FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Canonizations and Infallibility
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Back to S. Peter. Didn't S. Paul go to Jerusalem to straighten out S. Peter to his face concerning food of the pagans ? Didn't S. Peter in Acts after he was Pope have a vision from God telling him not to call animals He made unclean ? And to kill and eat what he wanted ? Perhaps the notion that Peter became twinkle toes is not quite accurate.

tim
Response to Scriptorium:

No Council, including Vatican 2, and no Magisterial teaching, has declared that we refrain from all personal reactions to every act a Pope engages in.  JP2's kiss of the Qu'ran was not an infallible act, with any kind of binding assent on the faithful.  To be dismayed that he would perform such an act publicly does not mean that a person "Doesn't care [in a total sense] what the Vatican does or says."

It's clear from your posts that you are very fond of Vatican 2, and also of JP2.  No one is required to be as fond as you are, of either.  Being less fond or more fond is not a measure of Catholic identity, but you do seem to have an agenda here.  Just saying..... :Hmm:
It has nothing to do with being fond. It has to do with our obligations as children of God to respect the Church, Her decisions, and Her leaders. That's a bare minimum. People who live "practical sedevacantism" are a lot more than not "fond", they actively resist in core areas. My question is, if you don't care what the Pope says on A B and C, why do you care about X and Y.
(07-10-2013, 11:26 AM)Scriptorium Wrote: [ -> ]It has nothing to do with being fond. It has to do with our obligations as children of God to respect the Church, Her decisions, and Her leaders. That's a bare minimum. People who live "practical sedevacantism" are a lot more than not "fond", they actively resist in core areas. My question is, if you don't care what the Pope says on A B and C, why do you care about X and Y.

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by the bolded.  I care about everything the Pope says/does...especially those things that appear to go against traditional Catholic teaching.
(07-10-2013, 11:26 AM)Scriptorium Wrote: [ -> ]It has nothing to do with being fond. It has to do with our obligations as children of God to respect the Church, Her decisions, and Her leaders. That's a bare minimum. People who live "practical sedevacantism" are a lot more than not "fond", they actively resist in core areas. My question is, if you don't care what the Pope says on A B and C, why do you care about X and Y.

Your father may make a horrible decision, but that does not mean he is no longer your father. As well, we are not called upon to obey our fathers when we hold in our hearts that our father is gravely erring, in fact, true obedience to our fathers comes from us telling them when they are wrong (if they are truly wrong). The same with a Pope. But, we recognize that the man is not inspired, but infallible, and only when he intends to be infallible. The Church does not call us to blind acceptance of pastoral actions of the Roman Pontiff.

Besides, since Vatican II declared no dogma and issued no anathemas, it stands for us to understand that any valid belief before Vatican II was valid afterward. It wasn't the "rad trads" that changed their positions, it was Rome, which changed its opinions on pastoral issues that send a message to other religions that they are enough to save you, regardless of what their actual intent was.

The Pope is the Pope, but we are not called to follow him into error simply because he is the Pope. We don't think the Pope can do no right, as you seem to be saying, but we also don't believe that the Pope can do no wrong.

In regards to Canonizations, it seems that John Paul II's heart was in the right place. If you read the council's document on Ecumenism, it heavily implies that it is a just new strategy for true unity under the Roman Pontiff, and not a belief that all religions are equally valid. Only its results that are imply that Ecumenism had failed. But as Catholics, we are told to reject Utilitarianism, the philosophical idea that actions can only be judged by their results. If Pope John Paul II is canonized, let him be canonized for the placement of his heart and not the results of his actions.
Scrip. here's the question: would you go into a mosque, synagogue, or heretical/schismatic place of worship to pray with them, for example for world peace, if the pope asked you to?
(07-10-2013, 01:48 PM)St. Pius of Trent Wrote: [ -> ]Scrip. here's the question: would you go into a mosque, synagogue, or heretical/schismatic place of worship to pray with them, for example for world peace, if the pope asked you to?

Actually that is not the Question. It is if you father had gone to a mosque, synagogue, or heretical schismatic worship to pray with them, for example for world peace, would you forgive him ? PS all saints are human and none were perfect, except Our Lord.

By your reasoning all sedevacantists are in that boat.

tim
(07-10-2013, 02:30 PM)Tim Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-10-2013, 01:48 PM)St. Pius of Trent Wrote: [ -> ]Scrip. here's the question: would you go into a mosque, synagogue, or heretical/schismatic place of worship to pray with them, for example for world peace, if the pope asked you to?

Actually that is not the Question. It is if you father had gone to a mosque, synagogue, or heretical schismatic worship to pray with them, for example for world peace, would you forgive him ? PS all saints are human and none were perfect, except Our Lord.

By your reasoning all sedevacantists are in that boat.

tim

Hmm.  I still don't think that's the question because there is no effective analogy for the leader of the Catholic Faith.  In other words, there is NO person on this earth we could substitute in the place of the Pope.  When the Pope publically sins (but privately confesses), consequences are something completely different than the consequences of Joe Schmoe sinning publically.
(07-10-2013, 02:38 PM)2Vermont Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-10-2013, 02:30 PM)Tim Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-10-2013, 01:48 PM)St. Pius of Trent Wrote: [ -> ]Scrip. here's the question: would you go into a mosque, synagogue, or heretical/schismatic place of worship to pray with them, for example for world peace, if the pope asked you to?

Actually that is not the Question. It is if you father had gone to a mosque, synagogue, or heretical schismatic worship to pray with them, for example for world peace, would you forgive him ? PS all saints are human and none were perfect, except Our Lord.

By your reasoning all sedevacantists are in that boat.

tim

Hmm.  I still don't think that's the question because there is no effective analogy for the leader of the Catholic Faith.  In other words, there is NO person on this earth we could substitute in the place of the Pope.  When the Pope publically sins (but privately confesses), consequences are something completely different than the consequences of Joe Schmoe sinning publically.

If the pope repented of his.participation in these public sins, I would think he'd be morally obliged to publicly clear up the confusion. Unless it happened near the end when he was incapacitated.

DD
(07-10-2013, 02:38 PM)2Vermont Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-10-2013, 02:30 PM)Tim Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-10-2013, 01:48 PM)St. Pius of Trent Wrote: [ -> ]Scrip. here's the question: would you go into a mosque, synagogue, or heretical/schismatic place of worship to pray with them, for example for world peace, if the pope asked you to?

Actually that is not the Question. It is if you father had gone to a mosque, synagogue, or heretical schismatic worship to pray with them, for example for world peace, would you forgive him ? PS all saints are human and none were perfect, except Our Lord.

By your reasoning all sedevacantists are in that boat.

tim

Hmm.  I still don't think that's the question because there is no effective analogy for the leader of the Catholic Faith.  In other words, there is NO person on this earth we could substitute in the place of the Pope.  When the Pope publically sins (but privately confesses), consequences are something completely different than the consequences of Joe Schmoe sinning publically.


So, if Mrs Pelosi publically sins bcs she is supporting abortion, she cannot be given the Eucharist until she:
1/ repents and privately confesses
2/ publically recants of this error
Right?
If the Pope publically sins when kissing the Quran or praying with animists, no public recantation is necessary after he confessed?
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5