G
GerardP
Guest
The good people at TIA have responded to my request for verification on the interview with Jean Guitton.
traditioninaction.org/Questions/F031_TrumpetsApocalipse.html
- Status
traditioninaction.org/Questions/F031_TrumpetsApocalipse.html
T
ThereCanBeOnly1
Guest
You have got to be joking?
Where exactly did you get this from, as your brethren Bear006 would say, Source please
T
ThereCanBeOnly1
Guest
Which Church are you referring to the ‘Universal/Catholic Church’ or the new definition of the V2, ‘the Universal Church subsists in the Catholic Church’.
P
pnewton
Guest
The Catholic Church.Which Church are you referring to the ‘Universal/Catholic Church’ or the new definition of the V2, ‘the Universal Church subsists in the Catholic Church’.
Did you not know this is a Catholic site?
T
ThereCanBeOnly1
Guest
To SURE and BEAR06,
So when Catholics confess to an SSPX priest, what happens? Are the words missed by Almighty GOD?
What about those who are married in an SSPX CATHOLIC Church? Are they living in Mortal Sin?
Are the people who attend SSPX CATHOLIC Churches Christian, and what of their children who receive the Eucharist and Make Penance?
S
Sure
Guest
Isn’t it obvious that “not consecrating” bishops does not constitute sin. Is there some Church teaching that says “thou shalt not not consecrate bishops”? And no, true obedience doesn’t cause one to commit schismatic acts, an incorrectly formed conscience does.You have got to be joking?
Where exactly did you get this from, as your brethren Bear006 would say, Source please
I’m tired of this thread.
T
ThereCanBeOnly1
Guest
Yes, have you read all the decrees of the Second Vatican Council? If you have then you would know what is meant by “Ecclesia Dei subsistit in Ecclesia Catholica” (no. 8).The Catholic Church.
Here for enlightenment research this:
Second Vatican Council
Chapter 2 : Lumen Gentium
Yes I knew this was a Catholic site and Thank you for asking. Have you read Lumen Gentium of the Second Vatican Council where it explicitly states: "Ecclesia Dei subsistit in Ecclesia Catholica"
i.e. “the Church of GOD subsists or takes its concrete form or is realized in the Catholic Church”.
which of course makes no sense since the Church of GOD is the Catholic Church.
Look for yourself:
vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html
T
ThereCanBeOnly1
Guest
Sure and Bear006,
I would just like you to know, in all seriousness, the more I read your posts the more I want to attend SSPX masses. And FYI, I am not SSPX.
B
bear06
Guest
We can only hope that they are truly ignorant. That said, most of the people here have seen this letter over and over so it’d be hard to claim ignorance. Incidently, this doesn’t only apply to the SSPX. All priests must have faculties from the local ordinary. This is canon law.
latin-mass-society.org/laitysspx.htm
T
TMC
Guest
I keep hearing different views on whether the SSPX is in schism or not. If they are, then I would think these sacraments would be illicit, but not invalid. Even if technically invalid, I would be of the opinion (FWIW) that a contrite penitent would be forgiven, and that any flaw in a marriage could be easily fixed, and that no sin or other bad effect would redound to the lay person. If the lay person is seeking out the SSPX priest with the intention of defying the Church and with knowledge that the sacraments were invalid, that might be another story. Without knowledge and intention, I don’t think any error by the priest would be imputed to the layman.
B
bear06
Guest
The Church has clarified the use of subsist. Maybe you missed it.Which Church are you referring to the ‘Universal/Catholic Church’ or the new definition of the V2, ‘the Universal Church subsists in the Catholic Church’.
B
bear06
Guest
Easy yes or no question - Do you feel that the use of the term subsists is heretical?
B
bear06
Guest
You’re problem is with the Church, not me. I quote Church documents and you get mad.Sure and Bear006,
I would just like you to know, in all seriousness, the more I read your posts the more I want to attend SSPX masses. And FYI, I am not SSPX.
BTW, if you start way back at the beginning of this thread, I was the first one to clarifiy that the video in question was the Dimond Bros. not SSPX.
T
ThereCanBeOnly1
Guest
Truthfully, I do not know if it is heretical. All I know is that “Ecclesia Dei subsistit in Ecclesia Catholica” in itself makes the implication that the Church of GOD and the Catholic Church are 2 separate entities. You need not be an expert to see this.
DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION ON THE CHURCH
LUMEN GENTIUM
SOLEMNLY PROMULGATED BY HIS HOLINESS
POPE PAUL VI
ON NOVEMBER 21, 1964
This Church constituted and organized in the world as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church, which is governed by the successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him, although many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside of its visible structure.
vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html
This meaning of the Church in its form today can in future deviate and morph into a different entity. For example, it could subsist in other religions. Not one really having the truth but some elements of the Truth.
**Sorry Bear06, I believe in the Church of GOD, which is the Catholic Church. **
There is no subsist.
There Is Only 1 Church.
ThereCanBeOnly1
B
bear06
Guest
You might want to read this
ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDFECCL.HTM
and this
catholicculture.org/library/view.cfm?recnum=3316
Scroll down to find the subsists section.
ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDFECCL.HTM
and this
catholicculture.org/library/view.cfm?recnum=3316
Scroll down to find the subsists section.
P
pnewton
Guest
Thants for the links. Great stuff. I hadn’t seen it before.
T
ThereCanBeOnly1
Guest
I Read the links. Thank you.
Nothing new here, same old same old. Just another clarification of the Second Vatican Council. (damage control of sorts).
This confusion of ‘Churches’ comes from decree on Ecumenism
It must be noted that** ‘Churches’ in the plural was never used before the Council to refer to the schismatic Orthodox churches. **
2nd Vatican Council approves the new meaning of this expressive statement saying:
DECREE ON ECUMENISM
UNITATIS REDINTEGRATIO
CHAPTER I
CATHOLIC PRINCIPLES ON ECUMENISM
- …It follows that the separated Churches and Communities as such, though we believe them to be deficient in some respects, have been by no means deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Church.
S
Sure
Guest
Ok…I’ve explained this on about 20 threads so far.
This is not in any way opposed to previous teaching. It says other churches can be a means of salvation. This is true. Many separated churches have valid baptisms and marriages. This is not some new post-Vatican II teaching. Their baptisms (given proper form and matter) are valid and confer grace. BUT where does that grace come from??? It can only come THROUGH the church. In this way, the separated churches access the grace of the Catholic Church. Unless of course you have some theory where grace is obtained without the Church (Impossible) or that these sacraments are not valid (goes against 500+ years of Church teaching). So, your theory that this statement of Vatican II is absolutely contrary is utterly incorrect.
S
stmaria
Guest
.
Could you post a pre-Vatican II encyclical that says that the Holy Spirit uses separated communities [protestant] as a “means of salvation”
Pope Leo also used the word “communities” but not in the same way as did the Decree on Ecumenism
SATIS COGNITUM
ON THE UNITY OF THE CHURCH
ENCYCLICAL OF POPE LEO XIII
JUNE 29, 1896
papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13satis.htm
4. It is so evident from the clear and frequent testimonies of Holy Writ that the true Church of Jesus Christ is one, that no Christian can dare to deny it. But in judging and determining the nature of this unity many have erred in various ways… We must consequently investigate not how the Church may possibly be one, but how He, who founded it, willed that it should be one. But when we consider what was actually done we find that** Jesus Christ did not,** in point of fact, institute a Church to embrace several communities similar in nature, but in themselves distinct, and lacking those bonds which render the Church unique and indivisible after that manner in which in the symbol of our faith we profess: "I believe in one Church… For this reason Christ, speaking of the mystical edifice, **mentions only one Church, **which he calls His own - "I will build my church; " any other Church except this one, since it has not been founded by Christ, cannot be the true Church”
.
SUMMO IUGITER STUDIO
papalencyclicals.net/Greg16/g16summo.htm
“The holy universal Church teaches that it is not possible to worship God truly except in her and asserts that all who are outside of her will not be saved.” Official acts of the Church proclaim the same dogma. Thus, in the decree on faith which Innocent III published with the synod of Lateran IV, these things are written: “There is one universal Church of all the faithful outside of which no one is saved.”
It is not possible to TRULY worship God except in the Catholic Church. So outside of Baptism and Marriage of course Protestants tend to get married several times so grace is only given once right? they are in fact living in adultery] what other grace is given to Protestant communities via the Catholic Church?
Please quote a pre-Vatican encyclical to back this up.
G
Gara3987
Guest
It is interesting that you bring SSPX up. If I remember correctly Pope Benedict XVI has publicly recognized SSPX as being apart of the Church (something that Pope John Paul II would not do), which would make them legal. I will only attend a SSPX Service if that is the only option that I have.
In reality the way I see it is that what they had originally done (breaking off the Church) was completely wrong and when they did it, that would make attending their masses wrong. In other words they were just as bad as Martin Luther.
I personally follow the tridentine mass because I don’t really feel comfortable attending the Novus Ordo services. I feel that they do not execute their services properly, and they have some noticeable errors, it seems to me the the Novus Ordo is not just a translation from the Traditional Latin Rite Mass but was completely changed. Some of their actions are very questionable as well; for example, up here in Washington State there was a Novus Ordo service being done by a bishop (I don’t remember his name), and he was using Doritos for the Holy Eucharist.
But any way I didn’t mean to get off subject, I think that SSPX is now recognized by the Church which would make it legit. The ones that I really stay away from are SSPV, and CMRI they seem to be completely outside the Church.
- Status