Is This Heretical?

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

Talking on ecclesiasticus, i didn't realise it meant anyone outside of those whom believe in Jesus.

[Nihil Obstat]

Well before we get into that, why do you believe it is the most reasonable position?

We could get into that, but honestly I do not really want to. If you are actually becoming a sedevacantist, that is not a position I have very much interest in discussing. I do not enjoy it, and it always makes me feel bad.

 

So, you can play along and assume sedeplenism, assume it is reasonably demonstrated. Or, we can simply end here with you accepting in some minor de facto sense that sedevacantism is a valid and compelling thesis. But I am not going to argue you out of sedevacantism. That is not what I like doing.

[mortify]

1. You are not my boyfriend, so stop calling me "dear".  It's condescending and only serves to make me mad. And as you don't use pet names for the dudes on the forum, it comes off as sexist.  I've read the Qu'ran, I've taken a course in Islamic Philosophy taught by a faithful Catholic professor who specializes in Islamic philosophy, and I'm finishing my Master's Degree in theology. But because the internet is a great equalizer, on Phatmass I'm no more credentialed than you are, so I'd appreciate it if your language reflects the fact that we're equals.  Savvy? :)

 

I'm sorry you feel that way but I think you're being overly too sensitive. I did not intend to be condescending or sexist, or to use some sort of pet-name for you, trust me, I'm not interested.

 

 

2. I'm not confusing the religion with the people. My point still stands - it depends on what was implied by the statement, because the statement itself is vague.  Seeing as Catholics understand the Church to be the one true religious entity, while others partake in ecclesial communities at best, I think it's reasonable to interpret the comment as referring to the people.  When we say "the White House says cats are evil" we don't literally mean the White House spoke.  We mean the President, supported by his staff.  It's called a metonym.  

 

The statement is not vague, it's problematic. The Pope asked the heavens to protect a false religion. I don't think he simply mispoke because his English was descent enough to distinguish between "Islam" (a religion) and "Muslims" (a people.) Futhermore, the Polish words for "Islam" and "Muslims" are very similar to their English counterpart. Some suggest that Pope John Paul II personally held indifferentist views, it would be interesting if there is any statement of his that explicitly reflect the belief that Catholicism is the only true religion and necessary for salvation.

[Nihil Obstat]

I call her Basil, unless I think she is in a bad mood. :proud:

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

Talking on ecclesiasticus, i didn't realise it meant anyone outside of those whom believe in Jesus.

 

I thought the ecclisatical movements was apologetics to other christian denoms and non denoms to try and give them a better understanding about the truth of the church. Does the mission now include or always has included the other abramatic faiths ie: islam and judaism, and perhaps anyone whom has an open ear. Theres my seriously funny side again, "and perhaps anyone whom has an open ear."

 

Onward christian souls.

JESUS iz LORD.

[mortify]

We could get into that, but honestly I do not really want to. If you are actually becoming a sedevacantist, that is not a position I have very much interest in discussing. I do not enjoy it, and it always makes me feel bad.

 

So, you can play along and assume sedeplenism, assume it is reasonably demonstrated. Or, we can simply end here with you accepting in some minor de facto sense that sedevacantism is a valid and compelling thesis. But I am not going to argue you out of sedevacantism. That is not what I like doing.

 

I'm entertaining a host of possibilities. Sedevacantism has some explanatory power to what's going on but I'm not sure that it's the truth. I would have to sift through a lot of evidence before I came to that conclusion.

 

If we assume sedeplenism then the solution would have to be a grass-roots movement. A few serious souls banding together to start a change. Unfortunately what we really need is assistance from heaven, someone like a St Athanasius or St Maximus the Confessor.

[Nihil Obstat]

I'm entertaining a host of possibilities. Sedevacantism has some explanatory power to what's going on but I'm not sure that it's the truth. I would have to sift through a lot of evidence before I came to that conclusion.

 

If we assume sedeplenism then the solution would have to be a grass-roots movement. A few serious souls banding together to start a change. Unfortunately what we really need is assistance from heaven, someone like a St Athanasius or St Maximus the Confessor.

Ok, so let us run with this. If you want to explore sedevacantism, speak to someone who is familiar with such things. Like an FSSP priest, perhaps. Especially perhaps one who was there from the start, from Econe. They might have some very worthwhile points to make. 

 

Anyway, assuming sedeplenism, I think you are right in that a grassroots movement is what will help us. But look. We have that. Look at Una Voce. Look at the stuff the NLM site showcases. Check out the new journal Laudamus Te. Or the not-so-new journal Communio. Look at the fact that traditional seminaries are the ones that are full, and the liberal ones are empty. Look at which bishops have the strongest voice in the world today- not Mahony or Law. It is people like Dolan and Athanasius Schneider and people like them. Look at priests who are blogging these days- Fr. Z and Longenecker. Or the new priests coming from the FSSP seminaries. Hopefully some of them become bishops someday. This is our new generation of Catholicism. It is going to be a slow process, but things are moving in the right direction.

 

If Pope Francis does not help the liturgy, then fine. We will deal with it. The grassroots is already here. We already have momentum. No pope can take that away.  

[mortify]

If Pope Francis does not help the liturgy, then fine. We will deal with it. The grassroots is already here. We already have momentum. No pope can take that away.  

 

I'm actually not confident about this. The problem is Trad organizations within the Church are too passive and the Modernists are too aggressive. If a grassroots operation is to work the militancy of the enemies must at least be matched for any success. Resistance to falsehood and active intellectual attacks against the positions of the modernists must be seriously advanced.

[Nihil Obstat]

I'm actually not confident about this. The problem is Trad organizations within the Church are too passive and the Modernists are too aggressive. If a grassroots operation is to work the militancy of the enemies must at least be matched for any success. Resistance to falsehood and active intellectual attacks against the positions of the modernists must be seriously advanced.

What evidence do you have that we are passive? My experience has been quite the opposite. That we are active and push for what we believe is right while maintaining Christian charity.

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

i have to laugh quietly to myself, what made you all think we where out of the dark ages, was it t.v's? was it computers, cars,trains and automobiles. :( that is terribly material thinking. back to debating on the streets, take it to the people out there again and let them decide. Hence why we need constant renewals of faith from within the church to the outside world including non believers,prodigals and lost sheep, because it's very dark out there, LORD please come soon. We have had many big renewals i see from time to time while reading my 1st book on church history. :)

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

JC "darkness will never overcome the church."

 

Fr Ken Barker "young men of GOD rise up."

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

or perhaps ammible sports as oppossed to gladiators made one think we where out of the dark ages, it is an illusion same women different dress. Pride and Power.

[mortify]

What evidence do you have that we are passive? My experience has been quite the opposite. That we are active and push for what we believe is right while maintaining Christian charity.

 

I see, and how do the groups you support push for what they believe?

[Nihil Obstat]

I see, and how do the groups you support push for what they believe?

I would say that the biggest one is funding and supporting traditional Masses, priests, and communities across the world. Even pre-Summorum Pontificum, when it was very hard to do so.

[havok579257]

my advice, don't join a group that does not hold the truth like the secdiv.  its no different than joining a protestant church.  they are wrong, do not hold the whole truth and deny the catholic church currently as the one true church. 

Edited April 10, 2013 by havok579257