Extra ecclesiam nulla salus Posted January 1, 2006 Author Share Posted January 1, 2006 the Church of christ subsistes in the Catholic church. this is said " in "Lumen Gentium." now would anyone agree that this is ambigiously written, and could be taken hijack by modernists? Especially considering the church had to condemn the idea that the church of christ subsits in other ecclesiastical communities? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myles Domini Posted January 1, 2006 Share Posted January 1, 2006 [quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Jan 1 2006, 02:44 PM']the Church of christ subsistes in the Catholic church. this is said " in "Lumen Gentium." now would anyone agree that this is ambigiously written, and could be taken hijack by modernists? Especially considering the church had to condemn the idea that the church of christ subsits in other ecclesiastical communities? [right][snapback]842411[/snapback][/right] [/quote] There is no lack of clarity unless you possess a very limited vocabulary. Even in the English lexicon the word 'subsist' means: [quote]subsist from www.m-w.com One entry found for subsist. Main Entry: sub·sist Pronunciation: s&b-'sist Function: verb Etymology: Late Latin subsistere to exist, from Latin, to come to a halt, remain, from sub- + sistere to come to a stand; akin to Latin stare to stand -- more at STAND intransitive senses 1 a : to have existence : BE b : PERSIST, CONTINUE 2 : to have or acquire the necessities of life (as food and clothing); especially : to nourish oneself <subsisting on roots, berries and grubs> 3 a : to hold true b : to be logically conceivable as the subject of true statements transitive senses : to support with provisions [/quote] If you have any grasp of Thomistic philosophy where we're constantly speaking about subsistent being then you should grasp instantly that Lumen Gentium is saying clearly that the Church of God takes its existence and continues to exist in the Catholic Church. In Latin 'subsitere' is even stronger. If Catholics cannot be bothered to consult the English dictionary and/or learn the terminology of scholasticism is that the Church's fault? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Extra ecclesiam nulla salus Posted January 1, 2006 Author Share Posted January 1, 2006 what about the modernsit who took advantage of the word? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myles Domini Posted January 1, 2006 Share Posted January 1, 2006 [quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Jan 1 2006, 04:29 PM']what about the modernsit who took advantage of the word? [right][snapback]842454[/snapback][/right] [/quote] The Spirit of Vatican II is in the letter of Vatican II. The document says the Church of God exists in the Catholic Church and both the Latin and the English are clear about this. If people have taken advantage of other indivuals ignorance of the English language and the lexicon of Thomist philosophy that is not the Church's fault. If it takes two minutes at marriam-webster online to discover the meaning of subsist those who cannot be bothered to cross reference the definition of words like 'subsist' have only themselves to blame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
son_of_angels Posted January 2, 2006 Share Posted January 2, 2006 Actions speak louder than words. If this phrase is to mean something as serious as the dictionaries imply, the only need to say it over and over again stems from a lack of evangelism, especially among Jews and Orthodox, to the people from the perspective that "We are the Church!" The problem stems from the poor behavior of the post-conciliar and immediately pre-conciliar Church to represent the core doctrines as essential guides to policy, such that the same doctrines held for two millenia must be repeated over and over again. The Council is not exempt, for it is the result and culmination of this "bad behavior." My heart says: "What one must repeat over and over again is repeated for the benefit of the repeater and not the listener." But, what I wonder is this, why should a Council, none of whose documents qualify as infallible, be allowed so much an impact on Catholic life, while the prescriptions of Councils like Florence, Trent, Nicea, Chalcedon, Vatican I, etc. be ignored, or held in less value, when they are the very sources of our faith. To me its like memorizing the Rosary having never heard of the Bible, or singing hymns with no familiarity to the Psalms, or knowing the Brigittine prayers without knowing an Our Father and Hail Mary. What's the point? Not only that, aren't we looking to the wrong Council for inspiration. If it is "pastoral" why the publicity? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Extra ecclesiam nulla salus Posted January 2, 2006 Author Share Posted January 2, 2006 you brought up a good point: how Many times have i heard this: Since Vatican II the Church no longer Teaches X well if it was pastoral, than why is that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myles Domini Posted January 2, 2006 Share Posted January 2, 2006 [quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Jan 2 2006, 12:52 AM']you brought up a good point: how Many times have i heard this: Since Vatican II the Church no longer Teaches X well if it was pastoral, than why is that? [right][snapback]842791[/snapback][/right] [/quote] And how often has it been shown to be a lie? I agree with Son of Angels that a lot does need to be restated and that some people have tended to overemphasise the import of the Second Vatican Council since it was pretty much an exercise in ressourcement. Nonetheless, I do not agree that Vatican II or the Magisterium are at fault. Even the document the modernists use to justify disobidience in the name of conscience, that is, Gaudeum et Spes, condemns a conscientious judgement that opposes the Magisterium (Gaudeum et Spes paragraph 16). Moreover, what could be more traditional than Humane Vitae springing up right at the genesis of the so-called 'post conciliar' period? In terms of doctrine to my mind not much has changed since the Second Vatican Council. Rather what has happened is that the Magisterium is betrayed. If you can show me the parish that uses the Catechism of the Catholic Church, enforces the teachings of the 'post-conciliar' encyclicals, where the priest can actually quote at length the documents of Vatican II; in which there has also been a move away from the 'pre-conciliar' Church I shall be most surprised. The Church has been betrayed from within but the Church's teaching has not been compromised. Neither at the Second Vatican Council or thereafter. The deposit of faith remains intact. Many people, even in Holy Order, may well try to gloss over the truth's they dislike but they remain there rearing their heads in post-synodal letters, apostolic exhortations, encyclicals and the like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DingoBot Posted January 2, 2006 Share Posted January 2, 2006 [quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Jan 1 2006, 10:29 AM']what about the modernsit who took advantage of the word? [right][snapback]842454[/snapback][/right] [/quote] what is the problem with that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Extra ecclesiam nulla salus Posted January 2, 2006 Author Share Posted January 2, 2006 if you ask that question than you must be a modernist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Extra ecclesiam nulla salus Posted January 2, 2006 Author Share Posted January 2, 2006 i guess bieng a bot would constitue modernism! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qfnol31 Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 [quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Jan 2 2006, 05:20 PM']i guess bieng a bot would constitue modernism! [right][snapback]843658[/snapback][/right] [/quote] According to Bacon! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laudate_Dominum Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 [quote name='qfnol31' date='Jan 3 2006, 12:41 AM']According to Bacon! [right][snapback]844220[/snapback][/right] [/quote] What about according to sausage? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qfnol31 Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 : He's the one who started the whole mess, and in the [i]New Atlantic[/i] he talked about robots I believe. Scary thing is, he lived 400 years ago! : Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laudate_Dominum Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 [quote name='qfnol31' date='Jan 3 2006, 12:52 AM']: He's the one who started the whole mess, and in the [i]New Atlantic[/i] he talked about robots I believe. Scary thing is, he lived 400 years ago! : [right][snapback]844235[/snapback][/right] [/quote] haha, yeah. I have some of Bacon's books and I actually like them a little (from what I've read). I still prefer Canadian bacon. : Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qfnol31 Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 Yikes! You need to read something like the [i]Advancement of Learning[/i] I think. We'll fix your Bacon desires quickly! : 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