Could these words actually have come from the mouth of a Supreme Pontiff?

  • Thread starter Thread starter rf9661
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

rf9661

Guest
Hello all.

Was just watching a video and in the video, it states that His Holiness, Paul VI, said the following things towards the end and after Vatican II:
We must maintain a line of demarcation between Christian life and secular life. Between the spiritual and the temporal there cannot exist this communion - or rather this confusion - of interests and ways of life that the old unitary conception of Christianity made easier and more habitual.
Click to expand...
Indeed, an immense love for men profoundly permeated it. Human needs examined and considered in detail… have absorbed the attention of our Synod. You worshipers of humanity ( cultores humanitatis ) who renounce transcendental truths ought to pay tribute to the Council for at least this and acknowledge our new Humanism. For we also, and we more than anyone, are worshipers of man.
Click to expand...
Is it truly possible that the living Vicar of Christ said these things?

I have tried searching the quotes online to no avail…
 
Last edited:
whoever made the video did not do any kind of historical research, Pius VI was pope from 1775-1799, so he most certainly could not have said anything at the time of Vatican 2, as for whether or not, he did say those things, without the actual documents, there is no way to know, be very careful about quotes ripped out of context
 
That is my mistake. I just corrected it. It should’ve said Paul VI, not Pius VI.
 
rf9661 said:
We must maintain a line of demarcation between Christian life and secular life. Between the spiritual and the temporal there cannot exist this communion - or rather this confusion - of interests and ways of life that the old unitary conception of Christianity made easier and more habitual.
Click to expand...
I can’t find an English translation of this document but it’s from a General Audience on 3rd July, 1974.

Not sure why you have a problem with it though. It just sounds like he is saying in the past religious life and secular life overlapped in a unity of Christian values but now with secular humanism pervading civil life, we must keep strictly to our Christian values.

The second paragraph is from the closing speech of Vatican II on 7th December, 1965.

Secular humanism, revealing itself in its horrible anti-clerical reality has, in a certain sense, defied the council. The religion of the God who became man has met the religion (for such it is) of man who makes himself God. And what happened? Was there a clash, a battle, a condemnation? There could have been, but there was none. The old story of the Samaritan has been the model of the spirituality of the council. A feeling of boundless sympathy has permeated the whole of it. The attention of our council has been absorbed by the discovery of human needs (and these needs grow in proportion to the greatness which the son of the earth claims for himself). But we call upon those who term themselves modern humanists, and who have renounced the transcendent value of the highest realities, to give the council credit at least for one quality and to recognize our own new type of humanism: we, too, in fact, we more than any others, honor mankind.

Here he is basically contrasting secular humanism which makes man into a God with Christian humanism which honors man as a creature made by and for God and worthy of great love and care.

I suspect you’ve been watching one of those extremist type groups. Stay away from them for the sake of your faith!
 
Last edited:
Emeraldlady said:
I can’t find an English translation of this document but it’s from a General Audience on 3rd July, 1974.
Click to expand...
Neither can I.
The SSPX or the like (it is unclear to me and I m not interested in deepening there honestly) these extracts come from refer to a document dated July 3 1974. The one I find on that date in Italian has no such words;

https://w2.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/it/audiences/1974/documents/hf_p-vi_aud_19740703.html

And the list of documents that year can be found here :

http://www.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/en/speeches/1974.index.3.html

Blogs and the like have been copying pasting an http that is wrong ,doesn’t exist and really no one seems to have checked it nor corrected it.

So the answer is: Have a good night 🌙 and peace on earth 🌎!
 
Last edited:
As always, ignorant, hate-filled hearts will search and find a certain translation, or take comments out of context, or twist or simply lie to suit their goal of division. Who is it that divides?

Like the man behind the curtain in the Wizard of Oz to whom we are to pay no attention, hate groups are the same.

Except we are called to love our enemies and therefore, to pray for them.
 
graciew said:
Neither can I.
The SSPX or the like (it is unclear to me and I m not interested in deepening there honestly)these extracts come from refer to a document dated July 3 1974. The one I find in that date in Italian has no such words;
Click to expand...
Yes, we can get dragged into trying to verify a statement to find it has been manufactured or distorted and be left with a giant headache! I’ve done it so often.
 
Last edited:
There’s simply nothing wrong with it whether he said it or not. In fact, it reads very much like a statement I would expect any pope to make.
 
Emeraldlady said:
Yes, we can get dragged into trying to verify a statement to find it has been manufactured or distorted and be left with a giant headache! I’ve done it so often.
Click to expand...
It is one of the oldest tricks in the ‘liar’s bible’. Twisting the original scriptures was written of by Saint Peter almost 2,000 years ago - nothing new there. Now, add in imperfect translations and the hardened hearts have even more food on which to glut themselves. On occasion, I will ask them to find the paragraph in the catechism which teaches it. This is normally followed by the sounds of crickets chirping…
 
Not to derail this thread, but just for the record, the SSPX is not a hate group, nor are they sedevacantist. In fact, a SSPX priest told me that +Lefebvre threw out seminarians who tried to spread sedevacantist propaganda. I’d take the SSPX over the anti-Catholic bloggers that I see on Pinterest.
 
Last edited:
rf9661 said:
I have tried searching the quotes online to no avail…
Click to expand...
The third post after you has the document; you can verify what part of the document may be quoted, and what part does not coincide.

You might want to change your search parameters or in the alternative, avoid sites su;ch as what you found. There are a huge number of sites which reflect Church teachings.
 
What problem do you have with what the Pope said?

I’m not seeing an issue with it, especially viewed in context (which the poster above has provided).
 
Never mentioned any Catholic group, SSPX or other. From the gist of the content, I assumed it was some ignorant fundamentalist.

Strange how the attitudes are the same, once disobedience sets in.
 
I did.
The document is in Italian.

http://www.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/it/audiences/1974/documents/hf_p-vi_aud_19740703.html

The paragraph in full …and translated ( with google) reads like this

“ The first condition is to maintain a dividing line between the Christian life and the profane life. Between the spiritual and the temporal there cannot exist that communion, or rather confusion of interests and customs, which the ancient unitary conception of Christianity made easier and more habitual. And the more the Christian knows how to keep himself free and poor compared to the kingdom of the earth, the more authentic his personal religious qualification will be, and the more effective his action will be to give or give back to certain aspects of life, both natural and social, their value. spiritual and moral.”

The document:

Exercise Christian wise and moral judgment with vigilant assiduity

So:
What question can there be about a paragraph that speaks of a first condition without the preceding ones ?
Read the whole document if you have the patience to translate it all and get as well into Gaudium te Spes which the previous paragraph refers to.

And for the record, I am not getting into the game of promoting anti Vatican II and parroting disgruntled videos of unauthoritative questionable sources.
 
Last edited:
Really? Then the SSPX would not exist, as no disagreement would exist. No, I cannot agree with this. Jesus established a living authority when he established the Church, one that is always current in the successor of Peter. If the very words of Jesus do not need that authority to teach them, then how can the words of men need less? That makes no sense. If Jesus Himself would not teach enough to last through eternity without an established authority to lead His Church, what Pope, Doctor or Saint could claim to do what Jesus could not?

The statement of the Pope above reminds me a lot of St. Louis de Montfort, in that a single sentence taken out of the contrast would belie the contrast it is making and set up a case for idolatry. Maybe both are wrong, or at least imprudent. But then, maybe human nature being what it is makes it impossible to be precise to all people through all times.
 
Last edited:
I wonder what is the purpose of this ^ entire paragraph. There is nothing ambiguous about what Paul VI said there unless a person just doesn’t know much about Catholicism. To interpret that quote through the syllabus of errors is almost laughable if it wasn’t also so sad and concerning.
 
Last edited:
Can you cite a papal Encyclical or council document to support this?

Few heresies claim the need to break with Tradition. Instead, they usually identify their movement with some practice or teaching allegedly common in the past.

Some heretics or schismatics affirm the Magisterium teaching authority, but say it doesn’t apply to recent novelties.

I don’t mean everyone who does this is a heretic or schismatic, sometimes it’s genuine. But how do we know the genuine restorationists from the well intentioned but misguided ones?

So yeah, the current Magisterium does have a role here. The pope recognized St Francis of Assisi. But for every St Francis wannabe there are many others.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top