FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Rorate Caeli: Many FI priests petitioning to be relieved of pontifical vows
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
(05-16-2014, 06:56 AM)Miles Immaculatae Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-15-2014, 06:26 PM)SouthpawLink Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-15-2014, 12:47 PM)Scotus Wrote: [ -> ]Has anyone called him a heretic on this thread?

Miles Immaculatae, in Reply #2, stated, "I knew he was modernist all along."

And you, in Reply #3, stated, "I realised that Francis was far more brazenly heterodox than I had feared."

Are these not equivalent terms?

I don't like your attitude. But anyway, I'll answer your question...

1.) I do believe Pope Francis is Modernist.
2.) I have not now, nor ever said he was a formal heretic, and I refuse to say this, for I am silent on the matter, and if anyone wishes to put words in my mouth, then that is their call.
3.) Make of this what you will, but bare in mind, I may or may not share your estimation that these are equivalent terms.

I asked a sincere question; I was not being facetious.

Modernism is "the synthesis of all heresies," so it follows that a Modernist is a heretic.  The forum rules say that we are not allowed to refer to the Holy Father as a heretic, nor may we accuse him of heresy; no distinction is made therein between "formal heresy/heretic" and "material heresy/heretic."  Moreover, I'd dispute the idea that a Catholic can be a material heretic; this term's reserved for Protestants (there's a good article on this point to which I can link, if you'd like).  It's also unfathomable to me how a man as highly-educated as is Jorge Bergoglio/Pope Francis could somehow be inculpably ignorant of the Catholic Faith.  And what does it say of the College of Cardinals, who — not once but twice (he came in second in the conclave of 2005) — have thought so highly of an ignorant-of-the-faith Catholic priest/cardinal as to trust him with the ruling of Christ's Church?
I was not accusing the Pope of being formal heretic but making an observation about his various heterodox statements. Two not-unrelated but certainly distinct things.

However, if Vox deems me to have overstepped the rules of the forum then out of respect for her I will cease from posting any further on this thread.
(05-16-2014, 08:22 AM)Scotus Wrote: [ -> ]I was not accusing the Pope of being formal heretic but making an observation about his various heterodox statements. Two not-unrelated but certainly distinct things.

However, if Vox deems me to have overstepped the rules of the forum then out of respect for her I will cease from posting any further on this thread.

I was not accusing anybody of heresy either. Definitely not the Holy Father. I also invite the moderator(s) to treat my previous comments as they should see fit.

(05-16-2014, 07:50 AM)SouthpawLink Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-16-2014, 06:56 AM)Miles Immaculatae Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-15-2014, 06:26 PM)SouthpawLink Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-15-2014, 12:47 PM)Scotus Wrote: [ -> ]Has anyone called him a heretic on this thread?

Miles Immaculatae, in Reply #2, stated, "I knew he was modernist all along."

And you, in Reply #3, stated, "I realised that Francis was far more brazenly heterodox than I had feared."

Are these not equivalent terms?

I don't like your attitude. But anyway, I'll answer your question...

1.) I do believe Pope Francis is Modernist.
2.) I have not now, nor ever said he was a formal heretic, and I refuse to say this, for I am silent on the matter, and if anyone wishes to put words in my mouth, then that is their call.
3.) Make of this what you will, but bare in mind, I may or may not share your estimation that these are equivalent terms.

I asked a sincere question; I was not being facetious.

Modernism is "the synthesis of all heresies," so it follows that a Modernist is a heretic.  The forum rules say that we are not allowed to refer to the Holy Father as a heretic, nor may we accuse him of heresy; no distinction is made therein between "formal heresy/heretic" and "material heresy/heretic."  Moreover, I'd dispute the idea that a Catholic can be a material heretic; this term's reserved for Protestants (there's a good article on this point to which I can link, if you'd like).  It's also unfathomable to me how a man as highly-educated as is Jorge Bergoglio/Pope Francis could somehow be inculpably ignorant of the Catholic Faith.  And what does it say of the College of Cardinals, who — not once but twice (he came in second in the conclave of 2005) — have thought so highly of an ignorant-of-the-faith Catholic priest/cardinal as to trust him with the ruling of Christ's Church?

I don't like your tone. You are intimating I have broken the forum rules, and you are trying to get me banned. You are trying to trick me into saying I think Pope Francis is a heretic. You are trying to say I have accused the Pope of heresy through your manipulative sophistry, and I don't like it. You have done it to another user as well.

The whole point of this forum is Traditional Catholicism. Traditional Catholicism is not merely about preferring the Traditional Mass, as various neo-Catholics are inclined to think. No, it is about resisting Modernism, and holding fast to the Traditional Faith in its entirely, which has been corrupted by Modernism.

I have never said John Paul II was a heretic. Never. But the Assisi events are Modernist, I wish they weren't, but they are, and there is no getting around that. If you want to reason that Pope John Paul II is a heretic, then that is entirely up to you. But I have never said that!

There was this thread recently about neo-Catholics taking over this forum. In this discussion there was also much criticism about snarky, alpha-male 'one-upmanship'. It really does bring the tone of the forum down. Please don't become one of them. Looking for fights, being cocky.
(05-16-2014, 07:50 AM)SouthpawLink Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-16-2014, 06:56 AM)Miles Immaculatae Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-15-2014, 06:26 PM)SouthpawLink Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-15-2014, 12:47 PM)Scotus Wrote: [ -> ]Has anyone called him a heretic on this thread?

Miles Immaculatae, in Reply #2, stated, "I knew he was modernist all along."

And you, in Reply #3, stated, "I realised that Francis was far more brazenly heterodox than I had feared."

Are these not equivalent terms?
I don't like your attitude. But anyway, I'll answer your question...

1.) I do believe Pope Francis is Modernist.
2.) I have not now, nor ever said he was a formal heretic, and I refuse to say this, for I am silent on the matter, and if anyone wishes to put words in my mouth, then that is their call.
3.) Make of this what you will, but bare in mind, I may or may not share your estimation that these are equivalent terms.

I asked a sincere question; I was not being facetious.

Modernism is "the synthesis of all heresies," so it follows that a Modernist is a heretic.  The forum rules say that we are not allowed to refer to the Holy Father as a heretic, nor may we accuse him of heresy; no distinction is made therein between "formal heresy/heretic" and "material heresy/heretic."  Moreover, I'd dispute the idea that a Catholic can be a material heretic; this term's reserved for Protestants (there's a good article on this point to which I can link, if you'd like).  It's also unfathomable to me how a man as highly-educated as is Jorge Bergoglio/Pope Francis could somehow be inculpably ignorant of the Catholic Faith.  And what does it say of the College of Cardinals, who — not once but twice (he came in second in the conclave of 2005) — have thought so highly of an ignorant-of-the-faith Catholic priest/cardinal as to trust him with the ruling of Christ's Church?

According to your reasoning, you seem to imply that Pope Francis is not modernist, at all. I think that is naive. According to the evidence, it is clear that Pope Francis is at the very least influenced by Modernism, as we have seen in his words, theology, and praxis.

(Disclaimer: I am not accusing the Holy Father of being a heretic, please see my posts above)

I request that the forum moderator clarify the position of the forum. Is it permissible that we imply the post-conciliar pontiffs have been influenced by modernism, or does this equal accusing them of being formal heretics, and thus break forum rules?

(05-16-2014, 07:50 AM)SouthpawLink Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-16-2014, 06:56 AM)Miles Immaculatae Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-15-2014, 06:26 PM)SouthpawLink Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-15-2014, 12:47 PM)Scotus Wrote: [ -> ]Has anyone called him a heretic on this thread?

Miles Immaculatae, in Reply #2, stated, "I knew he was modernist all along."

And you, in Reply #3, stated, "I realised that Francis was far more brazenly heterodox than I had feared."

Are these not equivalent terms?

I don't like your attitude. But anyway, I'll answer your question...

1.) I do believe Pope Francis is Modernist.
2.) I have not now, nor ever said he was a formal heretic, and I refuse to say this, for I am silent on the matter, and if anyone wishes to put words in my mouth, then that is their call.
3.) Make of this what you will, but bare in mind, I may or may not share your estimation that these are equivalent terms.

I asked a sincere question; I was not being facetious.

Modernism is "the synthesis of all heresies," so it follows that a Modernist is a heretic.  The forum rules say that we are not allowed to refer to the Holy Father as a heretic, nor may we accuse him of heresy; no distinction is made therein between "formal heresy/heretic" and "material heresy/heretic."  Moreover, I'd dispute the idea that a Catholic can be a material heretic; this term's reserved for Protestants (there's a good article on this point to which I can link, if you'd like).  It's also unfathomable to me how a man as highly-educated as is Jorge Bergoglio/Pope Francis could somehow be inculpably ignorant of the Catholic Faith.  And what does it say of the College of Cardinals, who — not once but twice (he came in second in the conclave of 2005) — have thought so highly of an ignorant-of-the-faith Catholic priest/cardinal as to trust him with the ruling of Christ's Church?
Then you, sir, are not very Catholic in your mindset! So many blessed and holy theologians and Saints have said otherwise. This is a big problem with this forum. It tries to be traditional but at it's core it remains novel.
Furthermore Protestants are always formal heretics. They are *formally* known as not being Catholic. Catholics cannot be formal heretics unless a superior make such a judgment rightfully and justly declares them excommunicated.
Also it's utterly ridiculous to say that any man, even a Catholic, cannot be a material heretic or in material heretical error. Pope John XXII even was, when he insistently preached that the Saints in heaven must wait until after the General Judgment to enjoy the Beatific Vision of God.
(05-16-2014, 09:35 AM)GodFirst Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-16-2014, 07:50 AM)SouthpawLink Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-16-2014, 06:56 AM)Miles Immaculatae Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-15-2014, 06:26 PM)SouthpawLink Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-15-2014, 12:47 PM)Scotus Wrote: [ -> ]Has anyone called him a heretic on this thread?

Miles Immaculatae, in Reply #2, stated, "I knew he was modernist all along."

And you, in Reply #3, stated, "I realised that Francis was far more brazenly heterodox than I had feared."

Are these not equivalent terms?

I don't like your attitude. But anyway, I'll answer your question...

1.) I do believe Pope Francis is Modernist.
2.) I have not now, nor ever said he was a formal heretic, and I refuse to say this, for I am silent on the matter, and if anyone wishes to put words in my mouth, then that is their call.
3.) Make of this what you will, but bare in mind, I may or may not share your estimation that these are equivalent terms.

I asked a sincere question; I was not being facetious.

Modernism is "the synthesis of all heresies," so it follows that a Modernist is a heretic.  The forum rules say that we are not allowed to refer to the Holy Father as a heretic, nor may we accuse him of heresy; no distinction is made therein between "formal heresy/heretic" and "material heresy/heretic."  Moreover, I'd dispute the idea that a Catholic can be a material heretic; this term's reserved for Protestants (there's a good article on this point to which I can link, if you'd like).  It's also unfathomable to me how a man as highly-educated as is Jorge Bergoglio/Pope Francis could somehow be inculpably ignorant of the Catholic Faith.  And what does it say of the College of Cardinals, who — not once but twice (he came in second in the conclave of 2005) — have thought so highly of an ignorant-of-the-faith Catholic priest/cardinal as to trust him with the ruling of Christ's Church?
Then you, sir, are not very Catholic in your mindset! So many blessed and holy theologians and Saints have said otherwise. This is a big problem with this forum. It tries to be traditional but at it's core it remains novel.

I think this forum is Traditional. It is just the neo-Catholics here that hold novel ideas. For example, the above assertion that the Pope couldn't possibly be modernist because the Cardinals elected him. This is a dangerous error.
(05-16-2014, 10:30 AM)Miles Immaculatae Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-16-2014, 09:35 AM)GodFirst Wrote: [ -> ]Then you, sir, are not very Catholic in your mindset! So many blessed and holy theologians and Saints have said otherwise. This is a big problem with this forum. It tries to be traditional but at it's core it remains novel.
I think this forum is Traditional. It is just the neo-Catholics here that hold novel ideas. For example, the above assertion that the Pope couldn't possibly be modernist because the Cardinals elected him. This is a dangerous error.
That's basically what I meant. The Fathers, Doctors and theologians even taught the Catholic doctrine that a pope can be a heretic and remain the pope. Even Pope themselves taught so, e.g. Popes Adrian VI and Innocent III.
(05-16-2014, 12:41 PM)GodFirst Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-16-2014, 10:30 AM)Miles Immaculatae Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-16-2014, 09:35 AM)GodFirst Wrote: [ -> ]Then you, sir, are not very Catholic in your mindset! So many blessed and holy theologians and Saints have said otherwise. This is a big problem with this forum. It tries to be traditional but at it's core it remains novel.
I think this forum is Traditional. It is just the neo-Catholics here that hold novel ideas. For example, the above assertion that the Pope couldn't possibly be modernist because the Cardinals elected him. This is a dangerous error.
That's basically what I meant. The Fathers, Doctors and theologians even taught the Catholic doctrine that a pope can be a heretic and remain the pope.

Thank you for that information. I didn't know that. That gives great strength to our argument, i.e. we can assert that the post-concilliar Popes are modernist without de facto becoming sedevacantists, which is the SSPX position. How can we reasonably be expected to either be sedevacantists or believe the pope is not modernist?
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9