Errors of the Catechism of the Conciliar Church
(02-11-2012, 03:03 AM)Vox Clamantis Wrote: Alphonsus, be careful. You are pretty much promoting sedevacantism, and that is not allowed here. Cut it out.

Sorry. I don't mean to be. :-(
Reply
(02-11-2012, 01:30 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: The differences between Catholicism and Calvinism on the matter of predestination are very small, since Calvin based his theaching on St. Paul and St. Augustine, but still enough to warrant one true and the other one false.

The difference between orthodoxy and Jansenism is even smaller.  Could you please explain what the difference between orthodoxy and the heresy of Jansenism is and why the latter is justly condemned? 
Reply
Friends,

Let's be disciplined and get this thread on track by pointing to the errors of the Catechism of the Conciliar Church, relegating all tangential discussions (including personal attacks) to other threads. Thanks.
Reply
(02-11-2012, 03:31 PM)alphonsusjr Wrote: Friends,

Let's be disciplined and get this thread on track by pointing to the errors of the Catechism of the Conciliar Church, relegating all tangential discussions (including personal attacks) to other threads. Thanks.

I apologize for contributing to the thread derailment. I shouldn't have been discussing predestination here.
Reply
(02-11-2012, 03:31 PM)alphonsusjr Wrote: Friends,

Let's be disciplined and get this thread on track by pointing to the errors of the Catechism of the Conciliar Church, relegating all tangential discussions (including personal attacks) to other threads. Thanks.

Your use of the word "errors" is problematic, as is your use of "conciliar".  You might be better off having the thread derailed.
Reply
(02-11-2012, 03:34 PM)JayneK Wrote:
(02-11-2012, 03:31 PM)alphonsusjr Wrote: Friends,

Let's be disciplined and get this thread on track by pointing to the errors of the Catechism of the Conciliar Church, relegating all tangential discussions (including personal attacks) to other threads. Thanks.

Your use of the word "errors" is problematic, as is your use of "conciliar".  You might be better off having the thread derailed.

"Errors" is not so problematic, since it's a fallible document that could have errors.  Even the hierarchy made changes to it when it was released the first time, didn't they?

But this "conciliar" church business is problematic.  Alphonsusjr, you could at least cite the title correctly in italics, and not worry about the whole Catholic/Conciliar debate.
Reply
(02-11-2012, 03:34 PM)JayneK Wrote:
(02-11-2012, 03:31 PM)alphonsusjr Wrote: Friends,

Let's be disciplined and get this thread on track by pointing to the errors of the Catechism of the Conciliar Church, relegating all tangential discussions (including personal attacks) to other threads. Thanks.

Your use of the word "errors" is problematic, as is your use of "conciliar".  You might be better off having the thread derailed.

Well, he is getting that distinction from the Cardinal speaking to Abp. Lefebvre on Paul VI's behalf (the Cardinal told Abp. Lefebvre that he was obliged to submit to the "conciliar church."). In fact, Paul VI made a distinction between the Catholic Church and the "Church of the council," as he called it. After repeatedly referring to the Catholic Church, he then goes on to say:
Address by Pope Paul VI during the last general meeting of the Second Vatican Council, Dec. 7, 1965. Wrote:Yes, the Church of the council has been concerned, not just with herself and with her relationship of union with God, but with man -- man as he really is today: living man, man all wrapped up in himself, man who makes himself not only the center of his every interest but dares to claim that he is the principle and explanation of all reality.

Why wouldn't he just say "Catholic Church" again in the way he had been doing over and over again? Why would he feel the need to make a distinction between the Catholic Church and the "Church of the council?" It makes much more sense if you keep reading the document, in which (in the next paragraph) he goes on to imply that a different religion characterizes this "Church of the council':
Address by Pope Paul VI during the last general meeting of the Second Vatican Council, Dec. 7, 1965. Wrote:The religion of the God who became man has met the religion (for such it is) of man who makes himself God. And what happened? Was there a clash, a battle, a condemnation? There could have been, but there was none.

Sickening. But then he continues immediately to say:
Address by Pope Paul VI during the last general meeting of the Second Vatican Council, Dec. 7, 1965. Wrote:The old story of the Samaritan has been the model of the spirituality of the council. A feeling of boundless sympathy has permeated the whole of it. The attention of our council has been absorbed by the discovery of human needs (and these needs grow in proportion to the greatness which the son of the earth claims for himself).

Wait a second. "son of the earth?" If that refers to the Son of God, why isn't it capitalized? He had been capitalizing references to God throughout the rest of the document, but here he doesn't capitalize it. In context, it sounds scarily like a near-deification of mankind, which is what St. Pius X warned was a consequence of the Modernist theology. What's going on here? He continues:
Address by Pope Paul VI during the last general meeting of the Second Vatican Council, Dec. 7, 1965. Wrote:But we call upon those who term themselves modern humanists, and who have renounced the transcendent value of the highest realities, to give the council credit at least for one quality and to recognize our own new type of humanism: we, too, in fact, we more than any others, honor mankind.

Now, we are all probably going to draw different conclusions of such statements based upon our own positions on the matter, but the fact is that if you were alive and in the Church during that time you would know that they, themselves, kept pushing that distinction. They didn't always so explicitly state, "There is the Catholic Church and then there is the Church of the council," but they don't have to. The distinction is made very clear. There was never the "Catholic Church" vs. the "Church of the Council of Trent." If such a distinction were ever made, it would only come from someone who would be trying to contrast the Catholic Church with the "Church of the Trent," as though they were different. Why, then, is Paul VI doing it? Can we fault alphonsusjr for using the term and not Paul VI or those who spoke on his behalf?
Reply
(02-11-2012, 05:09 PM)INPEFESS Wrote:
Address by Pope Paul VI during the last general meeting of the Second Vatican Council, Dec. 7, 1965. Wrote:The old story of the Samaritan has been the model of the spirituality of the council. A feeling of boundless sympathy has permeated the whole of it. The attention of our council has been absorbed by the discovery of human needs (and these needs grow in proportion to the greatness which the son of the earth claims for himself).

Wait a second. "son of the earth?" If that refers to the Son of God, why isn't it capitalized? He had been capitalizing references to God throughout the rest of the document, but here he doesn't capitalize it.

I doubt it refers to the Son of God.  I think it means human.  "Adam" means "earth" and referring to humans as "sons of Adam" is pretty established. It makes sense with that meaning and accounts for the capitalization.
Reply
(02-11-2012, 12:01 AM)INPEFESS Wrote:
(02-10-2012, 11:47 PM)Edward Wrote:
(02-10-2012, 10:26 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote:
(02-10-2012, 10:18 PM)JMartyr Wrote: Good hope at least is to be entertained of the eternal salvation of all those who are not at all in the true Church of Christ. -- Encyclical "Quanto conficiamur," Aug. 10, 1863.. Condemned in the Syllabus of Errors.
Would this include unbaptised babies?

Yes. Unbaptised babies (and adults) are not in the true Church of Christ.
where did my miscarried baby go???

What a misfortune! You have my prayers to help cope with such an immense burden. However, know that no misfortune comes to pass save that which God permissively wills. Trust in Him!

The Catholic Church teaches that your baby will go to Limbo which, though it be a realm devoid of the Beatific Vision, is nevertheless not without the natural happiness that results from the knowledge of participating in God's perfect justice without ever having offended Him.

Don't some theologians believe that a Child who dies without (before) baptism can be saved by God's grace in conduction with the parent's faith?  Or is this a recent convention to not be paid mind to?
More Catholic Discussion: http://thetradforum.com/

Go thy ways, old Jack;
die when thou wilt, if manhood, good manhood, be
not forgot upon the face of the earth, then am I a
shotten herring. There live not three good men
unhanged in England; and one of them is fat and
grows old: God help the while! a bad world, I say.
I would I were a weaver; I could sing psalms or any
thing. A plague of all cowards, I say still.
Reply
(02-11-2012, 05:17 PM)JayneK Wrote:
(02-11-2012, 05:09 PM)INPEFESS Wrote:
Address by Pope Paul VI during the last general meeting of the Second Vatican Council, Dec. 7, 1965. Wrote:The old story of the Samaritan has been the model of the spirituality of the council. A feeling of boundless sympathy has permeated the whole of it. The attention of our council has been absorbed by the discovery of human needs (and these needs grow in proportion to the greatness which the son of the earth claims for himself).

Wait a second. "son of the earth?" If that refers to the Son of God, why isn't it capitalized? He had been capitalizing references to God throughout the rest of the document, but here he doesn't capitalize it.

I doubt it refers to the Son of God.  I think it means human.  "Adam" means "earth" and referring to humans as "sons of Adam" is pretty established. It makes sense with that meaning and accounts for the capitalization.

Right. In context of what he's talking about, it sounds really bad (for reasons I won't get into right now).

My main point is about the "Catholic Church" / "Church of the council" distinction.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)