Errors of the Catechism of the Conciliar Church
#81
(02-10-2012, 09:57 PM)su Wrote:
(02-10-2012, 09:56 PM)DrBombay Wrote: My posts, while valuable and insightful, are not sacraments.  Epic fail.  Try again.

"Epic Fail" is not an English sentence.

Deleted. Try again.

Misquoting me causes your point to be lost forever.  I never capitalized "fail."

Epic fail redux.  Try again.  
Reply
#82
(02-10-2012, 09:59 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote:
(02-10-2012, 09:43 PM)JayneK Wrote: I think I can express my hopes in ways that are more acceptable.  I hope that God somehow supplies baptism for babies that are not baptized.  I hope that everyone I encounter will be saved from hell.  When I say these things, it is not against revealed truth, is it?

You know it's not.

So it isn't hope that is the problem.  It is that I have not used sufficient care and precision to state my hopes. 
Reply
#83
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?
Reply
#84
(02-10-2012, 09:50 PM)Someone1776 Wrote: The Catholic Church has repeatedly stated that it is improper to describe the reprobate as predestined to Hell.

Even after all this time you keep confusing this point.

Ludwig Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma Wrote:"God, by an eternal resolve of his will, predestines certain men, on account of their foreseen sins, to eternal rejection." (De fide)
 

Quote:This is a heresy call predestinarianism: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12376b.htm

Positive reprobation, that is, an unconditional predestination to the eternal punishment of hell without consideration of foreseen future demerits is indeed a heresy. That, however, was not what I wrote or suggested. A conditional positive reprobation, that is, with consideration of foreseen future demerits, is not a heresy. Not to mention that the Thomist view favours a negative reprobation: a non-election to eternal bliss, together with the divine resolve to permit some rational creatures to fall into sin, and thus by their own guilt to lose eternal salvation.

Therefore, when I said that "the reprobate, not to mention the devil and his angels, were predestined from all time to be there" this is to be understood in an orthodox manner, since the conditional aspect of reprobation is naturally implied.

Quote:What you are describing sounds more like John Calvin:

Quote:They are predestined to eternal death solely by his decision, apart from their own merit.

. . . those, then, whom he created for dishonor in life and destruction in death . . .

. . . his immutable decree had once for all destined them to destruction.

It "sounds" more like John Calvin if you want to spin it in order to get your "gotcha" moment.

Sadly, you missed the point.
Reply
#85
(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.
Reply
#86
There cannot be a pre-Conciliar Church and a post-Conciliar Church"
Yours will probably be the first generation that will correctly interpret the Second Vatican Council, not according to the "spirit" of the Council, which has brought so much disorientation to the Church, but according to what the Conciliar Event really said, in its texts to the Church and to the world.


There is no Vatican II different from the one that produced the texts we have in our possession today! It is in those texts that we find that will of God for his Church and it is to them that we must refer, accompanied by two thousand years of Tradition and Christian life.


Renewal is always necessary for the Church, because the conversion of her members, poor sinners, is always necessary! But there cannot be, nor could there be, a pre-Conciliar Church and a post-Conciliar Church! Were it thus, the second one - ours - would be historically and theologically illegitimate!


There is only one Church of Christ, of which you are part, that goes from Our Lord to the Apostles, from the Blessed Virgin Mary to the Fathers and the Doctors of the Church, from the Middle Ages to the Renaissance, from Romanesque to Gothic to Baroque, and thus until our days, uninterruptedly, without any solution of continuity, ever!


And all that because the Church is the Body of Christ, it is the unity of His Person that is given unto us, her members!


You, most dear Seminarians, will be priests in the same Church of Saint Augustine, of Saint Ambrose, of Saint Thomas Aquinas, of Saint Charles Borromeo, of Saint John Mary Vianney, of Saint John Bosco, of Saint Pius X, up to Saint Padre Pio, Saint Josemaría Escrivá and Blessed John Paul II. You will be priests of the same Church that has been made up of so many holy Priests who, throughout the centuries, have rendered the face of Christ, Lord of the world, luminous, beautiful, radiant, and, therefore, easily recognizable.


These were the main words of the powerful address delivered by Cardinal Piacenza, Prefect of the Congregation for the Clergy, to seminarians in the Archdiocese of Los Angeles on October 4 - the address is available in Italian and in Spanish in the Congregation's website
Reply
#87
(02-10-2012, 10:29 PM)JMartyr Wrote: There is no Vatican II different from the one that produced the texts we have in our possession today! It is in those texts that we find that will of God for his Church and it is to them that we must refer, accompanied by two thousand years of Tradition and Christian life.

That's plainly not true.  God did not "communicate His will" in Vatican II or a number of other Councils.  Revelation has closed.  God only protects councils from binding errors infallibly. 

It's more likely that God's permissive will allowed Vatican II to occur in order to punish His Church. 

Quote: Renewal is always necessary for the Church, because the conversion of her members, poor sinners, is always necessary!

That's definitionally not renewal.  It's called "maintenance" if that is the constant situation in the Church. 

Quote: But there cannot be, nor could there be, a pre-Conciliar Church and a post-Conciliar Church! Were it thus, the second one - ours - would be historically and theologically illegitimate!

That's like saying there cannot be a "Fat Elvis" period and a "pre-Fat Elvis" period.  No. Elvis was slim in the "pre-Fat Elvis" era and Fat in the "Fat Elvis" era. You can watch videos and say, "Elvis was better in the 'pre-Fat Elvis' era."

Or, better yet, that's like saying there could not be a description called the "Early Church" which would upset Pope Benedict since he used it in the title of one of his books. 
Reply
#88
I posted it for the third paragraph:
Renewal is always necessary for the Church, because the conversion of her members, poor sinners, is always necessary! But there cannot be, nor could there be, a pre-Conciliar Church and a post-Conciliar Church! Were it thus, the second one - ours - would be historically and theologically illegitimate!
Reply
#89
A seemingly frightful admission!!
Reply
#90
(02-10-2012, 11:02 PM)Gerard Wrote:
Quote: But there cannot be, nor could there be, a pre-Conciliar Church and a post-Conciliar Church! Were it thus, the second one - ours - would be historically and theologically illegitimate!

That's like saying there cannot be a "Fat Elvis" period and a "pre-Fat Elvis" period.  No. Elvis was slim in the "pre-Fat Elvis" era and Fat in the "Fat Elvis" era. You can watch videos and say, "Elvis was better in the 'pre-Fat Elvis' era."

There isn't a problem with describing periods as "'fat" and "pre-fat".  If people claimed that Elvis became a different person when he got fat, there would be a problem.  There wouldn't be anything wrong with simply using pre-Conciliar and post-Conciliar to denote time.  Talking like these are two different churches is a problem.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)