The Holy See’s team for the SSPX talks?
#11
(09-08-2009, 10:06 PM)QuisUtDeus Wrote:
(09-08-2009, 09:44 PM)CollegeCatholic Wrote: As this news comes to us, I think it is of the utmost importance that we pray for the success of these talks.  That they may be concluded soon, and that the SSPX may be fully regularized. 

And that Modernism be ejected from the Church like the refuse it is.

Et expecto resurrectionem mortuorum et vitam eternam. Amen.

Until the last judgment the seeds will not be separated

Matthew 13:29 And he said: No, lest perhaps gathering up the cockle, you root up the wheat also together with it.
Reply
#12
(09-09-2009, 07:42 AM)glgas Wrote:
(09-08-2009, 10:06 PM)QuisUtDeus Wrote:
(09-08-2009, 09:44 PM)CollegeCatholic Wrote: As this news comes to us, I think it is of the utmost importance that we pray for the success of these talks.  That they may be concluded soon, and that the SSPX may be fully regularized. 

And that Modernism be ejected from the Church like the refuse it is.

Et expecto resurrectionem mortuorum et vitam eternam. Amen.

Until the last judgment the seeds will not be separated

Matthew 13:29 And he said: No, lest perhaps gathering up the cockle, you root up the wheat also together with it.

I guess the Church should never have issued all those anathemas, right?

Quote:Galatians 1:6-10

6 I wonder that you are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ, unto another gospel. 7 Which is not another, only there are some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema. 9 As we said before, so now I say again: If any one preach to you a gospel, besides that which you have received, let him be anathema. 10 For do I now persuade men, or God? Or do I seek to please men? If I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ.

I'm thinking St. Paul repeated the statement twice for emphasis because he thought it important.

Reply
#13
I am sorry but now only the Church or the pope has the right to issue anathemas, or define what is to be condemned, and apply that definition to individual people or groups.  The Church condemned some groups, like womenpriests, married priests, sedevacantists, but the Church is very cautious in other areas.  Our understanding is limited, so for us the advise is still

Matt 13:30 Suffer both to grow until the harvest, and in the time of the harvest I will say to the reapers: Gather up first the cockle, and bind it into bundles to burn, but the wheat gather ye into my barn.

We pray for it, we wait for it but we are not the God's appointed reapers, no matter who much tempting role it is.

One biblical quote does not make a worldview, but if a biblical quote does not fit into our worldview, than our view is wrong. Only the whole together adds up as the truth.





(09-09-2009, 02:11 PM)QuisUtDeus Wrote: I guess the Church should never have issued all those anathemas, right?

Quote:Galatians 1:6-10

6 I wonder that you are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ, unto another gospel. 7 Which is not another, only there are some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema. 9 As we said before, so now I say again: If any one preach to you a gospel, besides that which you have received, let him be anathema. 10 For do I now persuade men, or God? Or do I seek to please men? If I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ.

I'm thinking St. Paul repeated the statement twice for emphasis because he thought it important.
Reply
#14
Modernism is condemned! It is. No doubt about it. So I don't see how your post fits into this.
Reply
#15
Modernism was condemned by the Church pre-Vatican II. Now everyone is the Church, post-Vatican II, holds Modernism. The majority of priests, bishops, cardinals, and even the Pope himself.

I think the SSPX group of theologians in the dialogue, is going to blow the Vatican team out of the water with the solid truth of orthodoxy. Most of the Vatican theologians will be convinced privately and personally. I just pray that the truth prevails and it is all made public.
Reply
#16
(09-09-2009, 05:14 PM)SaintRafael Wrote: Modernism was condemned by the Church pre-Vatican II.
And after.

Quote:Now everyone is the Church, post-Vatican II, holds Modernism.
But modernism is condemned. Vatican II does not teach anything new infallibly.

Quote:The majority of priests, bishops, cardinals, and even the Pope himself.
And what about you? Oh, I know, YOU are the Church ;) You can't condemn the Pope; there is a canonical way of doing it.

Reply
#17
Sorry u lost me ros.
Pls explain
Sip sip
Reply
#18
(09-09-2009, 05:17 PM)Rosarium Wrote: And after.
No. The hierarchy has been silent since Vatican II because they would be condemning themselves. There has been no serious attacks on Modernism like those done by Pius IX and Pius X.

(09-09-2009, 05:17 PM)Rosarium Wrote: But modernism is condemned. Vatican II does not teach anything new infallibly.

Modernism is condemned in reality. Its condemnation is eternal, but that doesn't stop the majority of Catholics who hold it and ignore the pre-VII condemnations. Vatican II doesn't teach anything infallibly, but it was the event that has given everyone the excuse to invent a new religion. Catholics use Vatican II as justification for holding all sorts of heresies and basically believing the Church started again anew after 1965.

(09-09-2009, 05:17 PM)Rosarium Wrote: And what about you? Oh, I know, YOU are the Church ;) You can't condemn the Pope; there is a canonical way of doing it.
I know I am part of the Church, but as a lay man, I don't hold the authority, responsibility, or hierarchical position of a cleric. Canonical penalties make official what already is obvious in reality to any Catholic who knows the faith and a proper Sensus Catholicus.
As far as a Pope is concerned, his condemnation could only occur after his death by a successor.

Reply
#19
(09-09-2009, 05:37 PM)SaintRafael Wrote: No. The hierarchy has been silent since Vatican II because they would be condemning themselves.

Indeed.

Reply
#20
(09-09-2009, 05:37 PM)SaintRafael Wrote: No. The hierarchy has been silent since Vatican II because they would be condemning themselves. There has been no serious attacks on Modernism like those done by Pius IX and Pius X.
Yes, they've been quiet, but that doesn't mean the Church supports it. It is still condemned.

Quote:Modernism is condemned in reality. Its condemnation is eternal, but that doesn't stop the majority of Catholics who hold it and ignore the pre-VII condemnations. Vatican II doesn't teach anything infallibly, but it was the event that has given everyone the excuse to invent a new religion. Catholics use Vatican II as justification for holding all sorts of heresies and basically believing the Church started again anew after 1965.
The Church has always had sinners.

Quote:I know I am part of the Church, but as a lay man, I don't hold the authority, responsibility, or hierarchical position of a cleric. Canonical penalties make official what already is obvious in reality to any Catholic who knows the faith and a proper Sensus Catholicus.
As far as a Pope is concerned, his condemnation could only occur after his death by a successor.

No, there are things which could be done during his life.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)