Concerning Lay Preaching and Such
#11
How do I defend the Faith, usually, I mean in private against Protestant Heretics then? When they calumniate the Holy Catholic Church of God and spread their heresies?  ???
Reply
#12
(12-25-2009, 11:53 PM)Ravenonthecross Wrote: Have we any further clarification QuisUtDeus?

This is a good start.  CE entry on Religious Discussions

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05034a.htm
Reply
#13
(12-26-2009, 12:49 AM)Ravenonthecross Wrote: How do I defend the Faith, usually, I mean in private against Protestant Heretics then? When they calumniate the Holy Catholic Church of God and spread their heresies?  ???

The Latin word for "dispute" implies something more formal than a Prot disparaging the Faith by shooting off his mouth.  In that case, we are supposed to defend the faith to the best of our abilities, making sure we don't "wing it".  Say as much as we know, learn more from our priest, etc.  A lot of Protestants are well-practiced in mental gymnastics and will run rings around people who 1) aren't as learned, 2) not as smart.  It's not a sin not to be a theologian or apologists - we all should be aware of our limits.

What we should not do, for example, is engage in e-mail debates and the like.  For further clarification, talk to your traditional priest and also the article I linked to gives some good explanations about this type of thing.
Reply
#14
(12-25-2009, 10:22 AM)StrictCatholicGirl Wrote:
Quote: Pope Alexander IV (1254-1261) in “Sextus Decretalium”, Lib. V, c. ii:

We furthermore forbid any lay person to engage in dispute, either private or public, concerning the Catholic Faith. Whosoever shall act contrary to this decree, let him be bound in the fetters of excommunication.

Does this carry any weight today? What about Catholic Internet forums? We're doomed!  :o

I'll ask my priest about this. I had no idea.

For the past 40/50 years Catholics have been all too easily plucked them from the arms of the Church, like candy from a baby. I think this is due to post VII poor catechesis and a post conciliar Church that has attempted to befriend Protestantism.

While I have to agree that many Protestants are good at mental gymnastics, I disagree that they can run rings around Catholics who know their faith. I find their arguments are very stupid. And they're in denial. They've got to be. With an online Catechism and a Douay-Rheims bible online,  I feel I can debate fine.

Furthermore, if it weren't for lay Catholic apologists, I might not have returned to the Catholic Faith. So, I thank God for them.
Oh my Jesus, I surrender myself to you. Take care of everything.--Fr Dolindo Ruotolo

Persevere..Eucharist, Holy Rosary, Brown Scapular, Confession. You will win.
Reply
#15
As a matter of fact the Quinisext council was not approved by the Western Chruch, that is not ecumenical council.

As for the preaching, anyone (lay person, deacon, priest, bishop) is subject to the authority of the Magisterium. 'To preach' need explicit authorization  from the Magisterium or from approved intermediate authority. Without this anyone is allowed to sound out his/her opinion (outside the Liturgy) but never as the authorized teaching of the Church.

Here is from the General Instruction of the Roman Missal:

66. The Homily should ordinarily be given by the priest celebrant himself. He may entrust it to a concelebrating priest or occasionally, according to circumstances, to the deacon, but never to a lay person.65 In particular cases and for a just cause, the homily may even be given by a Bishop or a priest who is present at the celebration but cannot concelebrate.
http://www.usccb.org/liturgy/current/cha...tml#sect3a

In more generic sense what happens here in this forum that certain people declare statements as heresy, is certainly against the rules of the Catholic Church. The Church is hierarchical jurisdictional body of Jesus Christ under the pope and the bishops, and even the priests are teaching having authority from that Church.

Reply
#16
(12-25-2009, 11:52 PM)QuisUtDeus Wrote: It mentions private ones as well.

Although the decree mentions engaging in private disputes, the article goes on to say that "this law, like all penal laws, must be very narrowly construed. The terms Catholic Faith and dispute have a technical signification. The former term refers to questions purely theological; the latter to disputations more or less formal, and engrossing the attention of the public."  In other words, these seem to be private disputes where there are other people around listening (i.e. debating in the break room at work, etc.).  It doesn't seem to be restricting the discussing of religious issues with others where it is truly a private discussion between two people.

But, yes, it does seem that many of the lay Catholic apologists today would be violating this decree by participating in all of the public and online debates that one can find on the internet. Personally, I have never seen any of these type of debates ever convert either of the people participating.  Usually both sides claim victory, and they go on as before.
Reply
#17
(12-25-2009, 11:50 PM)QuisUtDeus Wrote: That's nonsense.  First, if you want to act like a Protestant and beat people over the head with the Bible, go for  it.  If you read Church history and see how people were evangelized, it was first by setting an example.  Second, not everyone has that charism.  Some people are good theologians but lousy apologists.  To demand that everyone go out and evangelize is just, well, stupid. 

Very true!  As St. Paul wrote (emphasize mine), "And he gave SOME as apostles, others as prophets, others as evangelists, others as pastors and teachers,..." (Ephesians 4:11).  God has not called, or gifted, all of us to go out and be evangelists.  What He has done, though, is called all of us to share Christ with others to the best of our ability in accordance to our calling and gifts, whatever they may be.
Reply
#18
(12-26-2009, 09:34 AM)ServantofMary Wrote:
(12-25-2009, 11:52 PM)QuisUtDeus Wrote: It mentions private ones as well.

Although the decree mentions engaging in private disputes, the article goes on to say that "this law, like all penal laws, must be very narrowly construed. The terms Catholic Faith and dispute have a technical signification. The former term refers to questions purely theological; the latter to disputations more or less formal, and engrossing the attention of the public."  In other words, these seem to be private disputes where there are other people around listening (i.e. debating in the break room at work, etc.).  It doesn't seem to be restricting the discussing of religious issues with others where it is truly a private discussion between two people.

But, yes, it does seem that many of the lay Catholic apologists today would be violating this decree by participating in all of the public and online debates that one can find on the internet. Personally, I have never seen any of these type of debates ever convert either of the people participating.  Usually both sides claim victory, and they go on as before.

I have, true conversions.  :)  Although I'd agree it's rare because people like to be deceived and to believe what they want to believe because fallen humanity is stupid and lazy, and it's easier not to have to change our lives.

But Our Lord doesn't always allow us to see the fruits of a thing, although we plant a seed.

As Mother Teresa said, 'it's not my job to be successful, but just to be faithful'.
Oh my Jesus, I surrender myself to you. Take care of everything.--Fr Dolindo Ruotolo

Persevere..Eucharist, Holy Rosary, Brown Scapular, Confession. You will win.
Reply
#19
(12-26-2009, 10:30 AM)Jacafamala Wrote: I have, true conversions.  :)

That's AWESOME!!!!  Usually, the people in the debate are so engrossed with proving their particular viewpoint that they are not open to honestly hearing the other side.  I have to admit that reading online debates between Catholics and Protestants did have an influence in me coming to the Catholic Faith.  But at the same time, I was already open to listening to the Catholic Faith when I was reading them.  If I would have been a diehard Protestant, I doubt that reading them would have made too much of a dent in my belief system.
Reply
#20
(12-26-2009, 01:08 AM)QuisUtDeus Wrote:
(12-25-2009, 11:53 PM)Ravenonthecross Wrote: Have we any further clarification QuisUtDeus?

This is a good start.  CE entry on Religious Discussions

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05034a.htm

Awesome! This indeed makes it clearer.

St. Thomas (II-II, Q. x, a. 7) holds that it is lawful to dispute publicly with unbelievers, under certain conditions. To discuss as doubting the truth of the faith, is a sin; to discuss for the purpose of refuting error, is praiseworthy. At the same time the character of the audience must be considered. If they are well instructed and firm in their belief, there is no danger; if they are simple-minded then, where they are solicited by unbelievers to abandon their faith, a public defence is needful, provided it can be undertaken by competent parties. But where the faithful are not exposed to such perverting influences, discussions of the sort are dangerous. It is not, then, surprising that the question of disputations with heretics has been made the subject of ecclesiastical legislation. By a decree of Alexander IV (1254-1261) inserted in "Sextus Decretalium", Lib. V, c. ii, and still in force, all laymen are forbidden, under threat of excommunication, to dispute publicly or privately with heretics on the Catholic Faith. The text reads: "Inhibemus quoque, ne cuiquam laicæ personæ liceat publice vel privatim de fide catholicâ disputare. Qui vero contra fecerit, excommunicationis laqueo innodetur." (We furthermore forbid any lay person to engage in dispute, either private or public, concerning the Catholic Faith. Whosoever shall act contrary to this decree, let him be bound in the fetters of excommunication.) This law, like all penal laws, must be very narrowly construed. The terms Catholic Faith and dispute have a technical signification. The former term refers to questions purely theological; the latter to disputations more or less formal, and engrossing the attention of the public. There are numerous questions, somewhat connected with theology, which many laymen who have received no scientific theological training can treat more intelligently than a priest. In modern life, it frequently happens that an O'Connell or a Montalembert must stand forward as a defender of Catholic interests upon occasions when a theologian would be out of place. But when there is a question of dogmatic or moral theology, every intelligent layman will concede the propriety of leaving the exposition and defence of it to the clergy.

But the clergy are not free to engage in public disputes on religion without due authorization. In the Collectanea S. Cong. de Prop. Fide" (p. 102, n. 294) we find the following decree, issued 8 March, 1625: "The Sacred Congregation has ordered that public discussions shall not be held with heretics, because for the most part, either owing to their loquacity or audacity or to the applause of the audience, error prevails and the truth is crushed. But should it happen that such a discussion is unavoidable, notice must first be given to the S. Congregation, which, after weighing the circumstances of time and persons, will prescribe in detail what is to be done. The Sacred Congregation enforced this decree with such vigour, that the custom of holding public disputes with heretics wellnigh fell into desuetude. [See the decree of 1631 regarding the missionaries in Constantinople; also the decrees of 1645 and 1662, the latter forbidding the General of the Capuchins to authorize such disputes (Collectanea, 1674, n. 302).]
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)