St. Catherine of Siena quote source?

[itsjustdave1988]

---

You know —what you posted above goes against Catholic teaching. We are not to do a wrong (not defy the vicar even if he were the devil incarnate) so that some type of good will result from it.

I disagree that it goes against Catholic teaching, given the context of St. Catherine’s stated belief.

St. Thomas Aquinas, in his Summa Theologica, describes three kinds of obedience: Sufficient obedience, Perfect obedience, and Indiscreet obedience. ONLY indiscreet obedience is a sin, right? What does St. Catherine assert with regard to the impossibility of indiscreet obedience to the Roman Pontiff?

From St. Catherine of Sienna’s letter to Brother Antonio of Nizza:"**For divine obedience never prevents us from obedience to the Holy Father: nay, the more perfect the one, the more perfect is the other. And we ought always to be subject to his commands and obedient unto death. However indiscreet obedience to him might seem, and however it should deprive us of mental peace and consolation, we ought to obey; and I consider that to do the opposite is a great imperfection, and deceit of the devil." Thus, according to St. Catherine, she is describing what “might seem” to be, which should never prevent us from obedience to the Holy Father. Consequently, when understood in the context of her entire body of works, St. Catherine asserts that even if it might SEEM that the vicar is the devil incarnate, the reality is that DIVINE OBEDIENCE can never prevent us from obedience to the Roman Pontiff. In other words, if I were to conclude that the vicar is the devil incarnate, and that obedience to him would be indiscreet, that would be in reality a error, “a deceit of the devil” which I have fallen victim to. Thus, those who would assert that they can disobey the Roman Pontiff according to the teaching of St. Thomas Aquinas’ view of indiscreet obedience are themselves decieved, in the view of St. Catherine of Sienna.

You may not like the teaching of this saint and Doctor of Catholicism, but to claim that to abide in it is contrary to Catholic teaching is absurd.

 

[PKinsale]

If I recall correctly, there was a female saint (not Catherine) who had a vision of Our Lord speaking from the crucifix where she was praying. He gave her instructions counter to those of her spiritual director. She realized instantly that the vision was false.

Experts can, I’m sure, provide details or corrections to the above.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

---

There can be a problem when the line between a Pope “privately erring” and his official capacity becomes blurred. Using that quote from St. Catherine actually does more to damage the papacy --then help it.

Perhaps you should put St. Catherine’s works on the list of forbidden books.

 

[Walking_Home]

I disagree that it goes against Catholic teaching, given the context of St. Catherine’s stated belief.

St. Thomas Aquinas, in his Summa Theologica, describes three kinds of obedience: Sufficient obedience, Perfect obedience, and Indiscreet obedience. ONLY indiscreet obedience is a sin, right? What does St. Catherine assert with regard to the impossibility of indiscreet obedience to the Roman Pontiff?

From St. Catherine of Sienna’s letter to Brother Antonio of Nizza:“For divine obedience never prevents us from obedience to the Holy Father: nay, the more perfect the one, the more perfect is the other. And we ought always to be subject to his commands and obedient unto death. However indiscreet obedience to him might seem, and however it should deprive us of mental peace and consolation, we ought to obey; and I consider that to do the opposite is a great imperfection, and deceit of the devil.” Thus, according to St. Catherine, she is describing what “might seem” to be, which should never prevent us from obedience to the Holy Father. Consequently, when understood in the context of her entire body of works, St. Catherine asserts that even if it might SEEM that the vicar is the devil incarnate, the reality is that DIVINE OBEDIENCE can never prevent us from obedience to the Roman Pontiff. In other words, if I were to conclude that the vicar is the devil incarnate, and that obedience to him would be indiscreet, that would be in reality a error, “a deceit of the devil” which I have fallen victim to. Thus, those who would assert that they can disobey the Roman Pontiff according to the teaching of St. Thomas Aquinas’ view of indiscreet obedience are themselves decieved, in the view of St. Catherine of Sienna.

You may not like the teaching of this saint and Doctor of Catholicism, but to claim that to abide in it is contrary to Catholic teaching is absurd.

---

Either way—whether it just “seems” that the vicar is the devil incarnate—it still goes against Catholic teaching. It is what is being reflected that can cause damage. As I stated prior–the use of that quote does nothing to help the papacy.

 

[bear06]

There can be a problem when the line between a Pope “privately erring” and his official capacity becomes blurred. Using that quote from St. Catherine actually does more to damage the papacy --then help it.

Actually, I think using a fake quote does damage to the papacy.

If the line is truly blurred and one can’t figure out if it is a private wish or public teaching (not really sure how that happens but for the sake of argument…) one must always go with the pope. If it is a mistake then it would be his mistake. God would not find fault in us. God will, however, find fault in us if we disobey the pope and we are wrong. Big fault.

 

[bear06]

---

Either way—whether it just “seems” that the vicar is the devil incarnate—it still goes against Catholic teaching. It is what is being reflected that can cause damage. As I stated prior–the use of that quote does nothing to help the papacy.

Tell it to St. Catherine.

There are more quotes than that one. Here are some:

St. Catherine of Siena wrote to Barnabas, Viscount Lord of Milan: "He is insane who rises or acts contrary to this Vicar who holds the keys of the blood of Christ crucified

He who will be disobedient to Christ on earth, who stands in the stead of Christ in heaven, will not share in the fruit of the blood of the Son of God

When He returned to Me, rising to Heaven from the conversation of men at the Ascension, He left you this sweet key of obedience; for as you know He left His vicar, the Christ, on earth, whom you are all obliged to obey until death, and whoever is outside His obedience is in a state of damnation, as I have already told you in another place

Also let’s look at some other teachings of the Church:

Council of Trent, Dz 1728:

The Holy Council declares moreover: The Church has always had, in the dispensation of the sacraments, their substance being saved , the power to decide or to modify what she judges better to suit the spiritual utility of those who receive them or with respect to the sacraments themselves, according to

Mediator Dei

In every measure taken, then, let proper contact with the ecclesiastical hierarchy be maintained. Let no one arrogate to himself the right to make regulations and impose them on others at will. Only the Sovereign Pontiff, as the successor of Saint Peter, charged by the divine Redeemer with the feeding of His entire flock, and with him, in obedience to the Apostolic See, the bishops ‘whom the Holy Ghost has placed … to rule the Church of God,’ have the right and the duty to govern the Christian people.

Maybe someone can show me a quote that says if we obey the Holy Father and he’s blown it that *we *are going to hell.

 

[Walking_Home]

Actually, I think using a fake quote does damage to the papacy.

If the line is truly blurred and one can’t figure out if it is a private wish or public teaching (not really sure how that happens but for the sake of argument…) one must always go with the pope. If it is a mistake then it would be his mistake. God would not find fault in us. God will, however, find fault in us if we disobey the pope and we are wrong. Big fault.

---

You think not. What excuse are we to use—when we stand before God–the Pope made me do it.

 

[bear06]

Tell it to St. Catherine.

There are more quotes than that one. Here are some:
Treatsie of Obedience

He left you this sweet key of obedience; for as you know He left His vicar, the Christ, on earth, whom you are all obliged to obey until death, and whoever is outside His obedience is in a state of damnation, as I have already told you in another place

 

[bear06]

You think not. What excuse are we to use—when we stand before God–the Pope made me do it.

Uh, hello, you said when the line was blurred. We’re not going to have to answer for a blurry line. All we need to do is follow the pope if such case existed. The blame would be then his.

 

[Walking_Home]

Tell it to St. Catherine.

There are more quotes than that one. Here are some:

Also let’s look at some other teachings of the Church:

Council of Trent, Dz 1728:

The Holy Council declares moreover: The Church has always had, in the dispensation of the sacraments, their substance being saved , the power to decide or to modify what she judges better to suit the spiritual utility of those who receive them or with respect to the sacraments themselves, according to

 

[bear06]

Council of Trent, Dz 1728:

The Holy Council declares moreover: The Church has always had, in the dispensation of the sacraments, their substance being saved , the power to decide or to modify what she judges better to suit the spiritual utility of those who receive them or with respect to the sacraments themselves, according to

Mediator Dei

In every measure taken, then, let proper contact with the ecclesiastical hierarchy be maintained. Let no one arrogate to himself the right to make regulations and impose them on others at will. Only the Sovereign Pontiff, as the successor of Saint Peter, charged by the divine Redeemer with the feeding of His entire flock, and with him, in obedience to the Apostolic See, the bishops ‘whom the Holy Ghost has placed … to rule the Church of God,’ have the right and the duty to govern the Christian people.

 

[Walking_Home]

Uh, hello, you said when the line was blurred. We’re not going to have to answer for a blurry line. All we need to do is follow the pope if such case existed. The blame would be then his.

---

That would be true—only if we did not know our own history—our own link to Christ Himself. If we were ignorant of what was before and what is now.

 

[bear06]

You may also take into consideration that St. Catherine and the Council of Trent—did not foresee —that the “Spirit of Vat II” was going to take over in our time.

You might also take into consideration that both were inspired by the Holy Spirit although not in the same way. It’s kind of hard to say dogmatic statements like Pastor Aerternus have no inspired forthought.

 

[bear06]

That would be true—only if we did not know our own history—our own link to Christ Himself. If we were ignorant of what was before and what is now.

Well, now I’m not sure what you are talking about here. Are you saying that a pope can lead us astray in his official teaching capacity?

 

[Walking_Home]

Well, now I’m not sure what you are talking about here. Are you saying that a pope can lead us astray in his official teaching capacity?

Originally Posted by bear06
Uh, hello, you said when the line was blurred. We’re not going to have to answer for a blurry line. All we need to do is follow the pope if such case existed. The blame would be then his.

---

What I am saying is—by knowing our own history —we can know when and how the line is being blurred. Our history is our only connection to Christ–to knowing what Truth is and what it is not—otherwise we become a make it up and/or a change it up as we go Church. Falling back on --the line is blurred so we will not be answerable to God—is no excuse when we do have access to–and knowledge of our past.

 

[laudamus_te]

Maybe someone can show me a quote that says if we obey the Holy Father and he’s blown it that *we *are going to hell - one that’s not bogus.

How about using your God-given intelligence, instead of looking for a quote? You may not follow anyone, including the Pope, in error. As a Catholic, you are expected to know what is the truth and what is in error. You will suffer the consequences if you do, and using the “obedience” excuse isn’t going to cut it. This is my understanding of our Faith, as I have been taught, and I’m not going to sift through the internet for a handy little quote to back it up. It’s basic Catholicism we’re talking about here. If you disagree, it’s your soul.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

How about using your God-given intelligence, instead of looking for a quote? You may not follow anyone, including the Pope, in error. As a Catholic, you are expected to know what is the truth and what is in error. You will suffer the consequences if you do, and using the “obedience” excuse isn’t going to cut it. This is my understanding of our Faith, as I have been taught, and I’m not going to sift through the internet for a handy little quote to back it up. It’s basic Catholicism we’re talking about here. If you disagree, it’s your soul.

It’s also basic Catholicism that by virtue of the charism of his office, the Pope cannot lead the Church into error.

 

[AlexV]

The problem is that the number of times the popes have actually used their infallible teaching capacity is quite a bit fewer than what some people seem to think.

 

[laudamus_te]

It’s also basic Catholicism that by virtue of the charism of his office, the Pope cannot lead the Church into error.

Yes, but only “when he solemnly declares or promulgates to the Church a dogmatic teaching on faith or morals as being contained in divine revelation, or at least being intimately connected to divine revelation.” (Wikipedia)

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Yes, but only “when he solemnly declares or promulgates to the Church a dogmatic teaching on faith or morals as being contained in divine revelation, or at least being intimately connected to divine revelation.” (Wikipedia)

The disciplines of the Church (into which category the liturgies of the Church fall) enjoy a negative infallibility per the Council of Trent, which clearly anathematized any who stated that those disciplines could lead the faitful into impiety. That’s not the opinion of one saint, that’s an act proposed by a Council of the Church and promulgated by the Supreme Pontiff.