Loyalty to the Pope or Church

[WanderingCathol]

itsjustdave1988:

You’ve made the following claims:
Has the Pope taught that we should pray with heretics, muslims and jews? If so, please provide the source. As it stands, your opinion is unconvincing without providing the applicable papal decree.
Huh? Do you agree with Pope Stephen I that the baptisms of heretics are valid? If Pope Stephen I is correct, than these heretics have prayed sacramentally to God and God has answered their baptismal prayer with baptismal grace, correct?

Also, when Cornelius, a pagan centurian (Acts 10) prayed to God, did God ignore him? If not, then did God accept his worship, although he was not yet either Jew or Christian?

You so easily assert this claim: “as taught by popes …” But you consistently fail to support your opinion with actual source information from any pope. I can only presume that you don’t have source information, and as such, we ought to dismiss your argument as unconvincing.

God bless,

Dave

His actions speak louder than words. read the catechism where it says that we worship the same God. I don’t worship the muslim God.

Btw, centurion was a believer and a catholic since there were no other churches. He belonged to the catholic church.

 

[EUSTACHIUS]

In WanderingCathol defense, you are all confusing proclaiming the Truth to non-believer and participate in worship-services with non-believers.

Yes Jesus commanded his disciples to proclaim to good news to all the nations of the earth, and to do so we must proclaim the truth to non-believers. However, as Pope Pius the XI encyclical made clear we are not to participate in worship services with non-believers, because by doing so you give them the impression that their form of worship is correct. And this is what going wrong right now, buddhist and hindus are being allow to worship in Catholic churches, all sort pagan religion are invited to pray to their false gods at Catholic sponsored gathering, Eastern Orthodox Church members are told they do not need to convert, and Pope goes to a mosque and kisses the koran. These action give non-believes the impression that their form of worship is correct and it leave the impression with Catholics that all religions are good. This is just simply wrong.

You all love to quote St. Robert Bellarmine, will what about this quote from De Romano Pontifice:

Just as it is licit to resist the Pontiff that aggresses the body, it is also licit to resist the one who aggresses souls or who disturbs civil order, or, above all, who attempts to destroy the Church. I say that it is licit to resist him by not doing what he orders and by preventing his will from being executed; it is not licit, however, to judge, punish or depose him, since these acts are proper to a superior.

A case can be made that the examples I stated above and many others are damaging the Church. Again this does not mean we abandon the Pope, but we must pray for him and all our bishops so that they will receive the grace necessary to defend and proclaim the Truth.

 

[Pax]

itsjustdave1988:

Hey Pax … we cited the same Scripture. It seems clear that WanderingCatholic was shooting from the hip.

I would like to pat myself on the back and say that “Great minds run together,” but I think I just got lucky on this one.

 

[WanderingCathol]

itsjustdave1988:

False dichotomy, often used by Protestants. Hmmmmmmmmm.

Its seems painfully obvious you started a argument that you were not prepared to support with any sort of scholastic rigor. Perhaps you ought to do some more reading and try again later.

If not, provide the source information for you supposed claims. What papal decree has Pope John Paul II promulgated which contradicts de fide dogmas of Catholicism?

God bless,

Dave

Oh the protestant label. I am shocked

1. Only catholics can worship God: ewtn.com/library/ENCYC/G16SUMMO.HTM

Read it and see how it utterly contradicts what Pope John Paul teaches. kensmen.com/catholic/mortaliumanimos.html

From the document:The Encyclical
“Mortalium Animos”
Given by His Holiness Pope Pius XI
January 6, 1928

1. A similar object is aimed at by some, in those matters which concern the New Law promulgated by Christ our Lord. For since they hold it for certain that men destitute of all religious sense are very rarely to be found, they seem to have founded on that belief a hope that the nations, although they differ among themselves in certain religious matters, will without much difficulty come to agree as brethren in professing certain doctrines, which form as it were a common basis of the spiritual life. For which reason conventions, meetings and addresses are frequently arranged by these persons, at which a large number of listeners are present, and at which all without distinction are invited to join in the discussion, both infidels of every kind, and Christians, even those who have unhappily fallen away from Christ or who with obstinacy and pertinacity deny His divine nature and mission. Certainly such attempts can nowise be approved by Catholics, founded as they are on that false opinion which considers all religions to be more or less good and praiseworthy, since they all in different ways manifest and signify that sense which is inborn in us all, and by which we are led to God and to the obedient acknowledgment of His rule. Not only are those who hold this opinion in error and deceived, but also in distorting the idea of true religion they reject it, and little by little, turn aside to naturalism and atheism, as it is called; from which it clearly follows that one who supports those who hold these theories and attempt to realize them, is altogether abandoning the divinely revealed religion.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Euchastus,

The only thing I’d like for WanderingCatholic to do is actually quote at least one Pope, just one!!! That way I have a concrete understanding of what the heck he is talking about.

He attempted to quote Augustine and failed. Then he made mention of a St. Lerins, which I presume he meant St. Vincent who lived in Lerins. Other that that, I’ve reviewed his position again and he makes simple and ambigious claims without providing supporting evidence of his claims.

St. Robert, you are probably aware, was speaking in a specific context, in response to this argument…

Argument 7. Any person is permitted to kill the pope if he is unjustly attacked by him. Therefore, even more so is it permitted for kings or a council to depose the pope if he disturbs the state, or if he tries to kill souls by his bad example.

(De Romano Pontifice, II.29.)
I believe St. Robert’s answer is with regard to “bad example.” St. Robert’s answer was to a specific theoretical question and ought to be interpreted in that context. We are certainly not bound to the Pope’s bad example. We are, however, bound to his God-given teaching authority, even if denied Christ three times or behaved hypoctritically like St. Peter. WanderingCatholic seems to be asserting that Pope John Paul II is a heretic and therefore we are not bound to his teaching authority. I disagree.

God bless,

Dave

 

[itsjustdave1988]

WanderingCatholic,

Okay, now we finally have an attempt to support the argument. You get points for that. However, can you now show me where Pope Gregory’s encyclical on mixed marriages states that only Catholics can worship God? Perhaps I missed it in my quick review of the encyclical.

God bless,

Dave

 

[WanderingCathol]

itsjustdave1988:

Euchastus,

The only thing I’d like for WanderingCatholic to do is actually quote at least one Pope, just one!!! That way I have a concrete understanding of what the heck he is talking about.

He attempted to quote Augustine and failed. Then he made mention of a St. Lerins, which I presume he meant St. Vincent who lived in Lerins. Other that that, I’ve reviewed his position again and he makes simple and ambigious claims without providing supporting evidence of his claims.

St. Robert, you are probably aware, was speaking in a specific context, in response to this argument…
I believe St. Robert’s answer is with regard to “bad example.” St. Robert’s answer was to a specific theoretical question and ought to be interpreted in that context. We are certainly not bound to the Pope’s bad example. We are, however, bound to his God-given teaching authority, even if denied Christ three times or behaved hypoctritically like St. Peter. WanderingCatholic seems to be asserting that Pope John Paul II is a heretic and therefore we are not bound to his teaching authority. I disagree.

God bless,

Dave

I gave you two above. come on give me the not infallible answer.

Do I believe that Pope John Paul has taught heresy? yes I do.

Btw, I thought that I included “Vincent” of Lerins. Don’t claim victory yet.

Also, Saint Augustine did say that no one man makes up the mind of the church.

 

[WanderingCathol]

itsjustdave1988:

WanderingCatholic,

Okay, now we finally have an attempt to support the argument. You get points for that. However, can you now show me where Pope Gregory’s encyclical on mixed marriages states that only Catholics can worship God? Perhaps I missed it in my quick review of the encyclical.

God bless,

Dave

Here we go with the modernist catholic word game. But since you asked, here it goes.

Next let Us start with the things which concern the faith which, as We mentioned above, some are endangering in order to introduce greater freedom for mixed marriages. You know how zealously Our predecessors taught that very article of faith which these dare to deny, namely the necessity of the Catholic faith and of unity for salvation. The words of that celebrated disciple of the apostles, martyred St. Ignatius, in his letter to the Philadelphians are relevant to this matter: “Be not deceived, my brother; if anyone follows a schismatic, he will not attain the inheritance of the kingdom of God.” Moreover, St. Augustine and the other African bishops who met in the Council of Cirta in the year 412 explained the same thing at greater length: “Whoever has separated himself from the Catholic Church, no matter how laudably he lives, will not have eternal life, but has earned the anger of God because of this one crime: that he abandoned his union with Christ.” Omitting other appropriate passages which are almost numberless in the writings of the Fathers, We shall praise St. Gregory the Great who expressly testifies that this indeed is the teaching of the Catholic Church. He says: "The holy universal Church teaches that it is not possible to worship God truly except in her and asserts that all who are outside of her will not be saved.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

WanderingCatholic,

Also, I see that you have quoted from Pius XI’s where he refuted indifferentism.
Now, please show me where Pope John Paul II’s teaching is contradictory to either of these popes of blessed memory. You know … by quoting a source. Surely, with his long papacy, he must have written something by now which will help your argument, no?

God bless,

Dave

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Are you aware that mixed marriages are still prohibited by the Code of Canon Law?

**CHAPTER VI: MIXED MARRIAGES **
Canon 1124 Without the express permission of the competent authority, marriage is prohibited between two baptised persons, one of whom was baptised in the catholic Church or received into it after baptism and has not defected from it by a formal act, the other of whom belongs to a Church or ecclesial community not in full communion with the catholic Church.

Where’s the contradiction?

You’ve asserted that somewhere in Pope Gregory’s encyclical, he claims that only Catholics can worship God. Where is it? What paragraph? No word game … just a simple question appealing to your scholastic integrity.

God bless,

Dave

 

[WanderingCathol]

itsjustdave1988:

WanderingCatholic,

Also, I see that you have quoted from Pius XI’s where he refuted indifferentism.
Now, please show me where Pope John Paul II’s teaching is contradictory to either of these popes of blessed memory. You know … by quoting a source. Surely, with his long papacy, he must have written something by now which will help your argument, no?

God bless,

Dave

Thank you for saying indifferentism which is so prevalant and rampant in the modernist catholic church of today. You know the one that says that muslim, heretics and jews worship the same God, etc…

But read this and see how utterly departed the modernist church has drifted.

Next let Us start with the things which concern the faith which, as We mentioned above, some are endangering in order to introduce greater freedom for mixed marriages. You know how zealously Our predecessors taught that very article of faith which these dare to deny, namely the necessity of the Catholic faith and of unity for salvation. The words of that celebrated disciple of the apostles, martyred St. Ignatius, in his letter to the Philadelphians are relevant to this matter: “Be not deceived, my brother; if anyone follows a schismatic, he will not attain the inheritance of the kingdom of God.” Moreover, St. Augustine and the other African bishops who met in the Council of Cirta in the year 412 explained the same thing at greater length: “Whoever has separated himself from the Catholic Church, no matter how laudably he lives, will not have eternal life, but has earned the anger of God because of this one crime: that he abandoned his union with Christ.” Omitting other appropriate passages which are almost numberless in the writings of the Fathers,** We shall praise St. Gregory the Great who expressly testifies that this indeed is the teaching of the Catholic Church. He says: "The holy universal Church teaches that it is not possible to worship God truly except in her and asserts that all who are outside of her will not be saved**.

 

[Br.Dan_OCD]

There will probably be 20 new posts up on this thread by the time i get my two cents in, but…

First, I believe WanderingCatholic was referring to this statement of Pope St. Gregory the Great, which was quoted in the encyclical on mixed marriages: “The holy universal Church teaches that it is not possible to worship God truly except in her and asserts that all who are outside of her will not be saved.”

The problem here is this: what does “worship truly” and “in her” mean? We obviously have Biblical precedent of non-Catholics and their worship of God, which was accepted by God. Since the Church is the Body of Christ, perhaps “in her” means “in Christ.” No true worship of God is possible unless it is in Christ. I think we can all agree on that.

If, however, you say that one must be Catholic to offer true worship, say there is a ten year old Lutheran boy offering a prayer to God, is his prayer automatically worthless because he’s not Catholic? Would God ignore him even though the poor kid is doing the best he can?

I don’t know, I think the position of WanderingCatholic is growing on me. I mean, JP II never uses the “royal we” in his writings and that is a blatant break with Catholic Tradition! Actually, WanderingCatholic, you seem like a rabble-rousing, “How can I rile them up today?” sort of fellow, which is fine. Give it your best shot.

 

[WanderingCathol]

itsjustdave1988:

Are you aware that mixed marriages are still prohibited by the Code of Canon Law?

**CHAPTER VI: MIXED MARRIAGES **
Canon 1124 Without the express permission of the competent authority, marriage is prohibited between two baptised persons, one of whom was baptised in the catholic Church or received into it after baptism and has not defected from it by a formal act, the other of whom belongs to a Church or ecclesial community not in full communion with the catholic Church.

Where’s the contradiction?

You’ve asserted that somewhere in Pope Gregory’s encyclical, he claims that only Catholics can worship God. Where is it? What paragraph? No word game … just a simple question appealing to your scholastic integrity.

God bless,

Dave

Next let Us start with the things which concern the faith which, as We mentioned above, some are endangering in order to introduce greater freedom for mixed marriages. You know how zealously Our predecessors taught that very article of faith which these dare to deny, namely the necessity of the Catholic faith and of unity for salvation. The words of that celebrated disciple of the apostles, martyred St. Ignatius, in his letter to the Philadelphians are relevant to this matter: “Be not deceived, my brother; if anyone follows a schismatic, he will not attain the inheritance of the kingdom of God.” Moreover, St. Augustine and the other African bishops who met in the Council of Cirta in the year 412 explained the same thing at greater length: “Whoever has separated himself from the Catholic Church, no matter how laudably he lives, will not have eternal life, but has earned the anger of God because of this one crime: that he abandoned his union with Christ.” Omitting other appropriate passages which are almost numberless in the writings of the Fathers,** We shall praise St. Gregory the Great who expressly testifies that this indeed is the teaching of the Catholic Church. He says: "The holy universal Church teaches that it is not possible to worship God truly except in her and asserts that all who are outside of her will not be saved.**

 

[WanderingCathol]

Br. Dan:

There will probably be 20 new posts up on this thread by the time i get my two cents in, but…

First, I believe WanderingCatholic was referring to this statement of Pope St. Gregory the Great, which was quoted in the encyclical on mixed marriages: “The holy universal Church teaches that it is not possible to worship God truly except in her and asserts that all who are outside of her will not be saved.”

The problem here is this: what does “worship truly” and “in her” mean? We obviously have Biblical precedent of non-Catholics and their worship of God, which was accepted by God. Since the Church is the Body of Christ, perhaps “in her” means “in Christ.” No true worship of God is possible unless it is in Christ. I think we can all agree on that.

If, however, you say that one must be Catholic to offer true worship, say there is a ten year old Lutheran boy offering a prayer to God, is his prayer automatically worthless because he’s not Catholic? Would God ignore him even though the poor kid is doing the best he can?

I don’t know, I think the position of WanderingCatholic is growing on me. I mean, JP II never uses the “royal we” in his writings and that is a blatant break with Catholic Tradition! Actually, WanderingCatholic, you seem like a rabble-rousing, “How can I rile them up today?” sort of fellow, which is fine. Give it your best shot.

Not a rabble-rouser

Just want these catholics to be more catholic.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

"The holy universal Church teaches that it is not possible to worship God truly except in her and asserts that all who are outside of her will not be saved.

Ah yes. Who is “in” and who is “outside” of her? Surely you aren’t advocating the Feeneyists interpretation of this text are you? You are aware that the Holy Office well before Pope John Paul II’s time opposed Fr. Feeney’s interpretation of who is within the Catholic Church, right?.

From Pope St. Pius X (and no scholar has ever accused him of modernism that I am aware of) …

Q: But if a man through no fault of his own is outside the Church, can he be saved?
A: **If he is outside the Church through no fault of his, that is, if he is in good faith, and if he has received Baptism, or at least has the implicit desire of Baptism; and if, moreover, he sincerely seeks the truth and does God’s will as best he can such a man is indeed separated from the body of the Church, but is united to the soul of the Church and consequently is on the way of salvation **(Catechism of Pope St. Pius X, Q. 29, Article Nine)

Now is it your contention that Pope St. Pius X was also a modernist? A heretic?

God bless,

Dave

 

[WanderingCathol]

Br. Dan:

There will probably be 20 new posts up on this thread by the time i get my two cents in, but…

First, I believe WanderingCatholic was referring to this statement of Pope St. Gregory the Great, which was quoted in the encyclical on mixed marriages: “The holy universal Church teaches that it is not possible to worship God truly except in her and asserts that all who are outside of her will not be saved.”

The problem here is this: what does “worship truly” and “in her” mean? We obviously have Biblical precedent of non-Catholics and their worship of God, which was accepted by God. Since the Church is the Body of Christ, perhaps “in her” means “in Christ.” No true worship of God is possible unless it is in Christ. I think we can all agree on that.

If, however, you say that one must be Catholic to offer true worship, say there is a ten year old Lutheran boy offering a prayer to God, is his prayer automatically worthless because he’s not Catholic? Would God ignore him even though the poor kid is doing the best he can?

I don’t know, I think the position of WanderingCatholic is growing on me. I mean, JP II never uses the “royal we” in his writings and that is a blatant break with Catholic Tradition! Actually, WanderingCatholic, you seem like a rabble-rousing, “How can I rile them up today?” sort of fellow, which is fine. Give it your best shot.

Dan,

All the catholics throught out the history of the church knew exactly what you quoted above meant. It has been taught for centuries until the modernist heresy fell upon us. It is today in the moder world where we want to reinterpret ecyclicals and say " well that was no an infallible statement" and try to play word games.

 

[WanderingCathol]

itsjustdave1988:

Ah yes. Who is “in” and who is “outside” of her? Surely you aren’t advocating the Feeneyists interpretation of this text are you? You are aware that the Holy Office well before Pope John Paul II’s time opposed Fr. Feeney’s interpretation of who is within the Catholic Church, right?.

From Pope St. Pius X (and no scholar has ever accused him of modernism that I am aware of) …
Now is it your contention that Pope St. Pius X was also a modernist? A heretic?

God bless,

Dave

modernist word games.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

modernist word games

Just so I’m clear, you ARE in fact accusing Pope St. Pius X of modernism??? Yes or no?

 

[WanderingCathol]

itsjustdave1988:

Just so I’m clear, you ARE in fact accusing Pope St. Pius X of modernism??? Yes or no?

Sorry. Those words were not meant for you.

The issue is not Piux X. No he is not a heretic. Pius X never says ( assume) that muslim and jews and heretics worship the same God.

 

[Pax]

Dave,

I think you’re on a roll