Benedict: Take Joy in the Good of our Separated Brethren
(10-23-2012, 05:26 AM)TrentCath Wrote: i'm sorry vox but i'm confused, what is the difference between protestants and these heretics? You do realise that there were validly baptised heretics back then right? Regardless have you not seen the numerous authors and no less than three theological manuals which claim that heretics are cut off from the church, validly baptised or not, unless they are in good faith i.e invincibly ignorant? Can anyone bring up any pre conciliar sources to support these assertions? i, for one, would like to read them, as the leading manualists i.e tanquerey, ott etc... clearly state otherwise

From the Catholic Encyclopedia, written around 1910: "The fact of having received valid baptism places material heretics under the jurisdiction of the Church, and if they are in good faith, they belong to the soul of the Church. Their material severance, however, precludes them from the use of ecclesiastical rights, except the right of being judged according to ecclesiastical law if, by any chance, they are brought before an ecclesiastical court. They are not bound by ecclesiastical laws enacted for the spiritual well-being of its members, e.g. by the Six Commandments of the Church."

Protestants aren't "members" of the Church (I misspoke in an earlier post), but there is some level of communion with them by virtue of valid Baptism. It's just that simple. Some Protestants are even a part of the "Soul of the Church" (see "Mystici Corporis" about the Body and Soul of the Church). Most serious Protestants are good-willed (as good-willed as most Catholics are, anyway) and are ignorant of what the Church teaches. They've been lied to, misled, and are pretty clueless as a group (if they understood, they'd be Catholics, assuming they're good-willed). This just isn't hard to understand, and what the Pope said in the text that brought all this one, is fine. You might dislike often hearing that sort of talk, even if true, while rarely hearing anything about the dangers of heresy, the need to become formally Catholic, etc. (I do, too), but that's no reason to impugn the Holy Father's words. He even said they are "outside the community" ("For this reason the members of the Church must not be jealous but rejoice if someone outside the community does something good in Christ’s name") and invoked Our Lady, which a lot of Prots wouldn't appreciate ("dear friends, through the intercession of Mary Most Holy, let us pray that we might know how to rejoice in every good deed and initiative"). There's not one word in that text that is wrong, expressive of "indifferentism," or scandalous, let alone "clearly scandalous."

Someone said earlier --
Quote: If being a Catholic means being a naive little child who has no use for his brain and reasoning skills and is to ignore clearly scandalous writings and speeches by the Vicar of Christ in a time of Crisis and just assume "he means authentic Catholic teaching" while actually only muddling up the waters, well.... I don't know what to think then.

That doesn't jive with me having reason.

Why bother thinking if all I have to do is assume his intentions are good?

-- but, as I said, that isn't what I am saying at all. I am not saying that people should turn off their brains. The problem is the opposite: people's brains going into overdrive, apparently just dying to find something so they can call the Pope's words "clearly scandalous." What the Holy Father said is accurate and completely innocuous, but some people seem to want to find "indifferentism" and "clear scandal."  If, instead of jumping to the keyboard to type that sort of thing, people would take a few minutes to get clear on their ecclesiology, things like this wouldn't happen.

Besides which, there is something to be said for having a childlike trust: Matthew 18:3 "And said: Amen I say to you, unless you be converted, and become as little children, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven." I don't think Jesus would be pleased at what is said around here of His Vicar. At the very least, there should be no apparent satisfaction in expressing the idea that the Holy Father is mistaken or, worse, being intentionally misleading.

Further, yes, one should always assume the Pope's intentions are good. If there is real evidence to show otherwise, then that's another story, but the assumption should be that his intentions are good. That's how you're supposed to deal with everyone, not just His Holiness. But for some folks here, the assumption is just the opposite, and perfectly kosher text is twisted and jumped on. That's what's scandalous.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: Benedict: Take Joy in the Good of our Separated Brethren - by VoxClamantis - 10-23-2012, 06:41 AM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)