »
^^^ 

The Church is the Mystical Body of Christ.  The Church cannot defect.

Any explanation for the current situation has to take account of these facts. 
« Last Edit: January 14, 2019, 01:14:25 PM by awkwardcustomer »
And formerly the heretics were manifest; but now the Church is filled with heretics in disguise.  
St Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lecture 15, para 9.

And what rough beast, it's hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?
WB Yeats, 'The Second Coming'.
 
The following users thanked this post: Kreuzritter

Offline Kreuzritter

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 774
  • Thanked: 610 times
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Martyrdom or suicide?
« Reply #127 on: January 14, 2019, 01:33:53 PM »
Furthermore, there were no cardinals for the first millennium of the Church's existence. You really have turned the Roman system of the modern age into a false image of the essential Church if you're claiming the Church's and Papacy's existence are ontologically dependent upon that group of spiritual and literal harlots, and in a similar vein I can sympathise with the rage of someone like Maximillian against what he calls "Ultramontanism".

I haven't made the Papacy's existence to be ontologically dependent upon the College of Cardinals. The Popes did. Not ontologically, per se, but legally as supreme lawgivers.

No, they didn't. And again, as you have to if you subscribe to Aristotelian metaphysics, you're conflating the actual existence of the Papacy with the actual existence of a pope. I refuse to do this.

Quote
No, you just contradicted yourself. If she in fact has perpetual successors until the end, then there can't have been a time at which she didn't. That's absurd. The Pope doesn't receive his office from men, but through the Papacy, from Jesus Christ. And the Church's divine and unchangeable constitution given by Christ has never included the existence of cardinals and their having to choose the Pope.

Absurd?

Yes. If the Church does turn out to have papal successors until the end of time, then there cannot be any time at which the dogma of perpetuity of successors until the end of time was falsified.

Quote
I suggested that if we haven't had any valid pope since, say, Pius XII and then 10 years from now, God would directly crown another pope, there would still be a gap of 71 years where the Church was effectively without one and without any legal means to elect a new one.

And you drew an inference from that which I cannot accept because it involves a self-contradiction.

Quote
If St. Peter is to have successors in his primacy of the whole Church and for all time, as the dogma affirms, the Church can't be left in a permanent state of interregnum where her legals means to elect a new pope are extinguished.

She wouldn't ever be left in a permanent state of interregnum if there, in fact, comes to be a future pope.

Quote
As per current Church law, there is no solution. Another solution to this problem, as you already hinted at, would be for a new pope to be elected by other means, say by a a few living faithful bishops. But this might be a denial of the supreme jurisdiction of the pope, which is another dogma. And another problem.

I don't believe non-existent popes have jurisdiction. And immoral laws cannot have validity. I'd call leaving the faithful without possibility of having a pope because you handed over the process of electing one to the elite cardinals, for ultimately politicla reasons, without provisions for the total disappearance of the same, as immoral. The Pope may have the keys, but the Church belongs to Jesus Christ and exists for the sake of the faithful.

I haven't claimed she is not visible. And don't just throw in identifiability as though it were the same thing.

They're intimately related, though. The Church's visibility also entails that she is easily identifiable from everything else.[/quote]

She would be identifiable through her actions, just not in her final terrestrial authority and to the degree of certainty required for things like defining dogma and securing a certain kind of unity as only a pope can. I can't see how the Churchwould have been built without popes; but in their absence, I do still see the Church around me, even if it is like a sunray in the distance shining through a dark cloud.

Quote
As Ott puts it, "The Fathers teach that the Church of Christ is easily recognised and distinguished as such from heretical communions. St. Irenaeus holds against the Gnostics that the adherents of the Church throughout the whole world confess the same faith, observe the same commandments and preserve the same form of Church constitution. He compares the Church, which preaches the same truth everywhere, to a seven-branched candlestick, which, visible to all, bears the light of Christ (Adv. haer. V 20, I). St. Augustine compares the Church to a city on a mountain (Mt. S, 14) : "The Church stands clear and visible before all men; for she is the city on the mountain which cannot be hidden" (Contra Cresconium, II, 36, 45)." (Funtamentals of Catholic Dogma).

Ok, but taken too far and this is question begging. Heretical sects could presumably also show such unity within themselves. What they do not do is bear the light of Christ. Thats same light I see in some "Catholics" and "Catholic" groups, but not in others and not from the liberal hierarchy.
 
Quote
The more correct thing to say would be that Bergoglio does not head the Church. There is a distinct difference.

I understand.

In your opinion, who are the bishops and cardinals, if any, that comprise the hierarchical structure of the Catholic Church today?

I can't say in the particular case precisely because of the doubts over the existence of a pope. But in the same vein as there being saints on both sides of the Great Schisms, he who is validly ordained, with at least enough belief in the true Faith and implicit loyalty to the Papacy to be practising the same religion as the Apostles, he would comprise that structure. I have faith they exist and hope they will be revealed, as a group, at some time.

Quote
It would be a straw man if I suggested that such was your claim. I didn't. I was providing a rhetorical example that a true hierarchy living in caves, so to speak, unknown to the real world and to faithful Catholics, would be useless.

But they aren't useless. Wherever they are teaching the Faith, administering the Sacraments, and accomplishing the works of spiritual and corporal mercy, they are not working in vain, and they wouldn't exist in vain because the future of the Church on Earth depends upon them.
 

Offline Kreuzritter

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 774
  • Thanked: 610 times
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Martyrdom or suicide?
« Reply #128 on: January 14, 2019, 01:50:03 PM »
I'll make a point from the Catholic Encyclopedia.

Quote
(1) As the supreme teacher of the Church, whose it is to prescribe what is to be believed by all the faithful, and to take measures for the preservation and the propagation of the faith, the following are the rights which pertain to the pope:

    it is his to set forth creeds, and to determine when and by whom an explicit profession of faith shall be made (cf. Council of Trent, Sess. 24, cc. 1 and 12);
    it is his to prescribe and to command books for the religious instruction of the faithful; thus, for example, Clement XIII has recommended the Roman Catechism to all the bishops.
    The pope alone can establish a university, possessing the status and privileges of a canonically erected Catholic university;
    to him also belongs the direction of Catholic missions throughout the world; this charge is fulfilled through the Congregation of the Propaganda.
    It is his to prohibit the reading of such books as are injurious to faith or morals, and to determine the conditions on which certain classes of books may be issued by Catholics;
    his is the condemnation of given propositions as being either heretical or deserving of some minor degree of censure, and lastly
    he has the right to interpret authentically the natural law. Thus, it is his to say what is lawful or unlawful in regard to social and family life, in regard to the practice of usury, etc.

(2) With the pope's office of supreme teacher are closely connected his rights in regard to the worship of God: for it is the law of prayer that fixes the law of belief. In this sphere very much has been reserved to the sole regulation of the Holy See. Thus

    the pope alone can prescribe the liturgical services employed in the Church. If a doubt should occur in regard to the ceremonial of the liturgy, a bishop may not settle the point on his own authority, but must have recourse to Rome. The Holy See likewise prescribes rules in regard to the devotions used by the faithful, and in this way checks the growth of what is novel and unauthorized.
    At the present day the institution and abrogation of festivals which was till a comparatively recent time free to all bishops as regards their own dioceses, is reserved to Rome.
    The solemn canonization of a saint is proper to the pope. Indeed it is commonly held that this is an exercise of the papal infallibility. Beatification and every permission for the public veneration of any of the servants of God is likewise reserved to his decision.
    He alone gives to anyone the privilege of a private chapel where Mass may be said.
    He dispenses the treasury of the Church, and the grant of plenary indulgences is reserved to him. While he has no authority in regard to the substantial rites of the sacraments, and is bound to preserve them as they were given to the Church by Christ and His Apostles, certain powers in their regard belong to him;
    he can give to simple priests the power to confirm, and to bless the oil of the sick and the oil of catechumens, and
    he can establish diriment and impedient impediments to matrimony.

(3) The legislative power of the pope carries with it the following rights:

    he can legislate for the whole Church, with or without the assistance of a general council;
    if he legislates with the aid of a council it is his to convoke it, to preside, to direct its deliberations, to confirm its acts.
    He has full authority to interpret, alter, and abrogate both his own laws and those established by his predecessors. He has the same plenitude of power as they enjoyed, and stands in the same relation to their laws as to those which he himself has decreed;
    he can dispense individuals from the obligation of all purely ecclesiastical laws, and can grant privileges and exemptions in their regard.
    In this connection may be mentioned his power to dispense from vows where the greater glory of God renders it desirable. Considerable powers of dispensation are granted to bishops, and, in a restricted measure, also to priests; but there are some vows reserved altogether to the Holy See.

(4) In virtue of his supreme judicial authority

    causae majores are reserved to him. By this term are signified cases dealing with matters of great moment, or those in which personages of eminent dignity are concerned.
    His appellate jurisdiction has been discussed in the previous section. It should, however, be noted
    that the pope has full right, should he see fit, to deal even with causae minores in the first instance, and not merely by reason of an appeal (Trent, Sess. XXIV; cap. 20). In what concerns punishment,
    he can inflict censures either by judicial sentence or by general laws which operate without need of such sentence.
    He further reserves certain cases to his own tribunal. All cases of heresy come before the Congregation of the Inquisition. A similar reservation covers the cases in which a bishop or a reigning prince is the accused party.

(5) As the supreme governor of the Church the pope has authority over all appointments to its public offices. Thus

    it is his to nominate to bishoprics, or, where the nomination has been conceded to others, to give confirmation. Further, he alone can translate bishops from one see to another, can accept their resignation, and can, where grave cause exists, sentence to deprivation.
    He can establish dioceses, and can annul a previously existing arrangement in favour of a new one. Similarly, he alone can erect cathedral and collegiate chapters.
    He can approve new religious orders, and can, if he sees fit, exempt them from the authority of local ordinaries.
    Since his office of supreme ruler imposes on him the duty of enforcing the canons, it is requisite that he should be kept informed as to the state of the various dioceses. He may obtain this information by legates or by summoning the bishops to Rome. At the present day this jus relationum is exercised through the triennial visit ad limina required of all bishops. This system was introduced by Sixtus V in 1585 (Constitution, "Rom. Pontifex"), and confirmed by Benedict XIV in 1740 (Constitution, "Quod Sancta") .
    It is to be further observed that the pope's office of chief ruler of the Church carries with it jure divino the right to free intercourse with the pastors and the faithful. The placitum regium, by which this intercourse was limited and impeded, was therefore an infringement of a sacred right, and as such was solemnly condemned by the Vatican Council (Constitution, "Pastor Aeternus", cap. iii). To the pope likewise belongs the supreme administration of the goods of the Church.
    He alone can, where there is just cause, alienate any considerable quantity of such property. Thus, e.g., Julius III, at the time of the restoration of religion in England under Queen Mary validated the title of those laymen who had acquired Church lands during the spoliations of the previous reigns.
    The pope has further the right to impose taxes on the clergy and the faithful for ecclesiastical purposes (cf. Trent, Sess. XXI, cap. iv de Ref.).

If you actually believe all of this is Apostolic tradition revealed by God, and not the result of post-Medieval theological speculation engaged in a kind of neo-Pharisaism, its conclusions drawn from implicit vital, political and philosophical, biases I don't know what to say.

The Church exists forever. The Novus Ordo religion is not that of Jesus and the Apostles. Francis is a heretic almost certainly no pope. Facts, not speculations.
 

Offline Vetus Ordo

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 1547
  • Thanked: 1095 times
  • Religion: The Way
Re: Martyrdom or suicide?
« Reply #129 on: January 14, 2019, 03:10:42 PM »
What is your answer to the current situation?  That the Church has defected?

As it stands, there are no answers to be found within the traditional paradigm. That's basically the point.

It's a self-defeating position in the end, whether it be sedevacantism or "recognize and resist," stoically fighting to preserve a church that no longer exists. Nor can she come back.

The only defection that seems to have occurred is the defection of the premises that were traditionally taught and believed about the Church and the Papacy. We were completely gobsmacked by God, beaten up, humbled and punched in the face to wake up, very much like He did time and again with the ancient Jews.
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: Maximilian

Offline Vetus Ordo

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 1547
  • Thanked: 1095 times
  • Religion: The Way
Re: Martyrdom or suicide?
« Reply #130 on: January 14, 2019, 03:15:34 PM »
If you actually believe all of this is Apostolic tradition revealed by God, and not the result of post-Medieval theological speculation engaged in a kind of neo-Pharisaism, its conclusions drawn from implicit vital, political and philosophical, biases I don't know what to say.

What I believe is immaterial.

What is relevant is that Church taught it. If she taught those things about the Pope and they aren't really true, then what leg is traditional Catholicism left to stand on? None.

It must definitely morph into something more akin to Western Orthodoxy.
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.
 

Offline Kreuzritter

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 774
  • Thanked: 610 times
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Martyrdom or suicide?
« Reply #131 on: January 14, 2019, 03:35:46 PM »
What is relevant is that Church taught it. If she taught those things about the Pope and they aren't really true, then what leg is traditional Catholicism left to stand on? None.

She hasn't taught most of them. Not in a council and presented as part of the deposit of faith anyway, and not in general to the laity in catechising them, and so, as far as I'm concerned, never to the universal Church as binding on their faith, regardless of any post-Tridentine or moreso post-Vatican I theologian's opinion to the contrary. The contrary would be absurd, because any claim of their apostolic origin would be absurd. They are the relatively recent human concoction of theologians and, even worse, clerical politicians, and that's just a fact.

The pope has the God-given power to found universities? Yeah, that was clearly taught by the Apostles.  ::)
 

Offline Kreuzritter

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 774
  • Thanked: 610 times
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Martyrdom or suicide?
« Reply #132 on: January 14, 2019, 03:38:52 PM »
.

« Last Edit: January 14, 2019, 03:46:25 PM by Kreuzritter »
 

Offline Kreuzritter

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 774
  • Thanked: 610 times
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Martyrdom or suicide?
« Reply #133 on: January 14, 2019, 03:46:09 PM »
The only defection that seems to have occurred is the defection of the premises that were traditionally taught and believed about the Church and the Papacy. We were completely gobsmacked by God, beaten up, humbled and punched in the face to wake up, very much like He did time and again with the ancient Jews.

What was "traditionally taught" would have to go back to the Apostles. I don't see how this Papolatrous Ultramontanism does, nor even that it follows necessarily from the dogmas of Vatican I.

On the other hand, your point, if meant as a defence of the religion of the Novus Ordo, would be ridiculous. If the Church could have been wrong about the things contradicted by Vatican II and its implementation, then she could just as well have been wrong about all of the papal powers and notions of indefectibility of the bishops upon which your arguments are logically dependent. Although maybe that is your point? Could you just come out and say it in plain English, like Maximillian does?


« Last Edit: January 14, 2019, 03:48:53 PM by Kreuzritter »
 

Offline Vetus Ordo

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 1547
  • Thanked: 1095 times
  • Religion: The Way
Re: Martyrdom or suicide?
« Reply #134 on: January 14, 2019, 04:00:40 PM »
What is relevant is that Church taught it. If she taught those things about the Pope and they aren't really true, then what leg is traditional Catholicism left to stand on? None.

She hasn't taught most of them. Not in a council and presented as part of the deposit of faith anyway, and not in general to the laity in catechising them, and so, as far as I'm concerned, never to the universal Church as binding on their faith, regardless of any post-Tridentine or moreso post-Vatican I theologian's opinion to the contrary. The contrary would be absurd, because any claim of their apostolic origin would be absurd. They are the relatively recent human concoction of theologians and, even worse, clerical politicians, and that's just a fact.

The pope has the God-given power to found universities? Yeah, that was clearly taught by the Apostles.  ::)

I'm not arguing they are true in themselves. What matters is that Church taught them as true. These teachings about the Pope were presented as true, or at least as sure, even if some had not been defined with a solemn judgment or proposed as definitive by the ordinary and universal magisterium. Nevertheless, they were an authentic expression of the ordinary magisterium of the Roman pontiff, or of the college of bishops, and therefore required religious submission of will and intellect.
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.