Osama didn't need to convert says the Vatican
#25
SaintSebastian
Ref.  Reply #5 on: May 05, 2011, 08:03:AM

God Bless You!

Quote:Here's what Vatican II teaches on this point:

7. This missionary activity derives its reason from the will of God, "who wishes all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, Himself a man, Jesus Christ, who gave Himself as a ransom for all" (1 Tim. 2:45), "neither is there salvation in any other" (Acts 4:12). Therefore, all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church's preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_counc...es_en.html

There are two problems with this quote.

What are they?

First - this has to do with the actual implementation of the missionary work for the conversion of non-Catholics to the Church.

Why?

Because by their actions, since the days of Vatican 2

Quote:“I pray to God that I may die before the end of the council -- in that way I can die a Catholic” (Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani [b. at Rome, Italy on Wednesday, October 29, 1890 - d. at Rome, Italy on Friday, August 3, 1979], June 1962, Cardinal Prefect of the Supreme Holy Office, following a speech by Cardinal Montini  - the future Pope Paul VI - on the need for changes in the Church).


“Synod Vatican 2 was the greatest disaster in recent ecclesiastical history” (Giuseppe Cardinal Siri [b. Sunday, May 20, 1906 in Genoa, Italy - d. Tuesday, May 2, 1989], Archbishop of Genoa, Italy, from “Pontiff”, p. 369 - Gordon Thomas/Max Morgan Witts).


“Synod Vatican 2 was a sinister farce acted out by three thousand good-for-nothings, some of whom, despite the gold [pectoral] crosses on their chests, don’t even believe in the Trinity or the Virgin”  (Bishop Antonio Romeo of the Sacred Congregation of Rites in Bob Considine’s column ON THE LINE in the NEW YORK JOURNAL AMERICAN of Friday, November 27, 1964.)

there has been very little actual progress made to really and sincerely actually convert non-Catholics.  From what I have observed, most of what there has been is talk, talk, talk, and more talk, talk, talk - a.k.a. dialogue.

For example:

Quote:"Right from (Pope John Paul's) first encyclical Redemptor Hominis he opens the perspective of relations with people of other religions, that the mission of the Church is to all people. That doesn't necessarily mean - according to the teachings of the Second Vatican Council - that all have to become Christians. No-one could accuse John Paul II of being an unfervant Christian, he was a missionary for the Church, but at the same time he had this great respect for people of other religions - and they returned that respect."  (Archbishop Michael Fitzgerald; president of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue.)

But according to the previous quote from Vatican 2, the quote of Archbishop Michael Fitzgerald contradicts Vatican 2.

It should be self-evident that what V-2 says:

Quote:Therefore, ALL MUST BE CONVERTED TO HIM, made known by the Church's preaching, and ALL MUST BE INCORPORATED INTO HIM BY BAPTISM AND INTO THE CHURCH WHICH IS HIS BODY.
(emphasis added for clarity)

is the opposite of the previous quote of Archbishop Michael Fitzgerald:

Quote:“.....THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN - ACCORDING TO THE TEACHINGS OF THE SECOND VATICAN COUNCIL - THAT ALL HAVE TO BECOME CHRISTIANS....” (Archbishop Michael Fitzgerald; president of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue.)

(emphasis added for clarity)

So, by praxis (in actual practice) what Vatican 2 taught is obviously ignored because
Archbishop Michael Fitzgerald, president of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, clearly states that it is not necessary, per V-2:

Quote:“THAT ALL HAVE TO BECOME CHRISTIANS....”

despite the fact that the actual text of V-2 says:

Quote:“THEREFORE, ALL MUST BE CONVERTED TO HIM, MADE KNOWN BY THE CHURCH'S PREACHING, AND ALL MUST BE INCORPORATED INTO HIM BY BAPTISM AND INTO THE CHURCH WHICH IS HIS BODY.”

But, WORDS mean something.

Quote:“ALL MUST BE INCORPORATED INTO HIM BY BAPTISM AND INTO THE CHURCH WHICH IS HIS BODY” (V-2)

is NOT the same as:

Quote:“.....THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN - ACCORDING TO THE TEACHINGS OF THE SECOND VATICAN COUNCIL - THAT ALL HAVE TO BECOME CHRISTIANS....” (Archbishop Michael Fitzgerald; president of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue.)

Apparently the good Archbishop Michael Fitzgerald, who is in charge of, and the president of, the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, either never read  what Vatican 2 teaches or he has chosen to ignore it as perhaps being an inconvenient obstacle to “dialogue”?

Only God and the good Archbishop know for sure.

Does anyone know EXACTLY how many millions and millions of non-Catholics have actually been converted as the result of almost 50 years of “dialogue” - talk, talk, talk, talk, talk??

Does this historical reality force all of us to logically conclude that, although the Vatican 2 seems to REQUIRE real missionary work, this requirement has been blocked by almost 50 years of “dialogue” which appears not to have had the results which Vatican 2 had hoped for since in actual practice what some people might be inclined to call the “Heresy of Indifferentism” seems to be alive and well in many places???

Or, perhaps is it merely the implementation of the NEW Theology Theologians agenda, which seems to be inimical to the one True, Real Religion since it is too often observed to be a very subtle, but nevertheless, real, cacophony of contradictory beliefs, creeds, and teachings, as if the God of Unchangeable Truth

Quote:“I am the Way, and the Truth and the Life” (John 14:6).

“God is Truth”  (Saint Thomas Aquinas, O.P., [b. 1225 A.D. in Rocca Secca, Naples, Italy - d. Wednesday, March 7, 1274 A.D., in Fossa Nuova, Italy], Doctor of the Church, “Summa Theologica” Part I, Question 16, Article 5; “Summa Theologica” Part II-II, Question 93, Article 2, Reply to Objection 2. “Summa Contra Gentiles”  Book I, Chapter 60.)

is somehow imputed to be the Author of confusion and not the Author of the Immutable - Unchangeable - Divine Revelation: “I am the Lord and I change not” (Malachias 2:6) since “With the Father of light there is no change nor shadow of alteration” (James 1:17)?

The second problem with this quote from Vatican 2:

Quote:Here's what Vatican II teaches on this point:

7. This missionary activity derives its reason from the will of God, "who wishes all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, Himself a man, Jesus Christ, who gave Himself as a ransom for all" (1 Tim. 2:45), "neither is there salvation in any other" (Acts 4:12). Therefore, all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church's preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_counc...es_en.html

is the historical fact that it contradicts, in part:

Quote:Therefore, all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church's preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body.

what the Infallible Roman Catholic Church has historically taught.

For example:

Quote:“Here, therefore, rather than at the Consecration of His Body, is appropriately commemorated the Passion of our Lord, by the words. which shall be shed for the remission of sins. For the Blood, separately Consecrated, serves to place before the eyes of all, in a more forcible manner, the Passion of our Lord, His death, and the nature of His sufferings.”


“The additional words ‘for you and for many’, are taken, some from Matthew, some from Luke, but were joined together by the Catholic Church under the guidance of the Spirit of God. They serve to declare the fruit and advantage of His Passion. For if we look to its value, we must confess that the Redeemer shed His Blood for the salvation of all; BUT IF WE LOOK TO THE FRUIT WHICH MANKIND HAVE RECEIVED FROM IT, WE SHALL EASILY FIND THAT IT PERTAINS NOT UNTO ALL, BUT TO MANY OF THE HUMAN RACE.”


“When therefore [our Lord] said: ‘For you’, He meant either those who were present, or those chosen from among the Jewish people, such as were, with the exception of Judas, the disciples with whom He was speaking. When He added, ‘And for many’, He wished to be understood to mean the remainder of the Elect from among the Jews or Gentiles.”


“WITH REASON, therefore, WERE THE WORDS 'FOR ALL' NOT USED, as in this place the fruits of the Passion are alone spoken of, and TO THE ELECT ONLY DID HIS PASSION BRING THE FRUIT OF SALVATION. And this is the purport of the Apostle when he says: ‘Christ was offered once to exhaust THE SINS OF MANY’ [Heb. 9:28]; and also of the words of our Lord in John: ‘I PRAY FOR THEM; I PRAY NOT FOR THE WORLD, BUT FOR THEM WHOM THOU HAST GIVEN ME, BECAUSE THEY ARE THINE’ [John 17:9].”  (Infallible Nineteenth Œcumenical Council, The First Roman Catholic Council of Trent - [Thursday, December 13, 1545 A.D. - Wednesday, December 4, 1563 A.D.], “The Roman Catechism”, The Eucharist, # 64; emphasis added.)

“The Roman Catechism”, published by the order of the Infallible Nineteenth Œcumenical Council, The First Roman Catholic Council of Trent (Twenty-Fourth Session, November 11, 1563, Decree on Reformation, Chapter VII), contains the Immutable Form for the Double Consecration as it is found in the Infallible Decree of the Seventeenth Œcumenical Council, The First Council of Basel, Ferrara, Florence - [Monday, April 9, 1438 A.D. - Thursday, August 7, 1445 A.D.] which Infallible Decree was promulgated by His Holiness, Pope Gabriele Condulmer [Thursday, March 3, 1431 - Tuesday, February 23, 1447] and later promulgated in the “Missale Romanum, De Defectibus”, by His Holiness, the Infallible Roman Catholic Pope Saint Pius V, Antonio-Michele Ghislieri [Friday, January 7, 1566 - Monday, May 1, 1572], on Tuesday, July 14, 1570.

Therefore, it is self-evident that these Infallible Roman Catholic Popes and Infallible Roman Catholic Councils, whose authenticity and infallibility, to the best of my knowledge, have never been questioned, clearly contradict what Vatican 2, its Consilium, and his Holiness, Pope Paul 6, Giovanni Battista Montini [Friday, June 21, 1963 - Sunday, August 6, 1978], did when they made up the Novus Ordo Rite, a.k.a. the Novus Ordo Missae which - in terms of its ontological essence - is an updated, modernized version of the Protestant 2nd Prayer Book of Edward VI, most especially with its invalidated “form” for the Consecration of the Most Precious Blood by replacing “pro multis” - for many (ARR: Ancient Roman Rite) - with “pro omnibus” - for all (NOR: Novus Ordo Rite, a.k.a. the Novus Ordo Missae).

Because

Quote:“WITH REASON, therefore, WERE THE WORDS 'FOR ALL' NOT USED, as in this place the fruits of the Passion are alone spoken of, and TO THE ELECT ONLY DID HIS PASSION BRING THE FRUIT OF SALVATION. And this is the purport of the Apostle when he says: ‘Christ was offered once to exhaust THE SINS OF MANY’; and also of the words of our Lord in John: ‘I pray for them; I PRAY NOT FOR THE WORLD, BUT FOR THEM WHOM THOU HAST GIVEN ME, because they are Thine’”,

it logically follows that any deviation from these dogmatic and infallible Truths can only be considered to be part of what is called the “Heresy of Indifferentism” in which there is no one True, Real Religion, but rather a cacophony of contradictory beliefs, creeds, and teachings - thus, the:  "FOR ALL" - as if the God of Unchangeable Truth is the Author of confusion and not the Author of the Immutable - Unchangeable - Divine Revelation. 

Quote:“Truth cannot be Truth’s  contrary”  - Saint Thomas Aquinas, O.P., [b. 1225 A.D. in Rocca Secca, Naples, Italy - d. Wednesday, March 7, 1274 A.D., in Fossa Nuova, Italy], Doctor of the Church, “Summa Contra Gentiles” Book IV, paragraph 8.


“Every Truth without exception, and whoever may utter it, is from the Holy Ghost”  (Saint Thomas Aquinas, O.P., “Summa Theologica”, Part I-II, Question 109, Article 1, Reply to Objection 1).

Thanks for reading!

God Bless You!

A Catholic Catholic
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: Osama didn't need to convert says the Vatican - by A-Catholic-Catholic - 05-12-2011, 04:43 AM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)