FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums
Saint John of Avila to be Declared a Doctor of the Church - Printable Version

+- FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Church (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=2)
+--- Forum: Catholicism (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Thread: Saint John of Avila to be Declared a Doctor of the Church (/showthread.php?tid=48159)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14


Re: Saint John of Avila to be Declared a Doctor of the Church - Historian - 08-22-2011

The Missal of 1962 will not change with the addition of female doctors.  That is the Mass said by the SSPX.  That is the most modern that I will accept.  I've burned missals for the NO before.  They provide good warmth - not for the soul but for the body near the fireplace


Re: Saint John of Avila to be Declared a Doctor of the Church - newyorkcatholic - 08-22-2011

(08-22-2011, 10:31 PM)acatholiclife Wrote: The Missal of 1962 will not change with the addition of female doctors.  That is the Mass said by the SSPX.  That is the most modern that I will accept.  I've burned missals for the NO before.  They provide good warmth - not for the soul but for the body near the fireplace

You totally missed the point  Even the 1962 Missal did not decide who the Doctors of the Church were in 1962.  It *reflects* who the Doctors of the Church were in 1962.




Re: Saint John of Avila to be Declared a Doctor of the Church - Historian - 08-22-2011

(08-22-2011, 10:33 PM)newyorkcatholic Wrote:
(08-22-2011, 10:31 PM)acatholiclife Wrote: The Missal of 1962 will not change with the addition of female doctors.  That is the Mass said by the SSPX.  That is the most modern that I will accept.  I've burned missals for the NO before.  They provide good warmth - not for the soul but for the body near the fireplace

You totally missed the point  Even the 1962 Missal did not decide who the Doctors of the Church were in 1962.  It *reflects* who the Doctors of the Church were in 1962.

You miss my point - nothing after Vatican II can be trusted.


Re: Saint John of Avila to be Declared a Doctor of the Church - newyorkcatholic - 08-22-2011

(08-22-2011, 10:35 PM)acatholiclife Wrote:
(08-22-2011, 10:33 PM)newyorkcatholic Wrote:
(08-22-2011, 10:31 PM)acatholiclife Wrote: The Missal of 1962 will not change with the addition of female doctors.  That is the Mass said by the SSPX.  That is the most modern that I will accept.  I've burned missals for the NO before.  They provide good warmth - not for the soul but for the body near the fireplace

You totally missed the point  Even the 1962 Missal did not decide who the Doctors of the Church were in 1962.  It *reflects* who the Doctors of the Church were in 1962.

You miss my point - nothing after Vatican II can be trusted.

The practice of the pope naming Doctors of the Church well predates Vatican II.  ;D


Re: Saint John of Avila to be Declared a Doctor of the Church - Historian - 08-22-2011

(08-22-2011, 10:39 PM)newyorkcatholic Wrote:
(08-22-2011, 10:35 PM)acatholiclife Wrote:
(08-22-2011, 10:33 PM)newyorkcatholic Wrote:
(08-22-2011, 10:31 PM)acatholiclife Wrote: The Missal of 1962 will not change with the addition of female doctors.  That is the Mass said by the SSPX.  That is the most modern that I will accept.  I've burned missals for the NO before.  They provide good warmth - not for the soul but for the body near the fireplace

You totally missed the point  Even the 1962 Missal did not decide who the Doctors of the Church were in 1962.  It *reflects* who the Doctors of the Church were in 1962.

You miss my point - nothing after Vatican II can be trusted.

The practice of the pope naming Doctors of the Church well predates Vatican II.   ;D

The practice of Popes naming women is akin to allowing women's ordination.


Re: Saint John of Avila to be Declared a Doctor of the Church - Roger the Shrubber - 08-22-2011

(08-22-2011, 10:40 PM)acatholiclife Wrote:
(08-22-2011, 10:39 PM)newyorkcatholic Wrote:
(08-22-2011, 10:35 PM)acatholiclife Wrote:
(08-22-2011, 10:33 PM)newyorkcatholic Wrote:
(08-22-2011, 10:31 PM)acatholiclife Wrote: The Missal of 1962 will not change with the addition of female doctors.  That is the Mass said by the SSPX.  That is the most modern that I will accept.  I've burned missals for the NO before.  They provide good warmth - not for the soul but for the body near the fireplace

You totally missed the point  Even the 1962 Missal did not decide who the Doctors of the Church were in 1962.  It *reflects* who the Doctors of the Church were in 1962.

You miss my point - nothing after Vatican II can be trusted.

The practice of the pope naming Doctors of the Church well predates Vatican II.   ;D

The practice of Popes naming women is akin to allowing women's ordination.

Except in that it isn't.  Alright, go ahead and quote a Saint or Pope that has said as much explicitly.  I can find plenty of evidence for the impossibility of women priests not so much for the impossibility of women doctors.  Except of course for musings of a few cantankerous laymen.


Re: Saint John of Avila to be Declared a Doctor of the Church - Valz - 08-22-2011

(08-22-2011, 10:40 PM)acatholiclife Wrote: The practice of Popes naming women is akin to allowing women's ordination.

...what?  Confused

And the practice of  burning NO missals as you proudly claim to have done is all fine, I guess, right?


Re: Saint John of Avila to be Declared a Doctor of the Church - Roger the Shrubber - 08-22-2011

(08-22-2011, 10:35 PM)acatholiclife Wrote:
(08-22-2011, 10:33 PM)newyorkcatholic Wrote:
(08-22-2011, 10:31 PM)acatholiclife Wrote: The Missal of 1962 will not change with the addition of female doctors.  That is the Mass said by the SSPX.  That is the most modern that I will accept.  I've burned missals for the NO before.  They provide good warmth - not for the soul but for the body near the fireplace

You totally missed the point  Even the 1962 Missal did not decide who the Doctors of the Church were in 1962.  It *reflects* who the Doctors of the Church were in 1962.

You miss my point - nothing after Vatican II can be trusted.

Obedience

[Image: 5FX5Vo0pqoszv1nda9j8VEMgo1_500.jpg]

Not Just for Women Anymore

[Image: MtCarmelMonks_2.jpg]



Re: Saint John of Avila to be Declared a Doctor of the Church - newyorkcatholic - 08-22-2011

Roger the Shrubber: truly awesome photographs.


Re: Saint John of Avila to be Declared a Doctor of the Church - Valz - 08-22-2011

With regards to St. Thérèse, here is what Pope John Paul II said when he declared her a doctor of The Church:

Divini Amoris Scientia, 19 October 1997 - Apostolic Letter
"Fulfilling the wishes of many Brothers in the Episcopate and of a great number of the faithful throughout the world, after consulting the Congregation for the Causes of Saints and hearing the opinion of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith regarding her eminent doctrine, with certain knowledge and after lengthy reflection, with the fullness of Our apostolic authority We declare Saint Thérèse of the Child Jesus and the Holy Face, virgin, to be a Doctor of the Universal Church. In the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit."

Complains about her being a female, not producing massive works of theology, or any such things are very much irrelevant. The guarantee of the Holy Spirit to protect the Church from error when declaring matters of faith and morals trumps any such speculations and conspiracies and should give peace of mind to the faithful Catholic.


Valz