Author Topic: Why the Catholic Church abandoned St. Augustine & condemned Jansenism  (Read 861 times)

Offline Sin of Adam

  • Hellebardier
  • *
  • Posts: 54
  • Thanked: 32 times
  • in hoc signo vinces
  • Religion: Traditional Roman Catholic
An excerpt from the book, "God Owes Us Nothing" by Dr. Kolakowski:

Jansenists hardly ever called themselves “Jansenists,” of course; the name was coined by their Jesuit enemies almost at the beginning of the controversy; it suggested a kind of a new sect set up by one recently deceased theologian. Jansenius’s followers called themselves disciples of Augustine, whose authority had been unshakable in Christianity. They insisted that they—and their master, Jansenius—had nothing new to say; they simply followed and repeated the most traditional teaching of the Church, which conformed to the Gospels and to the epistles of Saint Paul and was codified in Augustinian theology. The “Molinist” doctrine, on the other hand, was, they argued, a novelty in the Catholic Church, even though it brought back to life the most dangerous heresy of the Pelagians or semi-Pelagians (the so-called “Marsilians”). The Jesuit writers were indeed in an awkward position when they were challenged by the authority of Augustine, and most of the time they preferred to avoid the issue. When pressed on this point, they either issued gratuitous denials or sometimes—not often—pointed out that the great saint, much as he deserved respect, was not infallible, after all, and his writings were not dogmatically binding; they also averred that their own theory of grace was perfectly in keeping with the teaching of Thomas Aquinas, whose authority they often invoked. They accused the Jansenists, however, of being tainted with the horrors of the Calvinist heresy. Good arguments may be advanced to show that both sides were right in their accusations. Jansenists were on firm ground in saying that they were faithful to the Augustinian teaching, and quite justified in scenting Pelagian errors in the Jesuit theology. The Jesuits were no less right in demonstrating the fundamental conformity of Jansenist tenets with Calvin’s theory of predestination. This amounts to saying that Calvin was, on this point, a good Augustinian and that, by condemning Jansenius, the Church was in effect condemning—without, of course, stating it explicitly—Augustine himself, its own greatest theological authority. The pronouncements and the anathemas of the Council of Trent left some ambiguities which both Jesuits and Jansenists could plausibly interpret in their favor; the successive condemnations of Baius, Jansenius, and Quesnel, however, sealed the fate of the Augustinian tradition on this crucial point in the Catholic world. This was a momentous event in the history of Christianity and thus in the European history of ideas, not a long-forgotten quarrel of hair-splitting medieval minds.

The Council of Trent did confirm the Augustinian teaching. Whatever God orders is feasible with his grace but this grace is not always there and not everybody gets it; otherwise we would not need to ask for help. And it is important to keep in mind that grace is refused not only to infidels and obdurate sinners but also to faithful and just people, who really do wish to abide by divine orders: they have will but not power. The paradigmatic example, both to Augustine and to Jansenius, is, of course, the denial of Peter, a supremely iustus vir who had the will to follow the commandments but was not provided with the divine aid to do it. One simple Augustinian sentence (among many) settles the matter: “I want you to will, but it is not enough that you will. You have to be aided so that you will fully accomplish what you will.”7 Even the Lord’s Prayer, “do not lead us into temptation,” implies that “it is not given to all not to be tempted above what they are capable of.”8 The self-conceited Pelagian contention that the will cannot be enslaved, and that we simply do not sin if we do not want to, is to be found among scholastics who fail to see that it is not enough to will, or to will not to, in order to overpower the temptation. “It is grace which causes that we not only will to do what is right but that we are able to do so.” Bad will can be converted into good will only by the power of grace. God demonstrated, through Peter’s example, that he punishes the pride of those who rely on their own powers. “And what is man without grace but what Peter was when he denied Christ?”9 Jansenius claims that Aquinas’s theology does not depart from Augustinian tenets on this point. Did not he say that man is in duty bound to perform acts he is incapable of performing without grace, which God does not always confer (a just punishment for previous crimes or at least for original sin)?10 Didn’t he say that the sinner is guilty even if he cannot escape sinning, not unlike a drunken killer who is not excused just because he committed the crime as a result of being drunk, since he was guilty of having got drunk in the first place?

According to Augustine, Jurieu, and Calvin, human creatures after the Fall can perform no morally good act (conform to divine law) unaided; for every such act they need the infusion of grace which is given to some and refused to others by the sheer wish of God, and not because some are more deserving of grace than others.
According to the semi-Pelagian teaching of the Jesuits, we do need divine grace to do good but “sufficient grace” is given to all, and it needs only our free will to make it efficient. Since this efficient grace is a constant condition of our life, we may say that moral perfection and our salvation depend on our effort and will. According to Aquinas, we have enough grace to perform some good acts by our free choice, but the free choice does not suffice to avoid all sins in all circumstances.

One might argue that the Augustinians’ fears and worries were not well grounded, as Christianity has after all survived after adopting a semi-Pelagian doctrine of salvation; neither has it been transformed into a secular philosophy, despite the intense efforts of many Catholic theologians. The powerful image of Jesus Christ is still there: a good shepherd with wide-open arms. But it is not the Christianity that the Jansenists carried in their hearts. If they were here now they might say, with infinite sadness, that “the cross has been emptied.” As a result of the long anti-Jansenist campaign, Christianity did undergo a mutation in both theological and cultural terms, imperceptible at the time. This probably made the survival of the Church possible, but at a price which the seventeenth-century Augustinians would have found exorbitant.

« Last Edit: October 16, 2020, 10:22:54 AM by Sin of Adam »
Lumen ad revelationem gentium: et gloriam plebes tuae Israel.
 
The following users thanked this post: Jayne, Maximilian, Prayerful, queen.saints, Matto

Offline Sin of Adam

  • Hellebardier
  • *
  • Posts: 54
  • Thanked: 32 times
  • in hoc signo vinces
  • Religion: Traditional Roman Catholic
Re: Why the Catholic Church abandoned St. Augustine & condemned Jansenism
« Reply #1 on: October 16, 2020, 10:30:20 AM »
Even the Lord’s Prayer, “do not lead us into temptation,” implies that “it is not given to all not to be tempted above what they are capable of.”

This is exactly why Pope Francis changed the Italian Missal translation of the Lord's prayer.

The Lord’s Prayer changed from “and lead us not into temptation” to “do not let us fall into temptation.”

Doctrinal revolutions hundreds of years ago still cause ripples and sometimes waves even today. In this case from Augustinianism to Semi-Pelagianism.
Lumen ad revelationem gentium: et gloriam plebes tuae Israel.
 

Offline Sin of Adam

  • Hellebardier
  • *
  • Posts: 54
  • Thanked: 32 times
  • in hoc signo vinces
  • Religion: Traditional Roman Catholic
Re: Why the Catholic Church abandoned St. Augustine & condemned Jansenism
« Reply #2 on: October 16, 2020, 10:45:19 AM »
Relevant to our discussion is the following article which appeared on Vatican News not too long ago:

Development of doctrine is a people that walks together
The Synod for the Amazon has provoked a lively debate among Catholics. There are some who fear going astray from the path of Tradition. The history of the Church shows the path of fidelity.
By Sergio Centofanti

Two thousand years of history teach us that the development of doctrine in the Church is a people that journeys together. Journeying through the ages, the Church sees and learns new things, always growing deeper in her understanding of the Faith. During this journey, there are sometimes people who stop along the way, others who run too quickly, and yet others who take a different path.

Benedict XVI: the Church’s teaching authority cannot be frozen
In this regard, the words of Benedict XVI – in a Letter written in 2009 on the occasion of the remission of the excommunication of the four bishops illicitly consecrated by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, the founder of the Society of Saint Pius X – are significant:

“The Church’s teaching authority cannot be frozen in the year 1962 – this must be quite clear to the Society. But some of those who put themselves forward as great defenders of the Council also need to be reminded that Vatican II embraces the entire doctrinal history of the Church. Anyone who wishes to be obedient to the Council has to accept the faith professed over the centuries, and cannot sever the roots from which the tree draws its life".

Drawing together new things and old
Two elements must be considered: not freezing the Magisterium in a given age; and at the same time remaining faithful to Tradition. As Jesus says in the Gospel: “Therefore every scribe who has been trained for the kingdom of heaven is like a householder who brings out of his treasure what is new and what is old” (Mt 13:52). We cannot simply cling to old things, nor can we simply welcome new things, separating them from the old.

Not stopping at the letter, but allowing oneself to be guided by the Spirit
It is necessary to understand when a development of doctrine is faithful to tradition. The history of the Church teaches us that it is necessary to follow the Spirit, rather than the strict letter. In fact, if one is looking for non-contradiction between texts and documents, they’re likely to hit a roadblock. The point of reference is not a written text, but the people who walk together. As we read in the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

“The Christian faith is not a ‘religion of the book’. Christianity is the religion of the ‘Word’ of God, ‘not a written and mute word, but incarnate and living’. If the Scriptures are not to remain a dead letter, Christ, the eternal Word of the living God, must, through the Holy Spirit, ‘open (our) minds to understand the Scriptures” (CCC, 108).

The great leap forward at the Council of Jerusalem, the first Council
If this spiritual and ecclesial viewpoint is lacking, every development will be seen as a demolition of doctrine and the building up of a new church. We should feel great admiration for the early Christians who took part in the Council of Jerusalem in the first century. Although they were Jews, they nonetheless abolished the centuries-old tradition of circumcision. It must have been very traumatic for some of them to make this leap. Fidelity, however, is not an attachment to a particular rule or regulation, but a way of “walking together” as the people of God.

Do unbaptized babies go to heaven?
Perhaps the most striking example concerns the salvation of unbaptized babies. Here we are talking about what is most important for believers: eternal salvation. In the Roman (“Tridentine”) Catechism, promulgated by Pope St Pius V in accord with a Decree of the Council of Trent, we read that no other possibility of gaining salvation is left to infants, if Baptism is not imparted to them (from the chapter, “On the Sacrament of Baptism”). And many people will remember what was said in the Catechism of Saint Pius X: “Where do babies who die without Baptism go? Babies who die without Baptism go to Limbo, where there is neither supernatural reward nor penalty; because, having original sin, and only that, they do not merit heaven; but neither do they deserve hell or purgatory”.

Development of doctrine from St Pius X to St John Paul II
The Catechism of the Council of Trent was published in 1566; that of St Pius X, in 1912. But the Catechism of the Catholic Church, produced under the direction of then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, and approved in 1992 by Pope St John Paul II, says something different:

“As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God…  Indeed, the great mercy of God ‘Who desires that all men should be saved’ (1 Tim 2:4), and Jesus’ tenderness toward children which caused Him to say: ‘Let the children come to Me, do not hinder them’ (Mk 10:4), allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism” (CCC, 1261).

So the solution was already in the Gospel, but we did not see it for many centuries.

The question of women in the history of the Church
The Church has made a great deal of progress on the question of women. The growing awareness of the rights and dignity of women was greeted by Pope John XXIII as a sign of the times. In the First Letter to Timothy, St Paul wrote, “Let a woman learn in silence with all submissiveness. I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over men” (v. 11-12). It was only in 1970’s, during the pontificate of St Paul VI, that women began to teach future priests in the pontifical universities. Yet even here, we had forgotten that it was a woman, St Mary Magdalene, who first proclaimed the Resurrection of Jesus to the Apostles.

The truth will set you free
A final example is the recognition of freedom of religion and of conscience, as well as freedom in politics and freedom of expression, by the Magisterium of the post-Conciliar Church. It is a real leap forward from the documents of 19th century popes such as Gregory XVI, who, in the encyclical Mirari vos, defined these principles as “most poisonous errors”. Looking at this text from a literal point of view, there seems to be a great contradiction, rather than a linear development. But if we read the Gospel more closely, we recall the words of Jesus: “If you continue in my word, you will truly be my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free” (Jn 8:31-32).

The sorrow of the Popes
The saints have always invited us to love the Popes, as a condition for walking together in the Church. Speaking to the priests of the Apostolic Union in 1912, Pope St Pius X, with “the outpouring of a sorrowful heart”, said, “It seems incredible, and even painful, that there should be priests to whom this recommendation must be made, but in our days we are unfortunately in this harsh, unhappy condition of having to say to priests: Love the Pope!”

Pope St John Paul II, in the Apostolic Letter Ecclesia Dei, noting “with great affliction” the illegitimate episcopal ordinations conferred by Archbishop Lefebvre, recalled that “a notion of Tradition which opposes the universal Magisterium of the Church possessed by the Bishop of Rome and the Body of Bishops” is “especially contradictory”. He continued, “It is impossible to remain faithful to the Tradition while breaking the ecclesial bond with him to whom, in the person of the Apostle Peter, Christ Himself entrusted the ministry of unity in His Church”.

And Benedict XVI, in a “Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church concerning the Remission of the Excommunication of the Four Bishops Consecrated Archbishop Lefebvre” expressed the same sorrow: “I was saddened by the fact that even Catholics who, after all, might have had a better knowledge of the situation, thought they had to attack me with open hostility”.

Catholics should not only never be lacking in respect toward the Pope, but should love him as the Vicar of Christ.

Appeal to unity: Walking together toward Christ
Fidelity to Jesus does not, therefore, mean being fixated on some text written at a given time in these two thousand years of history; rather, it is fidelity to His people, the people of God walking together toward Christ, united with His Vicar and with the Successors of the Apostles. As Pope Francis said at the Angelus on Sunday, at the conclusion of the Synod:

“What was the Synod? It was, as the word says, a journey undertaken together, comforted by the courage and consolations that come from the Lord. We walked, looking each other in the eye and listening to each other, sincerely, without concealing difficulties, experiencing the beauty of moving forward together in order serve”.

Link: https://www.vaticannews.va/en/church/news/2019-10/development-of-doctrine-is-a-people-that-walks-together.html
Lumen ad revelationem gentium: et gloriam plebes tuae Israel.
 

Offline Daniel

  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 3076
  • Thanked: 812 times
Re: Why the Catholic Church abandoned St. Augustine & condemned Jansenism
« Reply #3 on: October 16, 2020, 10:46:44 AM »
Even the Lord’s Prayer, “do not lead us into temptation,” implies that “it is not given to all not to be tempted above what they are capable of.”

Why do you say that "lead us not into temptation" implies that God leads some people into levels of temptation above what they are capable of? That doesn't seem to follow. All it implies is that God may lead us into temptation, and that He probably will lead us into temptation if we don't ask Him not to. (But, as St. Paul points out, "God [. . .] will not suffer you to be tempted above that which you are able" (1 Corinthians 10:13).)

edit - Oh, I see you were quoting from a book. Still, it doesn't seem to follow
« Last Edit: October 16, 2020, 10:48:31 AM by Daniel »
 

Offline Sin of Adam

  • Hellebardier
  • *
  • Posts: 54
  • Thanked: 32 times
  • in hoc signo vinces
  • Religion: Traditional Roman Catholic
Re: Why the Catholic Church abandoned St. Augustine & condemned Jansenism
« Reply #4 on: October 16, 2020, 02:51:17 PM »
Even the Lord’s Prayer, “do not lead us into temptation,” implies that “it is not given to all not to be tempted above what they are capable of.”

Why do you say that "lead us not into temptation" implies that God leads some people into levels of temptation above what they are capable of? That doesn't seem to follow. All it implies is that God may lead us into temptation, and that He probably will lead us into temptation if we don't ask Him not to. (But, as St. Paul points out, "God [. . .] will not suffer you to be tempted above that which you are able" (1 Corinthians 10:13).)

edit - Oh, I see you were quoting from a book. Still, it doesn't seem to follow

The argument flows from the implication in the Lord's Prayer that whatever temptation (or testing) we are subjected to can be withstood with - and perhaps only with - God's help.
Lumen ad revelationem gentium: et gloriam plebes tuae Israel.
 

Offline Michael Wilson

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Hauptmann
  • ****
  • Posts: 8109
  • Thanked: 6474 times
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Why the Catholic Church abandoned St. Augustine & condemned Jansenism
« Reply #5 on: October 16, 2020, 06:28:06 PM »
The Church didn't "Abandon St. Augustine"; it condemned the erroneous interpretation of Augustine's writings contained in a book by Bishop Cornelius Jansen. What next; an apologia for Arianism?
"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
 
The following users thanked this post: Wenceslav, Blue Violet

Offline Non Nobis

  • Why are you fearful?
  • Mary Garden
  • Hauptmann
  • ****
  • Posts: 5008
  • Thanked: 3798 times
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Why the Catholic Church abandoned St. Augustine & condemned Jansenism
« Reply #6 on: October 16, 2020, 08:46:17 PM »
The Church didn't "Abandon St. Augustine"; it condemned the erroneous interpretation of Augustine's writings contained in a book by Bishop Cornelius Jansen.

Yes, that's enough for those like you (and me) who think virtually everything the Popes taught formally prior to 1958 or so is true and final.  But is that what the OP thinks or what the members responding here think?  Some even deny Vatican I.  They have to figure out "The Church" themselves somehow.

I haven't read this yet but it is a long article from 1960 on "The Condemnation of Jansenism" that looks pretty scholarly and thorough.   https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=2792
[Matthew 8:26]  And Jesus saith to them: Why are you fearful, O ye of little faith? Then rising up he commanded the winds, and the sea, and there came a great calm.

[Job  38:1-5]  Then the Lord answered Job out of a whirlwind, and said: [2] Who is this that wrappeth up sentences in unskillful words? [3] Gird up thy loins like a man: I will ask thee, and answer thou me. [4] Where wast thou when I laid up the foundations of the earth? tell me if thou hast understanding. [5] Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?

Jesus, Mary, I love Thee! Save souls!
 

Offline Sin of Adam

  • Hellebardier
  • *
  • Posts: 54
  • Thanked: 32 times
  • in hoc signo vinces
  • Religion: Traditional Roman Catholic
Re: Why the Catholic Church abandoned St. Augustine & condemned Jansenism
« Reply #7 on: October 16, 2020, 09:30:42 PM »
The Church didn't "Abandon St. Augustine"; it condemned the erroneous interpretation of Augustine's writings contained in a book by Bishop Cornelius Jansen. What next; an apologia for Arianism?

A Roman Pontiff implicitly & indirectly condemned St. Augustine's doctrines, which were accepted Catholic doctrine for 1000+ years taught by the Ordinary & Universal Magisterium, by condemning Jansenism. This led to a revolution in the Church that still rages today.

Jansenism is Augustinianism, pure and simple.

No amount of damage control, intellectual or otherwise, can disprove what is obvious documented history.

As for Arianism, it was condemned by a dogmatic ecumenical council ratified by a Roman Pontiff. Jansenism, on the other hand, was condemned by a Pope in a fallible manner who fell prey to political machinations. Mind you, the same authority which is used today to condemn Traditionalists & the Traditional movement. In other words, Popes outside of ex-cathedra pronouncements are entirely fallible.
« Last Edit: October 16, 2020, 10:48:38 PM by Sin of Adam »
Lumen ad revelationem gentium: et gloriam plebes tuae Israel.
 
The following users thanked this post: Maximilian, queen.saints, Philip G.

Offline Sin of Adam

  • Hellebardier
  • *
  • Posts: 54
  • Thanked: 32 times
  • in hoc signo vinces
  • Religion: Traditional Roman Catholic
Re: Why the Catholic Church abandoned St. Augustine & condemned Jansenism
« Reply #8 on: October 16, 2020, 09:32:54 PM »
The Church didn't "Abandon St. Augustine"; it condemned the erroneous interpretation of Augustine's writings contained in a book by Bishop Cornelius Jansen.

Yes, that's enough for those like you (and me) who think virtually everything the Popes taught formally prior to 1958 or so is true and final.  But is that what the OP thinks or what the members responding here think?  Some even deny Vatican I.  They have to figure out "The Church" themselves somehow.

I haven't read this yet but it is a long article from 1960 on "The Condemnation of Jansenism" that looks pretty scholarly and thorough.   https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=2792

Yes because cherry picking Popes and their teachings is not unlike what you condemn.

Anyone who denies Vatican I or any other dogmatic ecumenical council is essentially a heretical schismatic just like the Old Catholics
« Last Edit: October 16, 2020, 10:21:26 PM by Sin of Adam »
Lumen ad revelationem gentium: et gloriam plebes tuae Israel.
 

Offline Daniel

  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 3076
  • Thanked: 812 times
Re: Why the Catholic Church abandoned St. Augustine & condemned Jansenism
« Reply #9 on: October 17, 2020, 07:57:55 AM »
The Church didn't "Abandon St. Augustine"; it condemned the erroneous interpretation of Augustine's writings contained in a book by Bishop Cornelius Jansen.

I've never read Jansen, but from what I do know I think the Jansenist interpretation is far more in line with Augustine than is the Thomistic re-interpretation of Augustine. The Thomistic re-interpretation seeks to harmonize Augustine with Thomas, but, the problem is, it's pretty clear from Augustine's writings that Augustine and Thomas were not saying the same thing to begin with. The Thomistic re-interpretation--even if theologically correct--is unnatural and forced, not faithful to Augustine. If you follow Augustine through to its natural conclusions (Augustine never went that far), what you end up with is something like Calvinism (without the additional Protestant errors) or Jansenism.


St. Augustine's doctrines, which were accepted Catholic doctrine for 1000+ years taught by the Ordinary & Universal Magisterium,

Were they though? (Not a rhetorical question... I actually don't know)

I am aware that Augustine was heavily influential in the West until Thomas came along and turned the tables. And the Magisterium, since then, does appear to more or less teach Thomism. But before that, did the Magisterium ever teach Augustine? or was Augustine simply one opinion among many? (or, rather, the dominant opinion in a world where there weren't many opinions to begin with)
« Last Edit: October 17, 2020, 07:59:29 AM by Daniel »
 

Offline Maximilian

  • Hauptmann
  • ****
  • Posts: 5570
  • Thanked: 3723 times
Re: Why the Catholic Church abandoned St. Augustine & condemned Jansenism
« Reply #10 on: October 17, 2020, 08:14:43 AM »
I think the Jansenist interpretation is far more in line with Augustine than is the Thomistic re-interpretation of Augustine. The Thomistic re-interpretation seeks to harmonize Augustine with Thomas, but, the problem is, it's pretty clear from Augustine's writings that Augustine and Thomas were not saying the same thing to begin with. The Thomistic re-interpretation--even if theologically correct--is unnatural and forced, not faithful to Augustine.

I believe that this is an historical and theological misunderstanding. The teaching of St. Thomas Aquinas on predestination is perfectly in line with St. Augustine. The "Thomistic" view is very hard line.

Historically, it was the Dominicans who were defending St. Augustine and St. Thomas during the controversies circa 1600. The Jesuits were the ones with the new "Molinist" views that have been described as "semi-Pelagian." The fight between the Dominicans and the Jesuits featured Dominicans on the side of the traditional interpretation of predestination and the Jesuits proposing new doctrines.
 
The following users thanked this post: Pon de Replay, Jayne, Daniel, Prayerful, queen.saints

Offline Maximilian

  • Hauptmann
  • ****
  • Posts: 5570
  • Thanked: 3723 times
Re: Why the Catholic Church abandoned St. Augustine & condemned Jansenism
« Reply #11 on: October 17, 2020, 08:25:47 AM »
Anyone who denies Vatican I or any other dogmatic ecumenical council is essentially a heretical schismatic

No, anyone who denies Vatican II (which is essentially everyone here on SD) has already rejected Vatican I whether they realize it or not. Vatican II has falsified Vatican I. When you state that Vatican II contains errors and heresies, you are thereby stating that Vatican I was false, since every document of Vatican II was solemnly promulgated by Pope Paul VI using his full authority as supreme pontiff speaking on matters of faith and morals.

just like the Old Catholics

Historically, the "Old Catholics" go back long before Vatican I. Some who were excommunicated for refusing to accept Vatican I turned to the Old Catholics for sacraments, notably Dollinger for example, who was universally considered to be the leading Catholic theologian of the day. This caused a confusion in people's minds between the rejection of Vatican I and the Old Catholics who had split in the prior century.
 
The following users thanked this post: queen.saints

Offline Maximilian

  • Hauptmann
  • ****
  • Posts: 5570
  • Thanked: 3723 times
Re: Why the Catholic Church abandoned St. Augustine & condemned Jansenism
« Reply #12 on: October 17, 2020, 08:42:48 AM »
I haven't read this yet but it is a long article from 1960 on "The Condemnation of Jansenism" that looks pretty scholarly and thorough.   https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=2792

I clicked on your link, and I find the article neither scholarly or thorough. It starts off in the first paragraph by signaling that the author intends to condemn the nasty Jansenists. A polemical piece by definition is not "scholarly." It is "thorough" in covering much of the early history of the dispute from a one-sided perspective, but skips over a good deal of essential material, for example, failing entirely to mention Port-Royal.

For an article by a high school teacher, it's true that he put in an awful lot of effort. But it never would have been published by a bulletin of the Archdiocese of New York if it was truly "scholarly and thorough."
 
The following users thanked this post: Pon de Replay, queen.saints

Offline Sin of Adam

  • Hellebardier
  • *
  • Posts: 54
  • Thanked: 32 times
  • in hoc signo vinces
  • Religion: Traditional Roman Catholic
Re: Why the Catholic Church abandoned St. Augustine & condemned Jansenism
« Reply #13 on: October 17, 2020, 09:38:22 AM »
Anyone who denies Vatican I or any other dogmatic ecumenical council is essentially a heretical schismatic

No, anyone who denies Vatican II (which is essentially everyone here on SD) has already rejected Vatican I whether they realize it or not. Vatican II has falsified Vatican I. When you state that Vatican II contains errors and heresies, you are thereby stating that Vatican I was false, since every document of Vatican II was solemnly promulgated by Pope Paul VI using his full authority as supreme pontiff speaking on matters of faith and morals.

just like the Old Catholics

Historically, the "Old Catholics" go back long before Vatican I. Some who were excommunicated for refusing to accept Vatican I turned to the Old Catholics for sacraments, notably Dollinger for example, who was universally considered to be the leading Catholic theologian of the day. This caused a confusion in people's minds between the rejection of Vatican I and the Old Catholics who had split in the prior century.

I would agree with you 100% if VII were a dogmatic ecumenical council. But its not. The council by its own authority declared that it was not defining anything and therefore is not infallible in those areas where it does not repeat previously infallibly defined pronouncements.

As for the Old Catholics, yes the term is a bit of a misnomer, but suffice it to say that today all those who identify as Old Catholics reject Vatican I.
« Last Edit: October 17, 2020, 10:20:06 AM by Sin of Adam »
Lumen ad revelationem gentium: et gloriam plebes tuae Israel.
 

Offline Michael Wilson

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Hauptmann
  • ****
  • Posts: 8109
  • Thanked: 6474 times
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Why the Catholic Church abandoned St. Augustine & condemned Jansenism
« Reply #14 on: October 17, 2020, 10:22:43 AM »
S.O.A. Stated:
Quote
A Roman Pontiff implicitly & indirectly condemned St. Augustine's doctrines, which were accepted Catholic doctrine for 1000+ years taught by the Ordinary & Universal Magisterium, by condemning Jansenism. This led to a revolution in the Church that still rages today.
Jansenism is Augustinianism, pure and simple.
Pure and simple Balderdash.
Quote

No amount of damage control, intellectual or otherwise, can disprove what is obvious documented history.
Blatant Revisionist history.
Quote

As for Arianism, it was condemned by a dogmatic ecumenical council ratified by a Roman Pontiff. Jansenism, on the other hand, was condemned by a Pope in a fallible manner who fell prey to political machinations. Mind you, the same authority which is used today to condemn Traditionalists & the Traditional movement. In other words, Popes outside of ex-cathedra pronouncements are entirely fallible.
Heresy! Condemned by Pius IX in the Syllabus of errors and Quanta Cura:
Quote

Syllabus of Errors: 22. The obligation by which Catholic teachers and authors are strictly bound is confined to those things only which are proposed to universal belief as dogmas of faith by the infallible judgment of the Church. — Letter to the Archbishop of Munich, “Tuas libenter,” Dec. 21, 1863.
QUANTA CURA: “Nor can we pass over in silence the audacity of those who, not enduring sound doctrine, contend that “without sin and without any sacrifice of the Catholic profession assent and obedience may be refused to those judgments and decrees of the Apostolic See, whose object is declared to concern the Church’s general good and her rights and discipline, so only it does not touch the dogmata of faith and morals.” But no one can be found not clearly and distinctly to see and understand how grievously this is opposed to the Catholic dogma of the full power given from God by Christ our Lord Himself to the Roman Pontiff of feeding, ruling and guiding the Universal Church.”

"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