There is No Such Thing as a Homosexual Catholic Priest
I usually shun the use of the laughing animations gifs but this is irresistible  :laughing: Yeah the modern latin neologism doesn't help much....the catechism says personae homosexuales...
Reply
(02-25-2011, 12:54 PM)James02 Wrote: What we are trying to establish is if you are a Puritanist heretic.

While your zeal warms my heart, I don't think any of us has the authority to determine or establish if Catholic Johnny is a "Puritanist heretic."

Perhaps the discussion should continue in more amicable terms. That's my suggestion.
Reply
(02-25-2011, 01:06 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote:
(02-25-2011, 12:54 PM)James02 Wrote: What we are trying to establish is if you are a Puritanist heretic.

While your zeal warms my heart, I don't think any of us has the authority to determine or establish if Catholic Johnny is a "Puritanist heretic."

Perhaps the discussion should continue in more amicable terms. That's my suggestion.

I agree.
Reply
(02-25-2011, 01:06 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote:
(02-25-2011, 12:54 PM)James02 Wrote: What we are trying to establish is if you are a Puritanist heretic.

While your zeal warms my heart, I don't think any of us has the authority to determine or establish if Catholic Johnny is a "Puritanist heretic."

Perhaps the discussion should continue in more amicable terms. That's my suggestion.

I agree. I'm just trying to establish what on earth is actually being debated.
Reply
(02-25-2011, 01:01 PM)St. Drogo Wrote: I usually shun the use of the laughing animations gifs but this is irresistible  :laughing: Yeah the modern latin neologism doesn't help much....the catechism says personae homosexuales...

Well, they have to update the Ecclesiastical Lexicon to deal with modern issues.  I mean, you'll find Latin words for refrigerator, internet, etc., as well.  They can't condemn things there aren't Latin words for.   ;D
Reply
(02-25-2011, 01:12 PM)QuisUtDeus Wrote:
(02-25-2011, 01:01 PM)St. Drogo Wrote: I usually shun the use of the laughing animations gifs but this is irresistible  :laughing: Yeah the modern latin neologism doesn't help much....the catechism says personae homosexuales...

Well, they have to update the Ecclesiastical Lexicon to deal with modern issues.  I mean, you'll find Latin words for refrigerator, internet, etc., as well.  They can't condemn things there aren't Latin words for.   ;D
lol thanks quis your right not much help.
sexuales malus?
Reply
(02-25-2011, 01:42 PM)voxpopulisuxx Wrote: lol thanks quis your right not much help.
sexuales malus?

There are lots of words in Latin, but they all refer to a person who engages in acts, such as "Sodomite" or "catamite".  "Homosexual" does not refer to an act, but to a disposition or set of tendencies.

The closest you could get in Latin, besides using gutter language,  is the Latin version of "sodomitical" or "catamitical" or something like that.  "Luster after men", etc. Most Latin nouns can be converted to adjectives.

Reply
Quote: I don't think any of us has the authority to determine or establish if Catholic Johnny is a "Puritanist heretic."

I agree.  Fixed.
Reply
(02-25-2011, 12:54 PM)James02 Wrote:
Quote: You maliciously distort my words.  My remarks are clear:  "Proper utilization of the most holy sacrament of penance and absolution can both regenerate an obstinate sinner and restore a fallen Catholic."

The sticks and twigs defense, with some ad hominem thrown in.  Your non-answer is called "begging the question".  We are trying to establish who is a Catholic.  Actually, the Pope has decided the matter.  What we are trying to establish is if you are professing heresy.

We are discussing if someone who commits sodomy or fornicates is Catholic.  

So I'll repeat my question, a Catholic fornicates or commits sodomy.  He repents and goes to confession.  Will a simple confession restore sanctifying grace to him?  If yes, then he was a Catholic before confession.

Simple question.

I did answer your question, James.  Let me just offer this with love and a pure intention.  Cradle Catholics sometimes lack the perspective of a convert or a revert when it comes to the Sacramental economy.  What I am reading here is an esteem for the efficacy of sacraments (which I have stated several times in this thread work ex opere operato), as a kind of blessing factory that magically works on the soul of the recipent without any willingness to cooperate with the grace offered. 

You say that simply because one is "Catholic" and makes a confession for his sodomy he is therefore absolved, even though the Church teaches that true contrition and amendment of purpose are also requirements of this sacrament.   The most enormous errors are presented here in the case of an unrepentant sodomite who wickedly presents himself for holy orders (Aquinas calls this a mortal sin) and who is reprobate concerning the Faith, whose every priestly action in this state is a mortal sin adding to his trespass (Aquinas), and you all rush to defend him as a valid Catholic!  As though faith and obedience has nothing to do with it!  Do you not hear our Blessed Lord Jesus?

Bring forth therefore fruits worthy of penance; and do not begin to say, We have Abraham for our father. For I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children to Abraham.  For now the axe is laid to the root of the trees. Every tree therefore that bringeth not forth good fruit, shall be cut down and cast into the fire. Luke 3:8-9

And that it is sometimes justified, even required to treat obstinate sinners as nonCatholics:

But if thy brother shall offend against thee, go, and rebuke him between thee and him alone. If he shall hear thee, thou shalt gain thy brother.

And if he will not hear thee, take with thee one or two more: that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may stand.  And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican
.  Matthew 18:15-17

And we are not to call them brethren who persist in mortal sin:

But now I have written to you, not to keep company, if any man that is named a brother, be a fornicator, or covetous, or a server of idols, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner: with such a one, not so much as to eat.  For what have I to do to judge them that are without? Do not you judge them that are within?  For them that are without, God will judge. Put away the evil one from among yourselves.  1 Cor. 5:11-13

We must not perceive the sacraments as magical powers that operate completely independent of the will of the recipient.  The sacraments are always efficacious, that is, they operate by the reality of Christ's eternal priesthood and His presence in the form and matter.  But it is impious to insist that the individual recipient is helped, changed, edified, strengthened, graced, etc... if they are persisting in mortal sin with no intention of repentance.  If anything, they are culpable of a kind of sacrilege - abusing the sacraments which St. Paul solemnly warns the Faithful not to do:

For as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the chalice, you shall shew the death of the Lord, until he come.  Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord.  But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice.  For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord.  Therefore are there many infirm and weak among you, and many sleep.  1 Cor. 11:26-30

In summary:  an unrepentant sodomite has repudiated his baptismal promises by his obstinate resistance of the graces offered in the new birth.  Aquinas teaches that holy orders presupposes baptism as the gateway to all the other sacraments.   He also teaches that presenting onseself for orders unworthily is a mortal sin for both the ordinand and ordinary.  This person, whatever titles he may arrogate to himself and flash as credentials, cannot be a Christian at all, much less an alter chrestus.   The sacraments he dispenses are valid ex opere operato but the sin of scandal and the false teaching he promulgates are enormous mortal sins. 

My firm opinion on this is that this crisis cannot be resolved in the Church by wielding unbiblical and untraditional language (neologisms) borrowed from scientific 'personality theory' to define in doctrine the state of such persons as homosexual persons.  Even if the term itself can be justified in theory, in praxis it provides an occasion for ruthless exploitation by the devil who delights in infiltrating the priesthood with reprobates who will facilitate the destruction of souls from within the Church, which Pope St. Pius X explained was the goal of the Modernist.

Reply
(02-25-2011, 10:24 PM)Catholic Johnny Wrote:
(02-25-2011, 12:54 PM)James02 Wrote:
Quote: You maliciously distort my words.  My remarks are clear:  "Proper utilization of the most holy sacrament of penance and absolution can both regenerate an obstinate sinner and restore a fallen Catholic."

The sticks and twigs defense, with some ad hominem thrown in.  Your non-answer is called "begging the question".  We are trying to establish who is a Catholic.  Actually, the Pope has decided the matter.  What we are trying to establish is if you are professing heresy.

We are discussing if someone who commits sodomy or fornicates is Catholic.  

So I'll repeat my question, a Catholic fornicates or commits sodomy.  He repents and goes to confession.  Will a simple confession restore sanctifying grace to him?  If yes, then he was a Catholic before confession.

Simple question.

I did answer your question, James.  Let me just offer this with love and a pure intention.  Cradle Catholics sometimes lack the perspective of a convert or a revert when it comes to the Sacramental economy.  What I am reading here is an esteem for the efficacy of sacraments (which I have stated several times in this thread work ex opere operato), as a kind of blessing factory that magically works on the soul of the recipent without any willingness to cooperate with the grace offered. 

You say that simply because one is "Catholic" and makes a confession for his sodomy he is therefore absolved, even though the Church teaches that true contrition and amendment of purpose are also requirements of this sacrament.   The most enormous errors are presented here in the case of an unrepentant sodomite who wickedly presents himself for holy orders (Aquinas calls this a mortal sin) and who is reprobate concerning the Faith, whose every priestly action in this state is a mortal sin adding to his trespass (Aquinas), and you all rush to defend him as a valid Catholic!  As though faith and obedience has nothing to do with it!  Do you not hear our Blessed Lord Jesus?

That's because he is.  Not by our definition, but by the Church's.

Quote:http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03744a.htm

Members of the Church

The foregoing account of the Church and of the principle of authority by which it is governed enables us to determine who are members of the Church and who are not. The membership of which we speak, is incorporation in the visible body of Christ. It has already been noted (VI) that a member of the Church may have forfeited the grace of God. In this case he is a withered branch of the true Vine; but he has not been finally broken off from it. He still belongs to Christ. Three conditions are requisite for a man to be a member of the Church.

In the first place, he must profess the true Faith, and have received the Sacrament of Baptism. The essential necessity of this condition is apparent from the fact that the Church is the kingdom of truth, the society of those who accept the revelation of the Son of God. Every member of the Church must accept the whole revelation, either explicitly or implicitly, by profession of all that the Church teaches. He who refuses to receive it, or who, having received it, falls away, thereby excludes himself from the kingdom (Titus 3:10 sq.). The Sacrament of Baptism is rightly regarded as part of this condition. By it those who profess the Faith are formally adopted as children of God (Ephesians 1:13), and an habitual faith is among the gifts bestowed in it. Christ expressly connects the two, declaring that "he who believeth and is baptized shall be saved" (Mark 16:16; cf. Matthew 28:19).

It is further necessary to acknowledge the authority of the Church and of her appointed rulers. Those who reject the jurisdiction established by Christ are no longer members of His kingdom. Thus St. Ignatius lays it down in his Letter to the Church of Smyrna (no. 8): Wheresoever the bishop shall appear, there let the people be; even as where Jesus may be there is the universal Church". In regard to this condition, the ultimate touchstone is to be found in communion with the Holy See. On Peter Christ founded his Church. Those who are not joined to that foundation cannot form part of the house of God.

The third condition lies in the canonical right to communion with the Church. In virtue of its coercive power the Church has authority to excommunicate notorious sinners. It may inflict this punishment not merely on the ground of heresy or schism, but for other grave offences. Thus St. Paul pronounces sentence of excommunication on the incestuous Corinthian (1 Corinthians 5:3). This penalty is no mere external severance from the rights of common worship. It is a severance from the body of Christ, undoing to this extent the work of baptism, and placing the excommunicated man in the condition of the heathen and the publican". It casts him out of God's kingdom; and the Apostle speaks of it as "delivering him over to Satan" (1 Corinthians 5:5; 1 Timothy 1:20).

Your definition, I hate to say it, but it's true, is Protestant in nature.  People only are ejected from the Church by heresy, schism, or excommunication.  Being a repeat offender, even of the worst kind and unrepentant to boot, does not make someone "not Catholic".  Simple heresy by rationalization or a "schismatic act" doesn't make someone "not Catholic" either.  To be cut off from the Church is the most severe punishment possible and is reserved for the gravest acts.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)