Paphnutius Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 (edited) [quote name='Inquisitor Generalis' date='Feb 14 2006, 10:43 PM']This is ridiculous and I'm not even going to debate the topic. You all need to look into what Catholicism was like before Vatican II, see it from the eyes of Catholics in various time periods, and you'll know what I'm talking about. You're asking me to debate something that's basically common sense. [right][snapback]887914[/snapback][/right] [/quote] So wait, are you arguing against the CCC? Perhaps we should read Fedei Depositium here? It is a sure guide for teaching as the apostolic constitution states. The Church is the same pre-Vat II, and post-Vat II. Only "traditionalists" who are unhappy with what the magesterium decided try to say otherwise. As I said, I was niether arguing for nor against the CCR, but the fact of the matter is that charisms are alive and well as stated in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Religious assent please? Edited February 15, 2006 by Paphnutius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inquisitor Generalis Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 No, I'm not arguing against the CCC. I'm pointing out that the pre-VII Church would have reacted in disgust to the charismatics. This is obvious, but some think I should "cite sources" on this point. I'm not playing that game. I made a simple point, and I'm not going to get bogged down in a bunch of other nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paphnutius Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 Also just so you know, the footnotes are as follows for the matter concerning us: 53: cf LG 12 54 Cf. I Cor 12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paphnutius Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 (edited) [quote name='Inquisitor Generalis' date='Feb 14 2006, 11:16 PM']No, I'm not arguing against the CCC. I made a simple point, and I'm not going to get bogged down in a bunch of other nonsense. [right][snapback]887937[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Fair enough. [quote]I'm pointing out that the pre-VII Church would have reacted in disgust to the charismatics. This is obvious, but some think I should "cite sources" on this point. I'm not playing that game.[/quote]As long as you are speaking about the [i]charismatics [/i]and not the [i]charisms [/i]themselves I can view your statements as merely personal opinion. If you state, however, that the charisms no longer serve the Church, or are no longer present I think we have some more to discuss. edit: switch cannot to can. Lol, makes much more sense there. Edited February 15, 2006 by Paphnutius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inquisitor Generalis Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 (edited) It's not merely personal opinion what the pre-VII Church likely would have thought. It's common sense. And, no, I don't want to get bogged down in a discussion on charisms. Edited February 15, 2006 by Inquisitor Generalis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paphnutius Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 [quote name='Inquisitor Generalis' date='Feb 14 2006, 11:20 PM']Oops. [right][snapback]887943[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Thank you for the edit. The footnotes were given because we were talking about citation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paphnutius Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 [quote name='Inquisitor Generalis' date='Feb 14 2006, 11:20 PM']It's not merely personal opinion what the pre-VII Church likely would have thought. It's common sense. And, no, I don't want to get bogged down in a discussion on charisms. [right][snapback]887943[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Very well then, if you wish to assert that the Church has changed its stance on charismatics I will read the encyclical you mentioned and get back to you as soon as I can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inquisitor Generalis Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 [quote name='Paphnutius' date='Feb 14 2006, 11:23 PM']Thank you for the edit. The footnotes were given because we were talking about citation. [right][snapback]887947[/snapback][/right] [/quote] I edited my original post, b/c I had not read all of what you had written before posting. Now that I have, let me just say that one would not need to cite sources in regard to what I was saying if one had any kind of [i]sensus Catholicus[/i]. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paphnutius Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 [quote name='Inquisitor Generalis' date='Feb 14 2006, 11:27 PM']I edited my original post, b/c I had not read all of what you had written before posting. Now that I have, let me just say that one would not need to cite sources in regard to what I was saying if one had any kind of [i]sensus Catholicus[/i]. [right][snapback]887952[/snapback][/right] [/quote] And so the magesterium has lost its sensus Catholicus? Also regarding this much favored term of yours, please respond to sacredella I believe it was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inquisitor Generalis Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 [quote name='Paphnutius' date='Feb 14 2006, 11:30 PM']And so the magesterium has lost its sensus Catholicus? Also regarding this much favored term of yours, please respond to sacredella I believe it was. [right][snapback]887954[/snapback][/right] [/quote] No. But the human element of the Church has let its guard down in allowing the charismatic movement to continue. As for scredella, or whoever, I really don't have the time. I've made a reasonably simple point, and you're basically asking me to prove that the sky is blue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paphnutius Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 (edited) [quote name='Inquisitor Generalis' date='Feb 14 2006, 11:46 PM']No. But the human element of the Church has let its guard down in allowing the charismatic movement to continue. As for scredella, or whoever, I really don't have the time. I've made a reasonably simple point, and you're basically asking me to prove that the sky is blue. [right][snapback]887957[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Then it should not be that hard to prove. Simply saying "Look for yourselves," does not win debates. All we are asking for is some solid evidence that the Church would have been "disgusted" with the charismatics. If it is as easy as the sky being blue, this should provide no problem. I am glad that you have decided not to continue the debate over :[quote]if you want me to cite sources, [i]bringing back speaking in tongues is awfully close to the false archaeology condemned [/i]by Pius XII in Mediator Dei. [/quote] because they never left. CCC #2003. I look forward to reading Mediator Dei! Edited February 15, 2006 by Paphnutius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paphnutius Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 It has occured to me that perhaps the discussions has been rather vague right now. Please tell us why you think the Church would have been disgusted with them 50 years ago? Is it their behavior during Mass? Or is it their spirituality? I think that would help to add some clarity to this and perhaps save you and I both some typing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inquisitor Generalis Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 [quote name='Paphnutius' date='Feb 15 2006, 12:01 AM']Then it should not be that hard to prove. Simply saying "Look for yourselves," does not win debates. All we are asking for is some solid evidence that the Church would have been "disgusted" with the charismatics. If it is as easy as the sky being blue, this should provide no problem. I am glad that you have decided not to continue the debate over : because they never left. CCC #2003. [/quote] Just for the record, I'm not here to "win a debate." I'm just telling you what Catholics before Vatican II would have thought of your movement. As for finding specific evidence against the charismatics from this time period, this is somewhat difficult, b/c at the time, nobody would have even suggested starting the charismatic movement inside Holy Mother Church. Thus, there would be no response. Anyway, I'm sure there are more honest members of your movement who will admit that my assertions are about the pre-VII Church and the charismatic movement are true. What I'm saying doesn't necessarily *prove* anything, it's just something you should keep in mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inquisitor Generalis Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 (edited) [quote name='Paphnutius' date='Feb 15 2006, 12:15 AM']It has occured to me that perhaps the discussions has been rather vague right now. Please tell us why you think the Church would have been disgusted with them 50 years ago? Is it their behavior during Mass? Or is it their spirituality? I think that would help to add some clarity to this and perhaps save you and I both some typing. [right][snapback]887965[/snapback][/right] [/quote] 1. The discussion has been vague intentionally. I was only trying to make a simple point. 2. 50 years ago, Catholics would have been disgusted w/both the charismatics' behavior during Mass *and* their spirituality. 3. I'm done arguing about this. You don't need to take my word for this. Let me give you a relatively easy challenge. Go ask a Catholic who was alive 50 years ago what they think *most* Catholics would have thought of your movement at the time. That should settle this matter. Edited February 15, 2006 by Inquisitor Generalis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paphnutius Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 [quote name='Inquisitor Generalis' date='Feb 15 2006, 01:04 AM']Anyway, I'm sure there are more honest members of your movement who will admit that my assertions are about the pre-VII Church and the charismatic movement are true. [/quote] More honest members of my movement? Have I been dishonest? And what movement are you talking about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now