Archive for the ‘controversy’ Category

« Older Entries

Examining the Current Status of ‘Communicatio in Sacris’

Thursday, February 9th, 2012

If it can be said, that consequently after Vatican Council II, there has been a shift in the understanding of the teaching on “communicatio in sacris”. For better or for worse, what we have witnessed after the Council is a terrible crisis of moral laxity and doctrinal abuse shown through the actions by members of the hierarchy of the Church with the ecumenical program and dialogue. Without accusing of religious apostasy, such actions have caused harm and scandal to the Church from within and throughout, even of reinforcing Protestants of their view on the Church and Bible.

Could there be room for doubt and misinterpretation on the true intent of such actions in order to bring about the desired unity within the Church and people of other religious beliefs? Is it possible that a more developed view has been pastorally (and theoretically) proposed in order to bring about the formal distinction of ‘communicatio in sacris’ and other forms of ‘communicatio’. Perhaps by reinforcing the former doctrinal discipline with much greater distinction from its cause can there be true interpretation of the latter for the cause of unity among peoples. These are only theories, of course, which speak volumes against abuses we have been exposed to since the Council.

Tags:
Posted in Catholic Church, Novus Ordo watch, controversy, reflection, salvation, scandal | No Comments »

The problem of sedevacantism

Wednesday, February 8th, 2012

This article is by no means supposed to refute the doctrinal thinking of sedevacantism. Whatever basis or principle is used to justify such moral decision will be left out until there is a reasonableness to argue against the incomplete theory. Here I will mainly focus on the social aspect and conflict that have arisen among sedevacantist groups. It may convince a person that it is just an extension of politics for much division rather than a unity in the Church, of which we all can hope for.

First, the social condition from which sedevacantism sprang shows us that from the very beginning there was confusion and unbeknown factors. The rock of Peter has become the molding pot for a lay person to form liken to his vision of the Church. But how can we be satisfied with authoritative solution if the theory is an ongoing problem, the problem of management and accountability, jurisdiction and authority? The visibility of the Church is adversely affected by such intrusion of a foreign entity that it would result in a total destruction or catastrophic scenario for the hierarchy of the Church.

The point here is that we have no principle or form of unity among Catholics. The common consent of the laity or even irregular clerics cannot be the factor which unites Catholics. It has been shown to be to the contrary, and with myriad consequences. We have a state of infighting, inter fighting, and confusion which blurs even the line between reality and fantasy from such constructive arguments.

The establishment of a true hierarchy or men of clerical authority is all the more shown to be important than we have ever thought! When it is no more, we become socially and even morally divisive. When it is taken away from us, the awareness of its implications is all the more apparent! Where do we even begin for a restoration if an end was already in sight? We are faced with a fundamental problem that cannot be overcome, humanly speaking!

to be continued

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Catholic Church, controversy, reflection, sedevacantism | No Comments »

Religious Liberty From the Edict of Milan

Tuesday, February 7th, 2012

Has religious liberty for all been allowed before in Rome?

Here’s a sample of “The Edict of Milan”:

When I, Constantine Augustus, as well as I, Licinius Augustus, fortunately met near Mediolanurn (Milan), and were considering everything that pertained to the public welfare and security, we thought, among other things which we saw would be for the good of many, those regulations pertaining to the reverence of the Divinity ought certainly to be made first, so that we might grant to the Christians and others full authority to observe that religion which each preferred; whence any Divinity whatsoever in the seat of the heavens may be propitious and kindly disposed to us and all who are placed under our rule. And thus by this wholesome counsel and most upright provision we thought to arrange that no one whatsoever should be denied the opportunity to give his heart to the observance of the Christian religion, of that religion which he should think best for himself, so that the Supreme Deity, to whose worship we freely yield our hearts) may show in all things His usual favor and benevolence. Therefore, your Worship should know that it has pleased us to remove all conditions whatsoever, which were in the rescripts formerly given to you officially, concerning the Christians and now any one of these who wishes to observe Christian religion may do so freely and openly, without molestation. We thought it fit to commend these things most fully to your care that you may know that we have given to those Christians free and unrestricted opportunity of religious worship. When you see that this has been granted to them by us, your Worship will know that we have also conceded to other religions the right of open and free observance of their worship for the sake of the peace of our times, that each one may have the free opportunity to worship as he pleases; this regulation is made we that we may not seem to detract from any dignity or any religion.

Read more

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Catholic Church, controversy, religious liberty | No Comments »

No Salvation Outside the Catholic Church dogma

Monday, February 6th, 2012

Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus escapes the minds of many individual Catholics today as a dogma of faith which must be held in order to be a faithful member of the Catholic Church. To the present day, the truth of this doctrine is being doubted by the increasing majority of Catholics worldwide, due to poor catechesis and failure of the hierarchy to defend this doctrine.

What is it about personal human conviction that trumps this article of truth? In modern times, truth established by man comes from inner feelings and interior disposition. The effort of man to defend truth has become what he believes to be true, therefore must be respected by everyone. Or, he may following the line of think that ‘what is true for me, may not be true for you’ mentality. This is what the world has taught us or, rightly so, this is what humanity is thinking.

No longer is it a truth that is revealed by God and taught by His apostolic successors in a religious formal setting. Modern thinking has taken on the notion that man has becoming his own God, so to speak. Quite frankly, this is a fallacy. Sadly to say, it is a world that we live in.

Read more

Tags: ,
Posted in Catholic Church, controversy, salvation | No Comments »

No Substitute for Baptism

Sunday, February 5th, 2012

Is it not true that Mary Magdalen was a saint from that moment in which Christ forgave her because she loved much? And yet we are not aware that she was then baptized. Is it not true that the Holy Innocents did not receive the Sacrament of Baptism? Also, that some of the canonised saints were only catechumens, and so forth? Now, it will promote tidiness and clarity of thought if we deal with this difficulty by proposing to ourselves these two questions, and by answering them:

First, Has Christ instituted any other positive means of regeneration besides baptism, either by way of addition to or exception from the law of baptism? Secondly, Is it not possible that, from the very nature of things which precedes all positive law and is allowed for in positive law, it might happen that a person could receive justification without the actual reception of the Sacrament of Baptism?

We answer the first of these questions in the negative. We cannot admit any other means of salvation positively instituted by Christ, for the very good reason that his positive law has provided one means and only one. If, therefore, any theories are advanced on the question of salvation which involve the recognition of some means of salvation positively instituted by Christ, other than baptism, such theories must immediately be rejected as at least erroneous. Attempts of this kind have been made from time to time. The best known is that of the theologian Cajetan, who expressed the opinion that in the case of infants dying in the mother’s womb, the prayers of the parents could secure the justification and salvation of the children. He thought that a blessing of the child in the womb, given in the name of the Blessed Trinity, would secure this.

Read more

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Catholic Church, Council of Trent, baptism of desire, controversy, reflection, salvation, theology | No Comments »

exception to law of baptism? “baptism of desire”

Monday, October 3rd, 2011

from The Teaching of the Catholic Church, Volume II, Canon George D. Smith:

First, Has Christ instituted any other positive means of regeneration besides baptism, either by way of addition to or exception from the law of baptism? Secondly, Is it not possible that, from the very nature of things which precedes all positive law and is allowed for in positive law, it might happen that a person could receive justification without the actual reception of the Sacrament of Baptism?
 
We answer to the first of these questions in the negative. We cannot admit any other means of salvation positively instituted by Christ, for the very good reason that his positive law has provided one means and only one. If, therefore, any theories are advanced on the question of salvation which involves the recognition of some means of salvation positively instituted by Christ, other than baptism, such theories must immediately be rejected as at least erroneous.
 
We answer to the second question in the affirmative. It can happen that a person receives justification without actually receiving the Sacrament of Baptism. And it can happen in one of two ways: either, 1. by Martyrdom, or 2. by Charity.
 
p.778-779
 
…. Now, an act of charity always and necessarily contains a desire for the Sacrament of Baptism, hence the expression Baptism of Desire. The reason why it must contain this desire is that an act of the love of God must contain a desire of conforming to his will in every way. Therefore, since it is God’s will that we should receive the Sacrament of Baptism, this act must contain the desire for baptism. But this desire may either be implicitly or explicitly, and each alternative requires our careful consideration.
 
It is implicit in anyone who makes an act of the love of God, and, through invincible ignorance, does not know of the necessity of sacrament baptism. This might happen in a country like England to people who are not baptised.
 
Might it not also happen to heathens who have never heard of Christ?
 
It might, if we suppose that these heathens have in some way obtained the necessary minimum knowledge of Revelation, and are capable of a salutary faith and hope in God. For it is very important to understand that when we speak of charity, we do not mean just any kind of love of God above all else, such as the natural love of a creature for its Creator. Charity is essentially a love of friendship (Our Blessed Lord does not call us servants, but friends), which implies an intimate communication with God, such as is only possible in a supernatural order. The existence of this supernatural order can only be known through Revelation. Charity, therefore, cannot exist without at least the knowledge of the principle truth of Revelation. p. 782-783

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Catholic Church, baptism of desire, controversy, salvation, theology | 1 Comment »

“The Catholic Church and Salvation”

Sunday, October 2nd, 2011

by Monsignor Joseph Clifford Fenton

analysis of, Cantate Domino:
 
(1) All of those outside the Church, even the individuals who have committed no sin against the faith itself, are in a position in which they cannot be saved unless they in some way enter or join the Church before they die.
 
(2) The alternative to eternal and supernatural salvation is deprivation of the Beatific Vision. In the case of those who are guilty of mortal sin which remains unrepented, this includes both the penalty of loss and the penalty of sense in hell.
 
(3) The spiritual condition of one who is not “within” the Church at least by an act of implicit desire is incompatible with the reception of the life of sanctifying grace.
 
This document insists that pagans, Jews, heretics, and schismatics will not be saved unless, before the end of their lives, they are joined (aggregati) to the one true Church. p. 40-41

Pius IX

 
… it is perfectly possible for a man to die “outside” the true Church and to be excluded from the Beatific Vision forever without having his ignorance of the true Church or of the true religion counted as a moral fault. That is precisely what Pope Pius IX said in the Singulari quadam. He said it, as the context shows, as part of his explanation of the fact that the Catholic dogma of the Church’s necessity for the attainment of eternal salvation in no way involves a contradiction of the doctrines about God’s sovereign mercy and justice.
 
In this section of the Singulari quadam Pope Pius IX goes on to urge the Bishops of the Catholic Church to use all of their energies to drive from the minds of men the deadly error that the way of salvation can be found in any religion. To a certain extent this is a mere restatement of the erroneous opinion according to which we may well hope for the salvation of men who have never entered in any way into the Catholic Church, the first misinterpretation of Catholic teaching…
 
One of the most interesting factors in this section of the allocution is the fact that Pope Pius IX forbids his people to inquire into the presence or the lack or the extent of invincible ignorance in individual cases. He actually goes so far as to insist that it is wrong to go beyond the teaching that there is one God, one faith, and one baptism. p. 47
 
The primary and central object of the Church’s doctrinal ministry is to be found in the body of truth revealed by God through Our Lord Jesus Christ, and delivered to the Church by His Apostles as doctrine to be accepted with the assent of divine faith. The secondary object of that ministry embraces all and only those truths which the Church must be able to teach inerrantly in order to teach its primary object adequately as a living and infallible teaching body. The decision as to just what would constitute invincible, as distinct from vincible or culpable, ignorance of the Catholic Church in any individual case does not fall within the confines of either object. And, as a matter of fact, this decision is something which man in this life is quite incapable of forming rightly. p.48
 
On, Singulari quadam:
 
(1) It is a ruinous error to imagine that one can have grounds for hope that people now dead, and who had not entered into the Church in any way during the course of their lives, are saved.

(2) The dogma that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church is in no way opposed to the truth that God is all-merciful and all-just.

(3) The doctrine that no one is saved outside the Catholic Church is a truth revealed by God through Jesus Christ, and a truth which all men must believe with the assent of divine faith. It is a Catholic dogma.
(4) Invincible ignorance, of the true Church or of anything else, is not considered by God as a sin. The dogma that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church in no way implies that invincible ignorance is sinful.

(5) It is an impious and deadly error to hold that salvation may be attained in any religion.

(6) It is not within the field either of our competence or of our rights to search out the way in which God’s mercy and His justice operate in any given case of a person ignorant of the true Church or of the true religion. We shall see how these divine attributes have operated in the light of the Beatific Vision itself. p. 56

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Catholic Church, Msgr. Joseph Fenton, controversy, reflection, salvation, theology, theology quotes | 4 Comments »

controversy of Pope St. Marcellinus

Tuesday, August 23rd, 2011

from August 2011 Adsum:

In a recent pamphlet written by a Julio Pro, M.D., objections were raised against the sedevacantists. One “proof” given was the supposed apostasy of Pope St. Marcellinus. It was erroneously claimed that this saintly Pope offered worship to false gods and still remained Pope. The following excerpt refutes this historical error:

“The States subject to Rome, watered with the blood of the persecuted, only because the more productive of Christian branches. Tortures tore the bodies of the martyrs, but their souls, firmly embracing the faith, remained invulnerable and invincible. Nevertheless, there were some weak spirits that yielded to threats, and with whom self-love prevailed over religion; and it has even been said that among those weak ones was Marcellinus himself. The falsehood which was circulated on this head was adorned with all the circumstances which might give it an air of probability. It was pretended that the pontiff, perceiving his fault, presented himself as a suppliant before a council of three hundred bishops, assembled at Sinuessa. There, ran the story, the culprit confessed his error, and, weeping, demanded that she should be sentenced to the punishment he had incurred; and the council replied: ’Pronounced sentence on thyself; the chief see cannot be judged but by itself.’ But in this statement every particular is false; it is now ascertained that the accusation is calumnious, and that the pontiff committed no fault. Saint Augustine, speaking of Petilius, author of that fable, says: ‘He calls Marcellinus a sacrilegious wretch; I declare him innocent. It is not necessary for me to weary myself to support my defence by proofs; for Petilius himself supports his accusations by no proof.”

-excerpt from Lives and Times of the Popes by Chevalier Artaud de Montor (1909)

Tags: , ,
Posted in controversy, pope, scandal | No Comments »

Catholic Liberals and religious liberty

Tuesday, July 26th, 2011

Obviously, the insistence of the Popes upon the rights of truth is anathema to contemporary Liberalism in which unrestricted Liberty, including the liberty to propagate error, is the supreme norm. This liberty had been proclaimed in the Masonically inspired Rights of Man of the French Revolution and was subjected to one resignation only, the demands of public order. Papal teaching on the right of a Catholic state to repress error was embarrassing to such Catholic Liberals as Father Murray who wished to make Catholicism acceptable to contemporary American society. He was, no doubt, sincere in his efforts and considered them to be for the good of the Church. His principal argument was that the teaching of the Popes which has just been cited was related to a particular period in the history of the Church and was not of permanent validity. He was answered by no less an authority than Cardinal Ottaviani in an important article which appeared in the May 1953 issue of the American Ecclesiastical Review:

The first fault of these persons consists in their failure to accept fully the arma veritatis and the teaching which the Roman Pontiffs during the past century, and particularly the reigning Pontiff Pius XII, have given to Catholics on this subject in encyclical letters, allocutions, and instructions of various kinds.

To justify themselves these people assert that in the body of teaching imparted within the Church there are to be distinguished two elements, the one permanent, and the other transient. The latter is supposed to be due to the reflection of particular contemporary conditions.

Unfortunately, they carry this tactic so far as to apply it to the principles taught in pontifical documents, principles on which the teachings of the Popes have remained constant so as to make these principles a part of the patrimony of Catholic doctrine.

Archbishop Lefebvre and Religious Liberty by Michael Davies, p. 8-9.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in John Courtney Murray, Novus Ordo watch, Pope Pius XII, article, controversy, manifest heresy, pope, religious liberty | 1 Comment »

Warren H. Carroll was a heretic

Monday, July 25th, 2011

Peter Dimond did a wonderful job of exposing Warren H. Carroll as a heretic. This is one of the reasons why the Vatican II Church cannot be the Catholic Church, because it fails to discipline and condemn heretics. If someone as reputable as Warren H. Carroll can get away with heresy, what can we expect from the Vatican II Church in matters of doctrine and morality?

Too long have we let these things go to the wayside of typical musings of radical professionals who claim to be Catholic, too long has the Catholic Church been silenced (due to the popular acceptance of false ecumenism and religious liberty) that we regrettably witness these aberrations from an acclaimed historical revisionist and false intellectual.

In likely future, when true Catholic hierarchy is restored (presuming that it may be), these things will have to be pointed out as usurpation of papal authority and rejection of Catholic dogma.

Christendom College is a disgrace.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Catholic Church, Dimond Brothers, Novus Ordo watch, controversy, manifest heresy, new devotions, news headlines, reflection, response, scandal, video | 2 Comments »

« Older Entries