M
mardukm
Guest
Dear brother Cassini,
Blessings
Brother Roman Army expressed everything I would have wanted to say.
Blessings
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
C
cassini
Guest
You contradict yourself then Mardulm. Your opinions are now worthless.Dear brother Cassini,
Brother Roman Army expressed everything I would have wanted to say.
Blessings
M
mardukm
Guest
Explanation, please?You contradict yourself then Mardulm. Your opinions are now worthless.
Blessings
C
cassini
Guest
Originally Posted by cassiniExplanation, please?
Blessings
Mardukm. This is an important opinion. I hope I am reading it correctly, but does the author say that if a definition and declaration is labeled HERESY, it must be considered infallible?
Yes, all positive definitions and negative definitions (i.e., labelling something a heresy) on a matter of faith or morals have the stamp of infallibility. But those things “short of heresy” should not automatically be considered to be infallible teaching. I believe this is the distinction between “error” and “heresy.”
Blessings,
Marduk
Originally Posted by cassini
Now mardukm the $64,000 question:
The following, according to the Vatican minutes, was the order of events after the examination. On Wednesday, February 24th, 1616 the same propositions were qualified in virtue of the Pope’s order:
(1) “That the sun is in the centre of the world and altogether immovable by local movement, was unanimously declared to be “foolish, philosophically absurd, and formally heretical, inasmuch as it expressly contradicts the declarations of Holy Scripture in many passages, according to the proper meaning of the language used, and the sense in which they have been expounded and understood by the Fathers and theologians.”
Posted by Roman army:
‘This claim of infallibility of yours has been refuted in a previous thread already.’
Posted by Mardukm
‘Brother Roman Army expressed everything I would have wanted to say.’
CONTRADICTION. You stated anything defined and declared as heresy HAS to be infallible.
Then you agree with Roman Army who says NO in this case. CONTRADICTION.
M
mardukm
Guest
Dear brother cassini,
Fine. I am in contradiction. That’s settled.
Blessings
I see the problem. The Church defines “heresy” as a matter concerned with Faith and morals. You believe it also concerns matters that do not involve Faith and morals, but also science and (perhaps) history. So according to your own personal definition, I am in “contradiction.”CONTRADICTION. You stated anything defined and declared as heresy HAS to be infallible.
Then you agree with Roman Army who says NO in this case. CONTRADICTION.
Fine. I am in contradiction. That’s settled.
Blessings
C
cassini
Guest
Mardukm my friend, what we have here is a contradiction not of your making but of a trap set by Satan who is cleverer that all of us. Our only protection against him lies in HAVING FAITH in all the Church teaches. It means having faith in the MAGISTERIUM that exists even outside the ex cathedra extraordinary infallibility. I appeal to you to consider what I have to say in the light that the Church is protected from error whenever it acts OFFICIALLY.Dear brother cassini,
I see the problem. The Church defines “heresy” as a matter concerned with Faith and morals. You believe it also concerns matters that do not involve Faith and morals, but also science and (perhaps) history. So according to your own personal definition, I am in “contradiction.”
Fine. I am in contradiction. That’s settled.
Blessings
To do this you must first hear me out. The types of CONTRADICTION you have been forced into is but the result of DOUBTING this protection of the Church. You have been led to believe that for 1741 years the Church was wrong in its interpretation of Scripture as regards a fixed sun, 1741 being the year Churchmen began to HIDE the 1616 decree. So, now you need EXCUSES to restore your belief that the Church does not make mistakes when operating OFFICIALLY.
These excuses are many. I could list ten of them. One by one they fell apart when the documents were released by the Church from its archives. Often however, these EXCUSES led to CONTRADICTIONS and further CONTRADICTIONS. Lies often lead to further lies and to try to keep a lie going one can resort to DENIALS that cannot be admitted.
All that I need do now is illustrate and isolate the one you have got yourself into knots with. You stated CATEGORICALLY that any definition that declares a HERESY has to be infallible. Common sense would agree. Heresy is not to be flung about willy nilly in the Church that supposedly represents God Himself. But you did not know I was leading you on to prove a point. I then showed a papal decree that categorically defines it heresy to say the sun is fixed relative to the earth.
Now you must find more EXCUSES why in this case your HERESY INFALLIBILITY does not qualify for the HERESY/INFALLIBILITY you so categorically defended yeaterday. Then it was thank God for Texas who came up with the standard EXCUSE, it was not on a matter of faith or morals.
OK. let us see what this EXCUSE has to deny to have any credibility.
It means that the WHOLE CHURCH of the SEVENTEENTH century did not know what was of faith and morals and what was not. And here are the bodies that did not know that difference:
In 1542, in the wake of the Protestant Reformation, Pope Paul III set up various congregations to assist the Pope in his task of safeguarding the Apostolic faith held ‘in agreement with Sacred Scripture and apostolic tradition.’ One of the most important of these was the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Inquisition, otherwise known as the Congregation of the Holy Office. **The function of this body was specifically to combat heresy at the highest level. **Then, in 1588, Pope Sixtus V (1585-90) gave this congregation even more explicit powers in the Bull Immensa Dei (God Who cannot be Encompassed). In this directive he made the reigning pope, whoever he may be, Prefect of the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Inquisition. This gave the Catholic world to understand that decisions assigned to its judgment, before publication, would invariably be examined and ratified by the Pope himself as supreme judge of the Holy See, and would go forward clothed with such papal authority.
Next was Cardinal Bellarmine:
Born in Montepulciano Italy, the now Saint Robert Bellarmine was made cardinal in 1599 by Pope Clement VIII who said that his equal in learning was not at that time to be found in the Church. By his books, published at the height of the Catholic Church’s reply to the Protestant Reformation, he dealt formidable blows to their heretical doctrines and ecclesiological ideas, especially those of the Freemason King James I of England, while by his catechism, translated into forty languages, he spread the knowledge of Christian doctrine in all countries of the world.
Bellarmine wrote in 1615:
Second. I say that, as you know, the Council of Trent prohibits expounding the Scriptures contrary to the common agreement of the holy Fathers. And if Your Reverence would read not only the Fathers but also the commentaries of modern writers on Genesis, Psalms, Ecclesiastes and Josue, you would find that all agree in explaining literally (ad litteram) that the sun is in the heavens and moves swiftly around the earth, and that the earth is far from the heavens and stands immobile in the centre of the universe. Now consider whether in all prudence the Church could encourage giving to Scripture a sense contrary to the holy Fathers and all the Latin and Greek commentators. **Nor may it be answered that this is not a matter of faith, for if it is not a matter of faith from the point of view of the subject matter (ex parte objecti), it is a matter of faith on the part of the ones who have spoken (ex parte dicentis). **It would be just as heretical to deny that Abraham had two sons and Jacob twelve, as it would be to deny the virgin birth of Christ, for both are declared by the Holy Ghost through the mouths of the prophets and apostles.
Continued next post
C
cassini
Guest
Next was a Special Commission
Because of his position as ‘the Pope’s official scientist’ and his high standing within the state of Florence, Galileo was not like other men who came under the investigation of the sacred tribunal, for Pope Urban VIII himself directed the affair at all times. Had all the copies of Dialogue been successfully seized, some compromise might have been possible, but by the time the authorities acted a thousand copies of the book had been well distributed throughout Europe. To handle such a sensitive case the Pope ordered his nephew, Cardinal Francesco Barberini, to set up a special commission to investigate the matter. ‘Such an extraordinary commission could be justified only in cases of exceptional gravity, but above all in cases of a difficult theological nature,’ says the historian Pietro Redondi. In his book, Redondi, failing to see the seriousness of the heliocentric heresy, but aware of the significance of a special commission, proposes a theory that Galileo’s crime was the threat ‘atomism’ presented to the dogma of transubstantiation. The facts are however, that the subject under examination was that of the doctrine of the earth’s movement and the sun’s immobility - all historians agree to that.
‘Our commission, too, was motivated by very serious concerns of a theological nature, for the pope reveals its existence to the Florentine Ambassador Niccolini on Sept 4, 1632, he will justify his decision by saying that “it was a matter of the most perverse material that one could ever have in one’s hands… doctrine perverse to an extreme degree.” ’
The special commission set up to investigate and examine Galileo was made up of three of the most eminent theologians of the time. The first was Pope Urban VIII’s personal theologian, Monsignor Agostino Oreggi, an ex-pupil of Cardinal Bellarmine’s and a consultant to the Inquisition or Holy Office. The second investigator was also chosen because he too was ‘a pope’s man’, Fr Zaccaria Pasqualigo, a brilliant professor of theology. The third commissioner chosen was a Jesuit, Fr Melchoir Inchofer S.J., Professor of Theology at the Spanish University at Messina who was not only a theologian but had a fair knowledge of astronomy and mathematics as a reading of the Dialogue demanded.
Finally there was the Supreme Holy Office of Pope Urban VIII who declared:
The Inquisition’s Sentence
Fr Roberts continues the story:
‘… “And to the end,” said the document, “that so pernicious a doctrine might be altogether taken away, and spread no further to the heavy detriment of Catholic truth, a decree emanated from the Sacred Congregation of the Index [in 1616], in which books that treat of doctrine of the kind were prohibited, and that doctrine was declared false, and altogether contrary to the sacred and divine Scripture.”
And observe in what emphatic and unmistakable terms Rome repudiated the notion that the decree might be interpreted as a practical direction, as a measure of caution for the time being, or as anything short of an absolute settlement of the question.
“Understanding,” the Congregation said, “that, through the publication of a work at Florence entitled Dialogo di Galileo Galilei delle due massime Sisteme del Mundo Ptolemaico e Copernicano, the false opinion of the motion of the earth and the stability of the sun was gaining ground, it had examined the book, and had found it to be a manifest infringement of the injunction laid on you, since you in the same book have defended an opinion already condemned, and declared to your face to be so, in that you have tried in the said book, by various devices, to persuade yourself that you leave the matter undetermined, and the opinion expressed as probable; the which, however, is a most grave error, **since an opinion can in no manner be probable which has been declared, and defined to be, contrary to the divine Scripture.” ** Thus the declaration of the Index, for which all the authority of an absolutely true decision was claimed, was identified with the condemnatory judgement made known to Galileo by a Congregation held in the Pope’s presence.
These then are the Church bodies and theologians that you Mardulk, and you Texas, and the rest of you Copernicans out there claim DID NOT KNOW WHAT BELONGED TO FAITH AND MORALS AND WHAT DID NOT. These are the Church bodies that you Mardulk, and you Texas, and the rest of you Copernicans out there, claim did not know what was defined and immutable and what was not.
Personally I have FAITH in these Church institutions and instruments to represent the inspiration of God for truth and
CERTAINLY NOT THE OPINIONS OF THE COPERNICAN HERETICS.
Because of his position as ‘the Pope’s official scientist’ and his high standing within the state of Florence, Galileo was not like other men who came under the investigation of the sacred tribunal, for Pope Urban VIII himself directed the affair at all times. Had all the copies of Dialogue been successfully seized, some compromise might have been possible, but by the time the authorities acted a thousand copies of the book had been well distributed throughout Europe. To handle such a sensitive case the Pope ordered his nephew, Cardinal Francesco Barberini, to set up a special commission to investigate the matter. ‘Such an extraordinary commission could be justified only in cases of exceptional gravity, but above all in cases of a difficult theological nature,’ says the historian Pietro Redondi. In his book, Redondi, failing to see the seriousness of the heliocentric heresy, but aware of the significance of a special commission, proposes a theory that Galileo’s crime was the threat ‘atomism’ presented to the dogma of transubstantiation. The facts are however, that the subject under examination was that of the doctrine of the earth’s movement and the sun’s immobility - all historians agree to that.
‘Our commission, too, was motivated by very serious concerns of a theological nature, for the pope reveals its existence to the Florentine Ambassador Niccolini on Sept 4, 1632, he will justify his decision by saying that “it was a matter of the most perverse material that one could ever have in one’s hands… doctrine perverse to an extreme degree.” ’
The special commission set up to investigate and examine Galileo was made up of three of the most eminent theologians of the time. The first was Pope Urban VIII’s personal theologian, Monsignor Agostino Oreggi, an ex-pupil of Cardinal Bellarmine’s and a consultant to the Inquisition or Holy Office. The second investigator was also chosen because he too was ‘a pope’s man’, Fr Zaccaria Pasqualigo, a brilliant professor of theology. The third commissioner chosen was a Jesuit, Fr Melchoir Inchofer S.J., Professor of Theology at the Spanish University at Messina who was not only a theologian but had a fair knowledge of astronomy and mathematics as a reading of the Dialogue demanded.
Finally there was the Supreme Holy Office of Pope Urban VIII who declared:
The Inquisition’s Sentence
Fr Roberts continues the story:
‘… “And to the end,” said the document, “that so pernicious a doctrine might be altogether taken away, and spread no further to the heavy detriment of Catholic truth, a decree emanated from the Sacred Congregation of the Index [in 1616], in which books that treat of doctrine of the kind were prohibited, and that doctrine was declared false, and altogether contrary to the sacred and divine Scripture.”
And observe in what emphatic and unmistakable terms Rome repudiated the notion that the decree might be interpreted as a practical direction, as a measure of caution for the time being, or as anything short of an absolute settlement of the question.
“Understanding,” the Congregation said, “that, through the publication of a work at Florence entitled Dialogo di Galileo Galilei delle due massime Sisteme del Mundo Ptolemaico e Copernicano, the false opinion of the motion of the earth and the stability of the sun was gaining ground, it had examined the book, and had found it to be a manifest infringement of the injunction laid on you, since you in the same book have defended an opinion already condemned, and declared to your face to be so, in that you have tried in the said book, by various devices, to persuade yourself that you leave the matter undetermined, and the opinion expressed as probable; the which, however, is a most grave error, **since an opinion can in no manner be probable which has been declared, and defined to be, contrary to the divine Scripture.” ** Thus the declaration of the Index, for which all the authority of an absolutely true decision was claimed, was identified with the condemnatory judgement made known to Galileo by a Congregation held in the Pope’s presence.
These then are the Church bodies and theologians that you Mardulk, and you Texas, and the rest of you Copernicans out there claim DID NOT KNOW WHAT BELONGED TO FAITH AND MORALS AND WHAT DID NOT. These are the Church bodies that you Mardulk, and you Texas, and the rest of you Copernicans out there, claim did not know what was defined and immutable and what was not.
Personally I have FAITH in these Church institutions and instruments to represent the inspiration of God for truth and
CERTAINLY NOT THE OPINIONS OF THE COPERNICAN HERETICS.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.