Pope John Paul II and the Animist Ritual in Togoville, 1985
#91
Firstly, every person here agrees that canonization shouldn't merely be a divine roster.  Everyone also agrees that, for that reason, JPII should not be canonized.   Absolutely no argument there.

(10-11-2011, 10:54 PM)K3vinhood Wrote: If he is Canonized, if he is truly in heaven, then I don't see how the path can truly be narrow. I don't see how it's possible so few will make it. I don't see how the teachings of the Fathers about the number of saved can possibly be true.

This is a better argument, in my opinion, for the speculation previously mentioned in this thread, but it still doesn't prove with certainty that JPII was not repentant.
Reply
#92
(10-11-2011, 10:54 PM)K3vinhood Wrote: The man professed heresies countless times and never recanted a single one of them that I know of.

There's no need to bring up all this he might of repented at the last second or he might have been invincibly ignorant talk. Even if he did make it to heaven, the Canonization would still be ridiculous. If any cleric or even layperson walks in his footsteps he would also be a heretic, not a saint.

Why should we honor this man and ask for his intercession? Based solely on the chance that he might be in heaven?

If that's the case, I think we should Beatify and maybe even Canonize everyone who's ever been Baptized. We can't forget about those virtuous people who had their 'Baptism of desire' too, let's Canonize them.

If he is Canonized, if he is truly in heaven, then I don't see how the path can truly be narrow. I don't see how it's possible so few will make it. I don't see how the teachings of the Fathers about the number of saved can possibly be true. Maybe I'm just a fool.

There is a much bigger issue here then just arguing over his personal salvation. It's about the acceptance of his practices and heresies. If everything he did is fine in the eyes of God (without recanting or fixing of any of it) then in my opinion we can all take a deep breath, relax, and basically be assured of our salvation.

I am not arguing for his canonization, K3vinhood.  I am making the quite unremarkable and non-controversial argument which follows:

"If John Paul II is in Heaven, this would NOT mean:

1. That the First Commandment is a joke.
2. That God does not care about orthodoxy.
3. That the logical thing to do is to apostatize from the Catholic Church."

This would be like arguing, from St. Alphonsus's account I posted, that Christ's decision to save the man who sold his soul to the devil means that the Lord no longer cares about demon worship, or that St. John Vianney's assurance of the salvation for the man who jumped off the bridge to his death means that the Lord no longer cares about suicide and that the Fifth Commandment has been nullified.

There are leaps in logic, and then there are manifest absurdities.

I'm fairly certain I could find even some honest sedevacantists to agree with me on that, let alone others on this forum.

I would also nitpick about whether you have the necessary theological acumen to be sniping John Paul II for his alleged countless heresies; from the caliber of some of the "theological arguments" of certain Internet lay theologians, I doubt whether they would be able to tell the difference, without using a Denzinger cheat sheet, of the difference between heresy, error, a temerarious and rash proposition, something contrary to what is sententia communis, etc.  And yes, theology is a science, just like physics.  If a B- high school physics student wandered onto a forum and began denouncing string theory, real physicists would rightly object.  

But when posters on Internet trad fora who have perhaps never so much as completed St. Thomas's Prima Pars wish to wax sedevacantical about the atrocious heresies with which John Paul II's every syllable was purportedly oozing like jelly from a doughnut (even though one of the SSPX priests himself admitted that out of the new Catechism's 2800 paragraphs, only 28, or 1%, if I recall, had real problems), then something should be said.  

But that's really not the point of my own reply, whatever others may have said: I merely maintained that Vetus cannot dogmatically define the eternal damnation of John Paul II to the fiery pit beneath.
Reply
#93
(10-11-2011, 11:05 PM)GUDC Wrote: I would also nitpick about whether you have the necessary theological acumen to be sniping John Paul II for his alleged countless heresies; from the caliber of some of the "theological arguments" of certain Internet lay theologians, I doubt whether they would be able to tell the difference, without using a Denzinger cheat sheet, of the difference between heresy, error, a temerarious and rash proposition, something contrary to what is sententia communis, etc.  And yes, theology is a science, just like physics.  If a B- high school physics student wandered onto a forum and began denouncing string theory, real physicists would rightly object.  

But when posters on Internet trad fora who have perhaps never so much as completed St. Thomas's Prima Pars wish to wax sedevacantical about the atrocious heresies with which John Paul II's every syllable was oozing like jelly from a doughnut (even though one of the SSPX priests himself admitted that out of the new Catechism's 2800 paragraphs, only 28, or 1%, if I recall, had real problems), then something should be said.  

Really?

St. Robert Bellarmine Wrote:For men are not bound, or able to read hearts; but when they see that someone is a heretic by his external works, they judge him to be a heretic pure and simple, and condemn him as a heretic. - St. Robert Bellarmine ( De Romano Pontifice)

I think St. Robert Bellarmine would come to the conclusion that this is enough evidence:
Pope John Paul II Wrote:Jews are our elder brothers in the faith. 
CH:99, 1994

Masons are sons of God the Father. 
LOR, 05/22/1984

Ecumenical Councils do not need to defend the truth. 
CH:162, 1994

All inter-religious marriages are good. 
FC, 11/22/1981

The New World Order is needed for the world. 
PP:809, 09/02/1981

Christ's miracles do not prove His messianic dignity. 
LOR, 11/11/1983

Infidels can be saved for : "May Ghandi live forever!" 
SME:9

Heretics legally can receive the sacraments from us. 
UUS:46, 05/25/1995

The Catholic Church has sinned against unity. 
UUS:34, 05/25/1995

Love is when we join in prayer with heretics. 
UUS:21, 05/25/1995

The State cannot forbid non-Catholic religions. 
FCR:2-4, 09/01/1980

Today's heretics are not to be blamed for their heresy. 
CCC:817, 10/11/1992

The Old Law is alive and working to God's call. 
CCC:839, 10/11/1992

The plan of salvation includes the Muslims. 
CCC:841, 10/11/1992

Apostate Jews worship the One True God. 
PM:135, 04/13/1986

It is unevangelical to condemn heretics. 
UUS:15, 05/25/1995

Buddhism is a religion of salvation. 
CH:84-85, 1994

Quote:But that's really not the point of my own reply, whatever others may have said: I merely maintained that Vetus cannot dogmatically define the eternal damnation of John Paul II to the lower circles of the fiery pit beneath, as he seems to wish.

I don't think he ever said with absolute certainty that JP II is in the lower circles of hell.

Reply
#94
(10-11-2011, 11:11 PM)K3vinhood Wrote: I don't think he ever said with absolute certainty that JP II is in the lower circles of hell.


From Vetus:

1. ggreg stated: "So if he were made a saint, I'd leave the Roman Catholic Church."

To which Vetus replied: "This."

In other words, according to Vetus, if John Paul II is canonized (by which is meant, he is declared to have been saved, not that each and every thing he said or did is praiseworthy), apostasy from Catholicism is a viable option.

2.
Quote:If he's in heaven, the 1st commandment is a joke.

In other words, if John Paul II was saved, according to Vetus, the 1st Commandment is not true.  Since the 1st Commandment must be true, John Paul II, according to Vetus, could not have been saved. 

It's simple logic.

I edited the original and removed it for accuracy, but the "lower circles of Hell" could be implied insofar as John Paul II, says Vetus, committed sins specifically against Faith, or the 1st Commandment, which are the gravest sort of sins and would therefore be punished with the most severity.  Vetus did not explicitly state this, though, but it was difficult not to treat his comments with the sarcasm they deserve, even to the point of hyperbole.  Fire is sometimes to be fought with fire.
Reply
#95
(10-11-2011, 11:23 PM)GUDC Wrote:
(10-11-2011, 11:11 PM)K3vinhood Wrote: I don't think he ever said with absolute certainty that JP II is in the lower circles of hell.
From Vetus:

1. ggreg stated: "So if he were made a saint, I'd leave the Roman Catholic Church."

To which Vetus replied: "This."

In other words, according to Vetus, if John Paul II is canonized (by which is meant, he is declared to have been saved, not that each and every thing he said or did is praiseworthy), apostasy from Catholicism is a viable option.

2.
Quote:if a man like him can be a saint, a model to all Christians, then Traditional Catholicism, and hence the true Church, is simply not true. In such a case we would be forced to conclude that orthodoxy doesn't really count much in the eyes of God and there's just too much ado about nothing.

3.
Quote:If he's in heaven, the 1st commandment is a joke.

In other words, if John Paul II was saved, according to Vetus, the 1st Commandment is not true.  Since the 1st Commandment must be true, John Paul II, according to Vetus, could not have been saved. 

It's simple logic.

The "lower circles of Hell" seems implied insofar as John Paul II, says Vetus, committed sins specifically against Faith, or the 1st Commandment, which are the gravest sort of sins and would therefore be punished with the most severity.  Vetus did not explicitly state this, though, but it was difficult not to treat his comments with the sarcasm they deserve, even to the point of hyperbole.  Fire is sometimes to be fought with fire.

I basically agree with him and ggreg, none of the Churches teachings would make any sense if this man is in heaven.

The path wouldn't be narrow, the Fathers would all be wrong, etc.

No, I'm not Christ.
No, I'm not the one judging his soul.

But with what I know, if he made it then all of us here can all be relatively assured that we will be saved with little to worry about.
Reply
#96
(10-11-2011, 11:28 PM)K3vinhood Wrote: I basically agree, none of the Churches teachings would make any sense if this man is in heaven.
So if I understood your view correctly:

1. Since St. John Vianney declared that a suicide ended up in Heaven, the Church's teaching on suicide makes no sense, and all suicides will be saved.

2. Since St. Alphonsus Liguori declared that a man who sold his soul to the devil was saved, the Church's teaching on devil worship makes no sense, and all devil worshippers will be saved.

3. Since Dutch Schultz, a Jewish mobster, was probably saved on his deathbed, the Church's teachings against Judaism and organized crime make no sense, and all Jewish mobsters will be saved.

Is that a good synopsis?
Reply
#97
(10-11-2011, 11:32 PM)GUDC Wrote:
(10-11-2011, 11:28 PM)K3vinhood Wrote: I basically agree, none of the Churches teachings would make any sense if this man is in heaven.
So if I understood your view correctly:

1. Since St. John Vianney declared that a suicide ended up in Heaven, the Church's teaching on suicide makes no sense, and all suicides will be saved.

2. Since St. Alphonsus Liguori declared that a man who sold his soul to the devil was saved, the Church's teaching on devil worship makes no sense, and all devil worshippers will be saved.

3. Since Dutch Schultz, a Jewish mobster, was probably saved on his deathbed, the Church's teachings against Judaism and organized crime make no sense, and all Jewish mobsters will be saved.

Is that a good synopsis?

I didn't say it was outright impossible for the man to be saved. I said it would make no sense to me.

Yes, God could have saved him at the last minute, but is that what we're depending on here? Even if that were the case, he should absolutley not be Canonized.
Reply
#98
I rather think people were announcing they would go sede if JPII was canonized, not "apostasize". 
Reply
#99
(10-11-2011, 11:34 PM)K3vinhood Wrote: I didn't say it was outright impossible for the man to be saved.
Vetus did, and you "basically agree" with him.

Quote:Yes, God could have saved him at the last minute, but is that what we're depending on here?
It's all that's necessary for a canonization to be infallible.

Quote:Even if that were the case, he should absolutley not be Canonized.
Did you read where I said I was not arguing for his canonization?
Reply
The point still remains (to me at least) that if he were to be in heaven (let alone be Canonized), there are a lot of seemingly misleading things taught by the Church and her Fathers, even Christ himself on salvation.

The Holy Gospel Wrote:For many are called but few are chosen.
Mark 20:16

Lord, are there few that are saved? But he said to them: Strive to enter by the narrow gate; for many, I tell you, shall seek to enter, and shall not be able.
Luke 13:23-24

Quote:Out of one hundred thousand sinners who continue in sin until death, scarcely one will be saved.
-St. Jerome

I do not speak rashly, but as I feel and think. I do not think that many priests are saved, but that those who perish are far more numerous.
-St. John Chrysostom

The number of the elect is so small - so small - that, were we to know how small it is, we would faint away with grief: one here and there, scattered up and down the world!
...
Be one of the small number who find the way to life, and enter by the narrow gate into Heaven. Take care not to follow the majority and the common herd, so many of whom are lost. Do not be deceived; there are only two roads: one that leads to life and is narrow; the other that leads to death and is wide. There is no middle way.
-St. Louis Marie de Montfort

There are many who arrive at the faith, but few who are led into the heavenly kingdom. Behold how many are gathered here for today's Feast-Day: we fill the church from wall to wall. Yet who knows how few they are who shall be numbered in that chosen company of the Elect?
-Pope St. Gregory the Great

The greater part of men choose to be damned rather than to love Almighty God.
...
All infidels and heretics are surely on the way to being lost. What an obligation we owe God! for causing us to be born not only after the coming of Jesus Christ, but also in countries where the true faith reigns! I thank Thee, O Lord, for this. Woe to me if, after so many transgressions, it had been my fate to live in the midst of infidels or heretics!
...
What is the number of those who love Thee, O God? How few they are! The Elect are much fewer than the damned! Alas! The greater portion of mankind lives in sin unto the devil, and not unto Jesus Christ. O Saviour of the world, I thank Thee for having called and permitted us to live in the true faith which the Holy Roman Catholic Church teaches. [...] But alas, O my Jesus! How small is the number of those who live in this holy faith! Oh, God! The greater number of men lie buried in the darkness of infidelity and heresy. Thou hast humbled Thyself to death, to the death of the cross, for the salvation of men, and these ungrateful men are unwilling even to know Thee. Ah, I pray Thee, O omnipotent God, O sovereign and infinite Good, make all men know and love Thee!
-St. Alphonsus Maria Liguori

The majority of men shall not see God, excepting those who live justly, purified by righteousness and by every other virtue.
-St. Justin the Martyr

If you wish to imitate the multitude, then you shall not be among the few who shall enter in by the narrow gate.
-St. Augustine

It is granted to few to recognise the true Church amid the darkness of so many schisms and heresies, and to fewer still so to love the truth which they have seen as to fly to its embrace.
-St. Robert Bellarmine

The number of the saved is as few as the number of grapes left after the vineyard-pickers have passed.
-St. John Mary Vianney

The greater part of men will set no value on the blood of Christ, and will go on offending Him.
-St. Isidore of Seville

Once again, I'm not saying it's outright impossibility.
Isaiah 59:1 Wrote:BEHOLD the hand of the Lord is not shortened that it cannot save, neither is his ear heavy that it cannot hear.

But we're really relying on a major miracle and deathbed conversion in the final minutes here. I don't see any other way.
And from what I understand, sudden deathbed conversions aren't all that common.

How would we feel if Paul VI were Canonized? What about Bugnini? What about Henry VIII, Luther, Calvin, Mark of Ephesus, etc.? All of them clearly went against Church teaching at some point, no? None of them recanted their heresies, correct?

Would that not raise some doubt in the infallibility of Canonizations? Maybe my faith is weak, but I know it would for me.

I really don't see how JP II's potential Canonization would be much different.

Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)