I may have been wrong on obedience

  • Thread starter Thread starter workinprogress
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
W

workinprogress

Guest
I said on one thread that only infallible teachings need be obeyed. I realize that there are many bishops and priests who do not listen to their highest boss next to God (the Pope) when he issues pastoral documents. Unfortunately, only traditionalists seem to get suspended. I realize that obedience, when not going against divine law, natural law, the Magesterium, and all those fundamental teachings need be obeyed, or you get anarchy. The laity also need to go by this, I think.
 
We still have to know our faith though so that we know what we are hearing and even seeing are we are obliged to obey. That means read Church teachings and writings of Councils even before Vatican 2. Read Pascendi, Quo Primum, Quas Primas (sp?), Mortualium animos (sp?), etc.
Code: 
Arianism was being taught by even a pope once.   Modernism may very well be poisoning the minds and souls of those in the clergy.
 Above all things, be charitable and don't be bitter about any sick priests.  Things will get better, but we may have to get better.  We can "elect" our clergy indirectly and non-personally.  I believe I heard an apparition from heaven told some seers that bad priests are what we deserve for the kind of sins we have committed since last century or before, possibly.
 
The Catechism of the Catholic Church has many good sections on Obedience. Look it up in the index and follow the references.

The Catechism itself can be considered a “synthesis of the essential and fundamental contents of Catholic doctrine, as regards both faith and morals, in the light of the Second Vatican Council and the whole of the Church’s Tradition” (from the Prologue of the catechism itself)
 
work(name removed by moderator)rogress:
Code: 
Arianism was being taught by even a pope once.
Click to expand...
I would dispute that this could be so. Can you provide documentation for it?
 
Arianism was being taught by even a pope once. Modernism may very well be poisoning the minds and souls of those in the clergy.
Click to expand...
Which Pope are you referring to? Pope Liberius excommunicated St. Athanasius sure enough, but he never did give into the Arian Heresy even under immense pressure, though bishop Ossius of Cordoba did brake under torture.

I am not aware of any pope that has publically advocated heresy.
 
40.png
Katholish:
Which Pope are you referring to? Pope Liberius excommunicated St. Athanasius sure enough, but he never did give into the Arian Heresy even under immense pressure, though bishop Ossius of Cordoba did brake under torture.

I am not aware of any pope that has publically advocated heresy.
Click to expand...
From the book "Christ the King, Lord of History"by Anne W Carroll p. 106…“All orthodox bishops were exiled; Arian bishops were in control. Even hosius of Cordova had been imprisoned and tortured and forced to sigh a pro-Arian statement at the age of 101. Liberius,under torture, sighned a condemnation of Athanasius and a document called the Third Formulary of Sirmium, which was unclear and could possibly be seen as an Arian document. But he added a “P.S.” to the document stating that he was in no way appoving any statement which declared the Son to be less than equal to the Father. And in spite of a year’s pressure, he never signed the Second Formulary of Sirmium, which was clearly Arian.”

Actually with Our Lord’s promise of “the gates of hell shall not prevale against it” the pope would not be able to teach herasy, God would intervine.
 
Super Mom, the source of my information in this regard is her husband, Dr. Warren Carroll and the Building of Christendom book. The Catholic world is a small world.
 
Katholish 🙂
YES, its a small world and God does have a sense of humor. 😉
 
I am pretty sure Pope Liberius (or was it an Honorius?) was condemned posthumously and became the first non-canonized pope. I could be wrong. There is a book I think called “Church History” published by TAN.
There had been problems then with many bishops in certain regions of the world buying into Arianism an punishing those teaching the truth. Now, whether instructions given to the inferiors of these clergy that do not contradict Church teaching could be disobeyed–I think that was the issue of which I posted. Athanasius disobeyed Pope Liberius but St Gerard took his undue punishment–the former refuting lies against the Faith; the latter not refuting a lie by some person against himself.
 
work(name removed by moderator)rogress;

Actually I have that book too, by Fr. John Laux. On p.117 it states…His first step was to gain the signature of Pope Liberius and Hosius of Cordova. “Liberius,” says St. Athanasius, “after he had nbeen in banishment tow years, gave way, and from fear of threatened death was induced to subscribe. Hosius was confined so straily that, at last broken by suffering (he was over a hundred years old) he was brought though with great difficulty, to hold communion with the Arians.” They were both permitted to return to their Sees. Both afterwards repented and refused to adjure the Nicene faith."

On the list of Pontiffs in the back Pope Liberius, is listed as St. Liberius. The first non-saint listed is #57 Pope Boniface II (530-532)
 
Wait, I vaguely remember what the reference is to. Unfortunately I forget the context of the case, that is who it was and in what exact regard. There was a pope that was condemned after his death, however if my memory serves in this instance, he was condemned for a lack of clarity and not for positively teaching heresy. It was a failure to act that he was condemned for.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top