S
StDominic
Guest
I heard Steven Heiner of True Restoration conducted an interview of Bp. Williamson after his expulsion. Does anyone here have a link to that video? It seems it was online then taken down. Thanks
- Status
T
thinkandmull
Guest
It’s kind of funny that the SSPX is concerned with the obedience of Williamson, after all they’ve said and done over all the years. The SSPX still are unable to comprehend how it could be said in truth that the Jews worship worship the same God as we do. Attempts to help them understand this have failed. -shrugs- Even one of their favorite old theologians essentially taught as much, but maybe they are ignorant about this:
The confirmation of our argument is that the purpose of [state] power is
to maintain the state in peace and justice, which cannot be done unless the state is also induced to live virtuously; but men cannot live according to moral and natural virtue, without true religion and the worship of the one God; therefore, natural power and the jurisdiction of a human state are extended to include this purpose…even a pagan—that is, a non-Christian—king, if he has a knowledge of the true God, may coerce his own subjects into believing that truth (cogere subditos ad idem credendum), either by their own reasoning if they are educated, or by putting human faith in more learned men, if they are ignorant Suarez de Fide disputation 18, section 4 para 7-8
The confirmation of our argument is that the purpose of [state] power is
to maintain the state in peace and justice, which cannot be done unless the state is also induced to live virtuously; but men cannot live according to moral and natural virtue, without true religion and the worship of the one God; therefore, natural power and the jurisdiction of a human state are extended to include this purpose…even a pagan—that is, a non-Christian—king, if he has a knowledge of the true God, may coerce his own subjects into believing that truth (cogere subditos ad idem credendum), either by their own reasoning if they are educated, or by putting human faith in more learned men, if they are ignorant Suarez de Fide disputation 18, section 4 para 7-8
L
Lormar
Guest
S
StDominic
Guest
Those who deny the Second Person worship the Trinity‽
S
StDominic
Guest
Suarez is very heterodox compared to the Angelic Doctor, but anyways…
States have a duty to uphold the 1st Commandment, but I don’t see how that proves Jews, who deny the Second Person of the Trinity, worship the Trinity, Who Catholic worship.
T
The_Scott
Guest
The Jewish conception of God is incomplete; that does not make it false.
The Old Testament God is the very same as the New Testament God. To assume that Jews worship a different God is akin to Marcionism.
S
StDominic
Guest
Of course
But the Old Testament Hebrews/Israelites are not the same as modern-day Jews. The former were entirely ignorant of God’s triune nature; those after Christ can be invincibly ignorant. The former’s religion ended definitively at the destruction of the Temple circa A.D. 70, thus the latter’s religion is something different.
I suppose, if I were talking about Jews before Christ (who I think are better termed Israelites or Hebrews).
Anyways, what do all these responses even have to do with the OP?
S
StDominic
Guest
Where does the Catechism say modern-day Jews are the same as the Old Testament Israelites/Hebrews? This whole argument hinges on their equivalence.
So the Second Coming is for modern-day Jews what Christ’s birth 2,000 years ago was for Old Testament Hebrews/Israelites? Do they expect him to be (re-)born of a virgin, etc., as the Old Testaments prophets, notably Isaiah, foretold?
This is blasphemous and is certainly fallible, since it comes from a non-dogmatic document of Vatican II. Allah, a god who can contradict himself (cf. Pope Benedict XVI’s Regensburg Lecture) and who commands the deaths and forced conversions of “infidels”, is a devil.
So the Second Coming is for modern-day Jews what Christ’s birth 2,000 years ago was for Old Testament Hebrews/Israelites? Do they expect him to be (re-)born of a virgin, etc., as the Old Testaments prophets, notably Isaiah, foretold?
This is blasphemous and is certainly fallible, since it comes from a non-dogmatic document of Vatican II. Allah, a god who can contradict himself (cf. Pope Benedict XVI’s Regensburg Lecture) and who commands the deaths and forced conversions of “infidels”, is a devil.
M
Melchior_1
Guest
Dogmatic Constitution
T
twf
Guest
- The name Allah is also used by Christians in their worship of the Triune God. It is simply the Arabic word for God. Your statement is very insulting towards centuries of Arabic speaking Catholic tradition.
- A false or incomplete understanding of God does not mean they are not seeking to understand the one true God of Abraham.
- All people are included in the plan of salvation God wills that all men be saved through His Son’s Church. Are you excluding Muslims from the plan of salvation? The catechism no where says that all Muslims will be saved nor that Islam is in itself salvic.
P
pnewton
Guest
It doesn’t. It has to do with you subsequent post (#4). As to the OP, there is not any substance there. Some random blogger claims this unlikely interview. His credentials are “male” and “English Lit. major”.
blogger.com/profile/16207641562001375125
This reminds me of the commercial where the woman thinks nothing can be on the internet unless it is true.
S
StDominic
Guest
Vatican II was not entirely infallible because it “ha evitato di pronunciare in modo straordinario dogmi dotati della nota di infallibilità [avoided pronouncing in an extraordinary way (newly defined) dogmas endowed with the note of infallibility]” (Pope Paul VI audience, 12 January 1966) and “In view of conciliar practice and the pastoral purpose of the present Council, this sacred Synod defines matters of faith or morals as binding on the Church only when the Synod itself openly declares so” (Council’s General Secretary, 16 November 1964), which it never did for its doctrinal novelties.
S
StDominic
Guest
He does most of the Bp. Williamson interviews. I’m surprised you’ve never heard of him.It doesn’t. It has to do with you subsequent post (#4). As to the OP, there is not any substance there. Some random blogger claims this unlikely interview. His credentials are “male” and “English Lit. major”.
blogger.com/profile/16207641562001375125
S
Sirach2
Guest
If it was on line and then taken down, how would anyone have a greater opportunity than you to find it? Why would any of us even want to look for it or keep a copy of it before it was taken down? What is your interest in this matter?
S
Sirach2
Guest
Doctrinal “novelties?” Do you customarily use such disrespectful language in speaking about the Church’s doctrines?
M
Melchior_1
Guest
Vatican II was either;
A) A pastoral council that clarified existing dogma. Same message, same belief, just presented differently. “Here’s H2O, but instead of presenting it as a solid ice cube, here it is the same amount of H2O, but in liquid format”. Because it was a group of bishops publicly teaching doctrine of the Faith, it was an exercise in infallibility.
B) Any new dogma declared with the bishops and Pope using a council is an exercise in infallibility.
C) Both of the above.
Either way; the council was infallible. The Pontiff has spoken. Assent is required. Which is roughly what Pope Benedict XVI and the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith are saying.
H
Hunter53
Guest
I don’t care how many fancy words they use, when they deny Christ, they do not worship the same Gad as me. Most of them hate Christ.
M
Melchior_1
Guest
Hey, if you want to disagree with our last four Popes and the entire Old Testament, be my guest!
P
pnewton
Guest
Does your misspelling change the nature of God whom you worship. The Lord God is one. There is no other. If one worships God, there is only one object of worship. One can be wrong about the nature of God, but that does not make two Gods instead of one. A man can love a woman and be very wrong about who she is and what she is like. Another man may love her because he knows this woman. That does not make the one woman into two women.
Consider this, even at best, we can still know only a fraction of who God is. Does that mean we do not worship God because we do not know Him fully?
H
Hunter53
Guest
So by disagreeing with the last four but yet I’m on the same page as the other 261 popes.
- Status