Was surprised to find a Bishop saying mass today.
(11-15-2009, 08:29 PM)Gerard Wrote:
(11-12-2009, 10:49 PM)petrelton Wrote:
(11-12-2009, 01:48 PM)Gerard Wrote:
(11-11-2009, 05:58 PM)petrelton Wrote: One so-called modernist passage in the CCC does not make the whole CCC modernist. 

"But the fact that a fault is subtle does not excuse it in the least. Nay. It simply makes it all the more dangerous."--Petrelton on Archbishop LeFebvre.

There seems to be a double standard at work here.
Its only a double standard if I was admitting that the passage was subtly modernist. WHICH I AM NOT. I called it a "so-called" modernist passage for the express reason of disclaiming that I personally held it to be modernist.

So can all you clowns who are giving each other high fives apologise please?

The specific passage doesn't matter if it's modernist or not.    

You say on one hand that an error in the Catechisms doesn't  make the whole CCC modernist.  

But on the other hand, you say faults are inexcusable, subtlety doesn't excuse it,  It becomes more dangerous.  

For you to be consistent, you'd have to admit that IF there is any modernism in the CCC it is all the more dangerous.

This can be born out.  People who know the faith fairly well know that the Dutch Catechism is a trainwreck of modernism.   They might not be able to tell that the CCC is a hash job and they may think it actually is a "sure norm" for knowing the faith.
Quite incorrect. Subtlety is only incorrect if it is concealing a lie and seeks to introduce it by subterfuge. Subtlety is quite acceptable when trying to explain mysteries of the faith. I certainly agree that if modernism is sculking in the catechism by subtley and subterfuge then that is dangerous and evil. The difference is though that I DO NOT ADMIT that such modernism exists. If it is then it so subtle that I am placing myself as a judge over the church to find fault and error with the church. This is inadmissable. The other difference is that  the church and the magisterium is there to expose the subtleties of deceit and error. We are not here to expose the subtleties of what we imagine to be error in the magisterium. The only judgement we can bring to the church is if they teach something which is blatantly heretical. The scripture talks about a great falling away which even denies that Christ is come in the flesh. This kind of blatant heresy is warrant to reject those who teach it but not subtleties where it is a matter of conjecture and debate as to whether it is heretical or not.

I am not familiar with the Dutch Catechism. However the CCC is a higher authority. regional councils and documents have always been subject to Rome. I am happy to leave Rome to deal with the Dutch particularly given the fact that I am not Dutch. I have never ceased to admit that there are appalling examples of modernism and heresy amongst the magisterium of the church in various places of the world. I am just yet to concede that such examples exist in the ecumenical council of the church or the holy offices of the Pope. There are many things that I disagree with the modern church however my disagreements only amount to opinions. To actually state that the catechism is modernist and worthy of suspicion is a judgement against the highest authority of the church and is unwarranted. If we find that our local magisterium appears to be at fault then we have a recourse to Rome. But if there is a problem in Rome then we have no recourse and must wait in prayer for God to correct what we believe to be the fault. 9 times out of 10 we will find that it is we who are at fault and have not properly understood what the church is teaching. This is why all of our concerns about the Vatican and her documents especially those coming from the Pope must be tempered with the most extreme humility even to the point of prayer and fasting before we come out in criticism of these highest levels of the church.

Messages In This Thread
Re: Was surprised to find a Bishop saying mass today. - by petrelton - 11-15-2009, 09:18 PM

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)