Really Confused about Vatican II
#21
I can't help but wonder if the state of the Church does not render tons of people invincibly ignorant? Who is really supposed to be convinced that a Church full of modernism and corruption of all kinds is the One True Church if we are to judge a tree by it's fruits?
Reply
#22
(10-06-2019, 09:15 AM)Markie Boy Wrote: I can't help but wonder if the state of the Church does not render tons of people invincibly ignorant?  Who is really supposed to be convinced that a Church full of modernism and corruption of all kinds is the One True Church if we are to judge a tree by it's fruits?

It doesn't render them invincibly ignorant because all Catholics are required to know their faith. There's certainly a cause for plain ignorance which may lessen the due punishment for certain sins. But information on the faith is widely and openly available, especially with the internet. If you are a Catholic who takes their faith seriously, then you are obliged to follow through with knowing your faith. This is why there are so-called "traditionalists" within Catholicism now because those who choose to learn the faith come to see that what is being generally offered by the "Synodal" Church is not true Catholicism. If all Catholics were practicing Catholicism as it should be, and the hierarchy was actually teaching the faith, then there would be no "traditionalists" just Roman Catholics.
"The Heart of Jesus is closer to you when you suffer, than when you are full of joy." - St. Margaret Mary Alacoque

Put not your trust in princes: In the children of men, in whom there is no salvation. - Ps. 145:2-3

"For there shall be a time, when they will not endure sound doctrine; but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears: And will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables." - 2 Timothy 4:3-4
[-] The following 2 users Like Augustinian's post:
  • HailGilbert, jovan66102
Reply
#23
I understand and hear what you are saying. But Catholic teaching is also to follow you priest and bishop. I can't do that very well with a clear conscience. Sort of a catch 22. If we now have to discern what is true Catholicism and false - we are having to make some big judgements, and find ourselves at odds with many of those in church office.

It is an odd reality that sort of makes the term "catholic" as in universal, much harder to apply.
Reply
#24
(10-06-2019, 08:05 PM)Markie Boy Wrote: But Catholic teaching is also to follow you priest and bishop.

There's absolutely nothing in Catholic teaching that tells you to follow your Priest or Bishop (or even the Pope) into error, and given the resources in the modern world for a literate person to learn the Faith, there is no excuse for doing so. Study Scripture, the Fathers, and approved catechisms, and when Your Priest or Bishop is in error, don't follow them!
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
“Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'
FishEaters Group on MeWe
[-] The following 3 users Like jovan66102's post:
  • Augustinian, mpk1987, SeekerofChrist
Reply
#25
(10-06-2019, 10:59 PM)jovan66102 Wrote: There's absolutely nothing in Catholic teaching that tells you to follow your Priest or Bishop (or even the Pope) into error...

Per the Catechism of St. Pius X, under "Preliminary Lesson", p. 9:

Quote:3 Q. Who is a true Christian?
A. A true Christian is he who is baptised, who believes and professes the Christian Doctrine, and obeys the lawful pastors of the Church.

And under "The Ninth Article of the Creed," p. 32:

Quote:10 Q. Who are the lawful pastors of the Church?
A. The lawful pastors of the Church are the Roman Pontiff, that is, the Pope, who is Supreme Pastor, and the Bishops. Other priests, also, and especially Parish Priests, have a share in the pastoral office, subject to the Bishop and the Pope.

And under "The Precepts of the Church," p.124:

Quote:2 Q. Are we obliged to obey the Church?
A. Undoubtedly we are obliged to obey the Church, because Jesus Christ Himself commands us to do so, and because the Precepts of the Church help us to observe the Commandments of God.

And again under "The Ninth Article of the Creed," pp. 34-35:

Quote:32 Q. Are we also obliged to do all that the Church commands?
A. Yes, we are obliged to do all that the Church commands, for Jesus Christ has said to the Pastors of the Church: "He who hears you, hears Me, and he who despises you, despises Me."

And p. 36:

Quote:46 Q. Are we obliged to hear the Teaching Church?
A. Yes, without doubt we are obliged under pain of eternal damnation to hear the Teaching Church; for Jesus Christ has said to the Pastors of His Church, in the persons of the Apostles: "He who hears you, hears Me, and he who despises you, despises Me."

So, while I suppose it could be argued that nothing in Catholic teaching tells one to follow one's Priest or Bishop (or even the Pope) into error, this would be a negative teaching whereas most of the rules, especially in connection with the above-cited passages from the catechism of Pope St. Pius X, are in the positive.  In other words, practically speaking, one has to be quite knowledgeable, theologically speaking, in order to transgress even a priest, let alone a bishop or the Pope.  This has the essential effect of what Markie Boy proposed, namely, that what the Catholic church teaches (and has taught for quite some time) is that one follows his priest/bishop/Pope.  While, naturally, one said priest/bishop/Pope is teaching/professing something that is contrary to the Church's magisterium (e.g., there is no such thing as the real presence!; one can easily get into heaven with unconfessed mortal sin(s) at the time of their death; etc.), this becomes less clear in other matters which, over time, erode away tradition and the faith.  In that regard, I find it almost Protestant-like how easily anyone can say that their priest is in error and disregard such teaching.  That is, quite frankly, how we got into this mess into the first place.    

Further, to adroitly state that you don't have to follow your priest/bishop/Pope into error, while technically true, wholly and entirely casts aside generationally inured traditions and beliefs which were very much the foundation to Catholic tradition. In theory, it should be quite easy to do; in practice, it's for the most part impossible.
Reply
#26
(10-06-2019, 11:36 PM)Bonaventure Wrote: In that regard, I find it almost Protestant-like how easily anyone can say that their priest is in error and disregard such teaching.  That is, quite frankly, how we got into this mess into the first place.

I'd say it's the other way around. Obeying everything the clergy said in the 1970s is how we got into this mess. If the priest says the altar has to be turned around and the altar rail demolished, who are we to object? If the priest says Protestants are our brethren and it's okay for them to receive Communion now, I guess you better give it to them when they come up to you to receive (in the hand, of course, even though the Church hasn't given permission for it yet, but just keep listening to the priest and the Vatican will okay it soon enough).

And when the bishops are calling for unlimited immigration, illegal or otherwise, calling it charity, and completely ignore what's charitable for the people who already live there, need jobs, and pay their taxes, are we bound to agree? Are we bound to agree that the death penalty is 'inadmissible', whatever that is, despite prior Popes imposing the death penalty, and that Something Must Be Done Right Now or we're all going to drown in 50 years when the sea levels rise since man is changing the climate? Is the Pope a science expert now?

St Pius X's catechism works well when the clergy are teaching orthodoxy. They haven't done much of that in 50 years.
[-] The following 3 users Like Paul's post:
  • Augustinian, Markie Boy, mpk1987
Reply
#27
Of course, St Pius was writing at a time when the safe assumption was that the Pope, your Bishop, and your Parish Priest were all Catholic. Since that is no longer the case, it falls to us, as Catholics, to learn the Faith and to resist error. We need to shake off the 'pray, pay, and obey' mindset and replace it with 'pray, pay judiciously, and resist when necessary'.
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
“Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'
FishEaters Group on MeWe
Reply
#28
(10-06-2019, 02:01 AM)Fionnchu Wrote: I learned from the B.C. far more about what was vanishing before my family's eyes than years of CCD.

This is truly sad, but I learned more in 5 months from research that spun off from a question posed in a class on ecology than I did in 4 years of Catholic High School and CCD.
-sent by howitzer via the breech.

God's love is manifest in the landscape as in a face.  - John Muir

I want creation to penetrate you with so much admiration that wherever you go, the least plant may bring you clear remembrance of the Creator.  A single plant, a blade of grass, or one speck of dust is sufficient to occupy all your intelligence in beholding the art with which it has been made  - Saint Basil

Heaven is under our feet, as well as over our heads. - Thoreau, Walden
Reply
#29
Yup - and I can't hardly teach kids that we all as believers are saints, just how scripture says. I sort of got shut down on that one, and told that the pope says none of us are saints but we are all trying.

Well - how does one explain the Communion of Saints that we say in the Creed every week so people would actually know what they are saying, without understanding the Biblical concept of who the saints are, the believers.

That's the one that got me this time - one more on the pile.
Reply
#30
(10-07-2019, 12:53 AM)jovan66102 Wrote: Of course, St Pius was writing at a time when the safe assumption was that the Pope, your Bishop, and your Parish Priest were all Catholic. Since that is no longer the case, it falls to us, as Catholics, to learn the Faith and to resist error. We need to shake off the 'pray, pay, and obey' mindset and replace it with 'pray, pay judiciously, and resist when necessary'.

If this was correct Jovan, why the need for Pius IX's 1864 Syllabus or Errors and Pius X's 1907 Pascendi, written to try to cope with the Moderrnism in the Church during those times. Indeed few are aware that Pope Pius VI's Auctorem fidei of 1794 said;

‘They knew the capacity of innovators in the art of deception. In order not to shock the ears of Catholics, the innovators sought to hide the subtleties of their tortuous manoeuvers by the use of seemingly innocuous words such as would allow them to insinuate error into souls in the gentlest manner. Once the truth had been compromised, they could, by means of slight changes or additions in phraseology, distort the confession of the faith that is necessary for our salvation, and lead the faithful by subtle errors to their eternal damnation. This manner of dissimulating and lying is vicious, regardless of the circumstances under which it is used. For very good reasons it can never be tolerated in a synod of which the principal glory consists above all in teaching the truth with clarity and excluding all danger of error.’ (all these methods were used at Vatican II)

This is indeed a very interesting thread, a subject repeated endlessly everywhere among Catholics. To be honest, to know the history of Catholicism from 1820-35 to today, with popes of that time allowing a material heresy that went on to cause huge reinterpretation and understanding of Scripture and Catholicism; and with traditional laws that Boneventure quoted earlier, and knowing it was keeping these same laws that led billions into apostasy and modernism as we have witnessed since the Renaissance and Enlightenment, let alone Vatican II, who could take such a Church seriously any more? Well we have to.

An earlier poster quoted Scripture 'by their fruits you will know them,' and correctly said if we were to follow the popes and bishops since Vatican II and their rotten fruits, we too would be in apostasy.  Yet are told we must follow them. With the goings-on in the Amazon Synod today, if we are meant to obey their conclusions, then Catholicism is now a religion of contradiction.

Now the Lord did ask if when He returned, 'would there be faith on Earth?' In other words He knew there would be a loss of faith on the scale we are now facing. Yet He allowed it to happen.

The conclusion I and friends have come to is that it is up to every one of us to know and keep the faith in spite of all the confusion Satan has been allowed to cause in the Catholic Church. Didn't Pope Leo XIII say he heard the Lord allow Satan a 100 years to try to destroy Catholicism. This keeping the faith can be done, and is done by those who have found refuge in Traditional priests and Masses as well as some who go to NO Masses. Trust in God, you already know the faith, simply carry on, do not change your belief no matter what or who tells you to, they occupy the offices of the Church no matter what some may say, God's Church, and He allows it for the present, but remember Our Lady said she will get her Son to soprt it out in the end.
[-] The following 1 user Likes cassini's post:
  • Bonaventure
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)