"Filial correction"

  • Thread starter Thread starter Vadne
  • Start date Start date
This hasn’t happened since the 14th century. And the last time it happened, the correctors were right.
 
graciew said:
We can always start at home…with a mirror.
Click to expand...
That means you, too. I will not presume or commit the sin of rash judgment by implying the the dubia cardinals and the signatories have not “looked into the mirror” beforehand. From what is obvious publicly, everyone involved has been reflective and hesitant, but felt the Holy Spirit was leading them to do this.
 
It’s not the fault of the correctors if their document is lucid, clearly written, and carefully documented…and if Amoris Laetitia is ambiguous.
 
I do not presume to know what is in the heart of a Pope,nor Cardinals to ask them to mortify their pride.
And you are wrong, there are no Cardinals involved in this letter. Do not drag them into this one.
Neither drag me into your demands of mortification of pride for our Pope.
Let it be clear,we are his flock too.
Do not speak on behalf of the flock to ask for mortification of pride and humility for our Pope. Speak for yourself. We are all alike in the vineyard.
 
Last edited:
I did not say this letter was the Cardinals letter, my dear. I was referring to both letters.

As for my statements about mortifying pride, where did I drag you into my statement? A lot of rash judgment going on here, me thinks.

I was speaking for myself – obviously. My statement was "[I] hope the Pope mortifies his pride ". I did not say “we.” Only a bishop can speak for “the flock.” I presume you were speaking for yourself with the “mirror” statement?
 
Last edited:
Vadne said:
This hasn’t happened since the 14th century. And the last time it happened, the correctors were right.
Click to expand...
There wasn’t an internet then.

For the record that “correction” was a little misdirected. He was accused of a heresy that was not defined until after his death by his Pope Benedict XII. Interesting parallel indeed.
 
I only recognize a handful of these names, most notably Bishop Fellay of the SSPX and a few of his group.
 
A lot of other people wanted to sign the letter but didn’t out of fear. There is significant anecdotal evidence that there is a real climate of fear in Rome in particular about doing anything to irritate this pope.
 
pnewton said:
40.png
Vadne:
This hasn’t happened since the 14th century. And the last time it happened, the correctors were right.
Click to expand...
He was accused of a heresy that was not defined until after his death by his Pope Benedict XII. Interesting parallel indeed.
Click to expand...
The definition of heresy was known in the 1st Centuries as the Church had to deal with it.
 
The “heresy” that he was accused of was not defined as doctrine until after his death.
 
Just so you know the leader of the SSPX, Bishop Bernard Fellay, signed this document. So they are on board
 
Last edited:
Yeah that’s why he was guilty of material heresy. It was revealed in scripture and trandition that upon death we receive the beatific vision. He denied that. He was in heresy. Luckily he was humble enough to relent and change his opinion on the matter.
 
Last edited:
pnewton said:
The “heresy” that he was accused of was not defined as doctrine until after his death.
Click to expand...
Well, that is not true. The teaching on the Beatific Vision had been an established and continually taught doctrine.

From the Catholic Encyclopedia is the account:
In the last years of John’s pontificate there arose a dogmatic conflict about the Beatific Vision, which was brought on by himself, and which his enemies made use of to discredit him. Before his elevation to the Holy See, he had written a work on this question, in which he stated that the souls of the blessed departed do not see God until after the Last Judgment. After becoming pope, he advanced the same teaching in his sermons. In this he met with strong opposition, many theologians, who adhered to the usual opinion that the blessed departed did see God before the Resurrection of the Body and the Last Judgment, even calling his view heretical.

A great commotion was aroused in the University of Paris when the General of the Minorites and a Dominican tried to disseminate there the pope’s view. Pope John wrote to King Philip IV on the matter (November, 1333), and emphasized the fact that, as long as the Holy See had not given a decision, the theologians enjoyed perfect freedom in this matter. In December, 1333, the theologians at Paris, after a consultation on the question, decided in favour of the doctrine that the souls of the blessed departed saw God immediately after death or after their complete purification; at the same time they pointed out that the pope had given no decision on this question but only advanced his personal opinion, and now petitioned the pope to confirm their decision.

John appointed a commission at Avignon to study the writings of the Fathers, and to discuss further the disputed question. In a consistory held on 3 January, 1334, the pope explicitly declared that he had never meant to teach aught contrary to Holy Scripture or the rule of faith and in fact had not intended to give any decision whatever. Before his death he withdrew his former opinion, and declared his belief that souls separated from their bodies enjoyed in heaven the Beatific Vision.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Words mean something. You wrote earlier of the value of discussion. How can discussion have value when I write it was not “defined as doctrine,” and you say what I said is not true, using the phrase “established and continually taught”.

The Catholic Encyclopedia excerpt shows that the discussion was still active in 1333. I point this out because changing the words of another and inaccuracy with language is an aggravation of argument, not discussion.

I get the impression that Catholics use the word “heresy” like politicians use “Nazi” and “fake news”.

So, as a refresher, "“Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed”
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top