Was surprised to find a Bishop saying mass today.
#61
What Petrelton doesn't understand is that it has ALWAYS been the agenda of the "Catholic" Modernists to mix in their lying novelties with truth - so as to make their lies seem truthful.  There is no doubt that the CCC contains serious ambiguities and even outright error (especially concerning the Moslems worshipping the same God that we do).  It is a rehashing of the flaming Modernist Dutch Catechism, which was just too obviously Modernist for them to allow - SO, they had to be more subtle about their approach so as to fool faithful Catholics into believing their lying novelties - something that you prove in spades, Petrelton...
Reply
#62
(11-16-2009, 04:15 AM)Nic Wrote: What Petrelton doesn't understand is that it has ALWAYS been the agenda of the "Catholic" Modernists to mix in their lying novelties with truth - so as to make their lies seem truthful.  There is no doubt that the CCC contains serious ambiguities and even outright error (especially concerning the Moslems worshipping the same God that we do).  It is a rehashing of the flaming Modernist Dutch Catechism, which was just too obviously Modernist for them to allow - SO, they had to be more subtle about their approach so as to fool faithful Catholics into believing their lying novelties - something that you prove in spades, Petrelton...

You are mentioning things that are right out of the encyclical Pascendi.  How on one page there may be something perfectly fine and on another some novelty will be there.  Also, the section where the sainted Pontiff talks about the "species of compromise" between conservative forces and progressive forces in order to make advances in their agenda at a pace in which the laiety can be moved along without being too disturbed. 
Reply
#63
Hi!  I've been off this thread for a couple of days and I'm not sure if I should jump right back in in the middle of a heated discussion, but I just saw an amazing show on Modernism.  It was GK Chesterton and it gave me a definition of modernism that I can use.  I am a really simple gal and I like this:  Modernism is against  Tradition, Dogma, and Thinking.  As I began applying the definitions that I saw in the show, it is hard not to conclude that the post-Vatican II church is full of modernism.  As a convert who loves to study her faith, I have often been perplexed when I find an old beautiful tradition that has been consigned to the dust heap and replaced withsomething banal.

Why we have replaced our Latin hymns with folk music is beyond me.  As I have begun to go to the TLM on occasion, I have gotten used to the silence or the beauty of the old Latin music.  Yesterday at mass I wanted to cry when they were singing during Communion.  I wished they would be quiet so that I could pray like I can at the TLM.  And Communion was so quick (like a drive through if you will) that I had no time for meditation or prayer before, during or after - especially since they use EMHC - we were all done in less than 5 minutes.

Back to the modernism thing - I have noticed that people don't think anymore!  It is all based on feeling.  They forget that truth is truth - regardless of how you feel.  My 11 year old picks up quickly on how ignorant people can be when he sees things on TV or in the news, etc.  We have tried to teach him to think!  And it appears to be working - he absolutely loves watching the GK Chesterton show and learning about Chesterton!  I know most people on this forum don't like EWTN, but I am glad they have that show.  I learn so much from it!

Last but not least, how do you deal with an NO mass when you truly want to be at a TLM?
Reply
#64
You will find that the clearest definition of Modernism is the belief that revealed Truth changes over time  - and the doctrines of the past can become irrelevant in a future age.  This is all done out of a spirit of the age and a consent to the modern world.  Truth CANNOT change.

Modernism is the most dangerous of all heresies because it destroys any basis for belief in a supernatural world, whereas previous heresies had restricted themselves to denying one or more teachings of the Catholic faith.

St. Pius X described Modernism as "the synthesis of all heresies" as it seeks to "lay the axe not to the branches and shoots (of the Catholic Church) but to the very root", that is, to the faith and "its deepest fibers, and once they have struck the axe "they (modernists) proceed to diffuse poison throughout the whole tree, so that there is no part of the Catholic truth which they leave untouched" (Pascendi). Modernism poses a threat to our faith, and hence to our hope of salvation.

It would not be false to call the Modernists the worst enemies of the Church for it is not from without but from within that they plot the destruction of the Church; by mingling in themselves rationalism and Catholicism, which is used to subtly seduce the ignorant in the name of "progress".

Ever since the days of Pope St. Pius X, we have witnessed this struggle between two camps, that of Tradition, in which the deposit of the faith is preserved and handed over to future generations and that of the Modernists, which marches in the name of progress to destroy all that the Church holds to be sacred, while destroying not only the deposit of the faith but even its very foundations, that is the notion of faith itself.

This heresy of Modernism has not changed its nature and approach till the present day but has only become more bold and daring as it has now affected the whole Catholic Church to so large an extent that it has been embraced by almost the entire Catholic hierarchy.  Thus, the words of Pope St. Pius X in Pascendi Dominici Gregis echo forth:


...the number of the enemies of the Cross of Christ has in these last days increased exceedingly, who are striving, by arts, entirely new and full of subtlety, to destroy the vital energy of the Church, and, if they can, to overthrow utterly Christ's kingdom itself. Wherefore We may no longer be silent, lest We should seem to fail in Our most sacred duty, and lest the kindness that, in the hope of wiser counsels, We have hitherto shown them, should be attributed to forgetfulness of Our office.

That We make no delay in this matter is rendered necessary especially by the fact that the partisans of error are to be sought not only among the Church's open enemies; they lie hid, a thing to be deeply deplored and feared, in her very bosom and heart, and are the more mischievous, the less conspicuously they appear. We allude, Venerable Brethren, to many who belong to the Catholic laity, nay, and this is far more lamentable, to the ranks of the priesthood itself, who, feigning a love for the Church, lacking the firm protection of philosophy and theology, nay more, thoroughly imbued with the poisonous doctrines taught by the enemies of the Church, and lost to all sense of modesty, vaunt themselves as reformers of the Church; and, forming more boldly into line of attack, assail all that is most sacred in the work of Christ, not sparing even the person of the Divine Redeemer, whom, with sacrilegious daring, they reduce to a simple, mere man...

...We have said, they put their designs for her ruin into operation not from without but from within; hence, the danger is present almost in the very veins and heart of the Church, whose injury is the more certain, the more intimate is their knowledge of her. Moreover they lay the axe not to the branches and shoots, but to the very root, that is, to the faith and its deepest fires. And having struck at this root of immortality, they proceed to disseminate poison through the whole tree, so that there is no part of Catholic truth from which they hold their hand, none that they do not strive to corrupt.
Reply
#65
(11-16-2009, 10:09 AM)SearchingCatholic Wrote: Hi!  I've been off this thread for a couple of days and I'm not sure if I should jump right back in in the middle of a heated discussion, but I just saw an amazing show on Modernism.  It was GK Chesterton and it gave me a definition of modernism that I can use.  I am a really simple gal and I like this:  Modernism is against  Tradition, Dogma, and Thinking.  As I began applying the definitions that I saw in the show, it is hard not to conclude that the post-Vatican II church is full of modernism.  As a convert who loves to study her faith, I have often been perplexed when I find an old beautiful tradition that has been consigned to the dust heap and replaced withsomething banal.

Why we have replaced our Latin hymns with folk music is beyond me.  As I have begun to go to the TLM on occasion, I have gotten used to the silence or the beauty of the old Latin music.  Yesterday at mass I wanted to cry when they were singing during Communion.  I wished they would be quiet so that I could pray like I can at the TLM.  And Communion was so quick (like a drive through if you will) that I had no time for meditation or prayer before, during or after - especially since they use EMHC - we were all done in less than 5 minutes.

Back to the modernism thing - I have noticed that people don't think anymore!  It is all based on feeling.  They forget that truth is truth - regardless of how you feel.  My 11 year old picks up quickly on how ignorant people can be when he sees things on TV or in the news, etc.  We have tried to teach him to think!  And it appears to be working - he absolutely loves watching the GK Chesterton show and learning about Chesterton!  I know most people on this forum don't like EWTN, but I am glad they have that show.  I learn so much from it!

Last but not least, how do you deal with an NO mass when you truly want to be at a TLM?


The Chesterton show is excellent.  I watched an episode last night and it was the only time I've ever seen a real mistake.  Dale Ahlquist said that "God became one of His own Creatures."   That is not true.  God became Incarnate, which D.A. also stated, but he has to make the distinction between Creation and Generation.   Christ was begotten not made.   God cannot be a Creature because He IS the Creator. 

Reply
#66
(11-16-2009, 11:43 AM)Gerard Wrote:
(11-16-2009, 10:09 AM)SearchingCatholic Wrote: Hi!  I've been off this thread for a couple of days and I'm not sure if I should jump right back in in the middle of a heated discussion, but I just saw an amazing show on Modernism.  It was GK Chesterton and it gave me a definition of modernism that I can use.  I am a really simple gal and I like this:  Modernism is against  Tradition, Dogma, and Thinking.  As I began applying the definitions that I saw in the show, it is hard not to conclude that the post-Vatican II church is full of modernism.  As a convert who loves to study her faith, I have often been perplexed when I find an old beautiful tradition that has been consigned to the dust heap and replaced withsomething banal.

Why we have replaced our Latin hymns with folk music is beyond me.  As I have begun to go to the TLM on occasion, I have gotten used to the silence or the beauty of the old Latin music.  Yesterday at mass I wanted to cry when they were singing during Communion.  I wished they would be quiet so that I could pray like I can at the TLM.  And Communion was so quick (like a drive through if you will) that I had no time for meditation or prayer before, during or after - especially since they use EMHC - we were all done in less than 5 minutes.

Back to the modernism thing - I have noticed that people don't think anymore!  It is all based on feeling.  They forget that truth is truth - regardless of how you feel.  My 11 year old picks up quickly on how ignorant people can be when he sees things on TV or in the news, etc.  We have tried to teach him to think!  And it appears to be working - he absolutely loves watching the GK Chesterton show and learning about Chesterton!  I know most people on this forum don't like EWTN, but I am glad they have that show.  I learn so much from it!

Last but not least, how do you deal with an NO mass when you truly want to be at a TLM, but the hubby doesn't want to gothere?  Would it be worth it to take the deal he has given me to expose him to the TLM?  He has said he will go to the TLM for 6 weeks if he can pick the most liberal church in the diocese for 6 weeks!  I told him it has to at least have a valid mass .  What do you think?


The Chesterton show is excellent.  I watched an episode last night and it was the only time I've ever seen a real mistake.  Dale Ahlquist said that "God became one of His own Creatures."   That is not true.  God became Incarnate, which D.A. also stated, but he has to make the distinction between Creation and Generation.   Christ was begotten not made.   God cannot be a Creature because He IS the Creator. 

Why is your husband trying to present you with a Faustian bargain?  Is he going to eat healthy food for 6 weeks and then rancid food for 6 weeks?  Liberalism isn't an alternative.  It's wrong.   You'd be better by going to both Liturgies on the same day for 6 weeks where you can point out the errors and the Liturgical abuse at the Liberal parish.

I hate to show my ignorance, but who is Faust?
Reply
#67




Quote:How does errors in translations justify rejecting the catechism (which was written in Latin) or even regarding it with suspicion.

For one thing, Catechisms in and of themselves aren't infallible. They may contain some infallible teachings, but are not infallible as a whole. I gave you the example regarding capital punishment which is at odds with the Church's traditional teaching on the subject. This confusion is courtesy of Cardinal Christoph Schonbrun, who's the one who inserted it in there.


Quote:Even the Bible has been subjected to errors in translation. Do we therefore regard it with suspicion also?

It depends on which version of the Bible. I'd regard the King James version with a lot of suspicion, to put it mildly. I wouldn't regard the Douay Rheims version with suspicion.


Reply
#68

Quote:I hate to show my ignorance, but who is Faust?

Faust is a protagonist in a legend about a German man who makes a deal with the devil in exchange for knowledge. It's been the basis for many literary works. Here's a summary of Goethe's writings regarding Faust:

http://www.cummingsstudyguides.net/Faust.html
Reply
#69
Quote: One so-called modernist passage in the CCC does not make the whole CCC modernist. 

Quote:"But the fact that a fault is subtle does not excuse it in the least. Nay. It simply makes it all the more dangerous."--Petrelton on Archbishop LeFebvre.
Quote:There seems to be a double standard at work here.


Quote:It should (or really, must) also be pointed out that the current Catechism had errors when it was promulgated in 1992, then it had to be re-issued with corrections in 1994.

really. You've made this comment before. How is this relevant? What exactly were the errors of the 29 catechism. Were they spelling errors or what?

Quote:You wish they were spelling errors.

It's relevant because if there were errors found in the 1992 Catechism, who's to say there aren't errors in the current one?

I can tell you that the passage regarding capital punishment in the new Catechism is at odds with what the Church has taught about the subject for over 1900 years.
Quote:Can you tell me what was corrected in the 1994 catechism which was in error in 1992. Can you explain how the catechism is at odds with 1900 years of church teaching on capital punishment?

You mean how the Catholic Church permits and allows the state to judicially exercise its perogative to utilise the Death penalty, let one see thus from writings of those of the Church:

St. Thomas Aquinas:
Quote:By sinning man departs from the order of reason, and consequently falls away from the dignity of his manhood, in so far as he is naturally free, and exists for himself, and he falls into the slavish state of the beasts, by being disposed of according as he is useful to others.... Hence, although it be evil in itself to kill a man so long as he preserve his dignity, yet it may be good to kill a man who has sinned, even as it is to kill a beast. For a bad man is worse than a beast, and is more harmful [Ref. 19, II-II, Q 64, A 2, Rp 3].


St. Augustine:
From the City of God:
Quote:However, there are some exceptions made by the divine authority to its own law, that men may not be put to death. These exceptions are of two kinds, being justified either by a general law, or by a special commission granted for a time to some individual.... And, accordingly, they who...in conformity with His laws have represented in their persons the public justice or the wisdom of government, and in this capacity have put to death wicked men; such persons have by no means violated the commandment, "Thou shalt not kill" [Ref. 14, p 27].

From Holy Writ:
Quote:Let every person be subject to the governing authorities; for there is no authority except from God, and those authorities that exist have been instituted by God. 2 Therefore, whoever resists authority resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Do you wish to have no fear of the authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive its approval; 4 for it is God's servant for your good. But if you do what is wrong, you should be afraid, for the authority does not bear the sword in vain! It is the servant of God to execute wrath on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore one must be subject, not only because of wrath but also because of conscience. 6 For the same reason you also pay taxes, for the authorities are God's servants, busy with this very thing. 7 Pay to all what is due them—taxes to whom taxes are due, revenue to whom revenue is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due [Ref. 6, Romans 13:1–7].
and:

Psalm 101:8,
Quote:"In the morning I put to death all the wicked of the land, that I might cut off all the workers of iniquity from the city of the Lord" (Ref. 22, pp 420–421).

And of course The venerable  Roman Catechism proclaims:
Quote:"The just use of this power [death penalty], far from involving the crime of murder, is an act of paramount obedience to this Commandment which prohibits murder" (Ref. 22, p 421).
Reply
#70
(11-16-2009, 04:33 PM)Ravenonthecross Wrote:
Quote:Can you tell me what was corrected in the 1994 catechism which was in error in 1992. Can you explain how the catechism is at odds with 1900 years of church teaching on capital punishment?

You mean how the Catholic Church permits and allows the state to judicially exercise its perogative to utilise the Death penalty, let one see thus from writings of those of the Church:

St. Thomas Aquinas:
Quote:By sinning man departs from the order of reason, and consequently falls away from the dignity of his manhood, in so far as he is naturally free, and exists for himself, and he falls into the slavish state of the beasts, by being disposed of according as he is useful to others.... Hence, although it be evil in itself to kill a man so long as he preserve his dignity, yet it may be good to kill a man who has sinned, even as it is to kill a beast. For a bad man is worse than a beast, and is more harmful [Ref. 19, II-II, Q 64, A 2, Rp 3].


St. Augustine:
From the City of God:
Quote:However, there are some exceptions made by the divine authority to its own law, that men may not be put to death. These exceptions are of two kinds, being justified either by a general law, or by a special commission granted for a time to some individual.... And, accordingly, they who...in conformity with His laws have represented in their persons the public justice or the wisdom of government, and in this capacity have put to death wicked men; such persons have by no means violated the commandment, "Thou shalt not kill" [Ref. 14, p 27].

From Holy Writ:
Quote:Let every person be subject to the governing authorities; for there is no authority except from God, and those authorities that exist have been instituted by God. 2 Therefore, whoever resists authority resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Do you wish to have no fear of the authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive its approval; 4 for it is God's servant for your good. But if you do what is wrong, you should be afraid, for the authority does not bear the sword in vain! It is the servant of God to execute wrath on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore one must be subject, not only because of wrath but also because of conscience. 6 For the same reason you also pay taxes, for the authorities are God's servants, busy with this very thing. 7 Pay to all what is due them—taxes to whom taxes are due, revenue to whom revenue is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due [Ref. 6, Romans 13:1–7].
and:

Psalm 101:8,
Quote:"In the morning I put to death all the wicked of the land, that I might cut off all the workers of iniquity from the city of the Lord" (Ref. 22, pp 420–421).

And of course The venerable  Roman Catechism proclaims:
Quote:"The just use of this power [death penalty], far from involving the crime of murder, is an act of paramount obedience to this Commandment which prohibits murder" (Ref. 22, p 421).
Can you explain how this is in contradiction to the Catechism?
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)