The Catholic Circle: orthodox vs. heterodox

[Daprato]

Is the SSPX deprived of salvation if they are indeed Schismatics/Heretics?

Of course not. By definition Orthodox Christians are schismatics and Protestants are heretics. There is no Church teaching that suggests that either group is automatically precluded from the opportunity of eternal life in Christ due to their choice of religion.

 

[Daprato]

While your references are correct, it only serves to prove the point; the word “modernism” or “modernist” is used pejoratively by those who, even if they had read the two documents, could not use the term correctly.

Modernism is a vague term, not one clearly defined, and it is an issue from the late 1800s that traces its lineage back to the Enlightenment and to the French Revolution. There have been any number of “isms” since then, which have nothing particular to do with modernism as a philosophical stance, which have impacted issues in the Church. However, if one is lacking in education in philosophy, it is much easier to sling a term around than it is to engage in critical analysis.

Further, the word is used for people who are operating within the paramters of what the Church allows, but are offending those who feel that things should be done differently; so those who are perfectly within acceptable parameters are painted with a term that really means “I don’t like what you are doing and I think you are wrong”.

Amen.

 

[SemperFidelis]

The SSPX are not Catholic. They are schismatics at best, heretics at worst.

That’s nice that you think so, but fortunately the Holy See doesn’t. Heretics really? Clearly you have your own little definition for heretics that does not at all coincide with the Catechism’s.

FOR ABOUT THE FIFTEENTH TIME:

CAN YOU SHOW ME HOW YOU CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE SSPX ARE HERETICS? DO YOU IGNORE THIS QUESTION BECAUSE YOU HAVE NO ANSWERS?

 

[SemperFidelis]

Is a “Traditional Catholic” as opposed to a traditionally-minded Catholic a new Protestant denomination like the “American Catholic Church?”

No because a Traditional Catholic IS a traditionally-minded Catholic.

 

[SemperFidelis]

While your references are correct, it only serves to prove the point; the word “modernism” or “modernist” is used pejoratively by those who, even if they had read the two documents, could not use the term correctly.

Modernism is a vague term, not one clearly defined, and it is an issue from the late 1800s that traces its lineage back to the Enlightenment and to the French Revolution. There have been any number of “isms” since then, which have nothing particular to do with modernism as a philosophical stance, which have impacted issues in the Church. However, if one is lacking in education in philosophy, it is much easier to sling a term around than it is to engage in critical analysis.

Further, the word is used for people who are operating within the paramters of what the Church allows, but are offending those who feel that things should be done differently; so those who are perfectly within acceptable parameters are painted with a term that really means “I don’t like what you are doing and I think you are wrong”.

While some people might use the term incorrectly, I apply it to those who advocate a position condemned by Bl. Pius IX or St. Pius X. It’s really not that hard.

 

[TMC]

You still haven’t given me an example of how a Traditional Catholic is heterodox.

Again its all in the defintion of Traditional Catholic. A Traditional Catholic that denies the validity of the consecration in a NO Mass is heterodox, I would say. A Traditional Catholic that denies the VII teaching on ecumenism and the availability of saving Grace to non-Catholics and non-Christians is heterodox. I am sure there are a few others, but these are the ones I hear the most. Not all people who refer to themselves as Traditional believe those things, though, so its hard to say. None of that amounts to heresy. And neither schism nor heresy prevents salvation, although the Church would say it makes it more difficult.

 

[sinningcatholic]

having read so many of these responses, i say we are all heretics. this turned into a longer e than expected; i just love you really don’t care about how the Holy Ghost/Holy Spirit sent by Christ calls you to Him. I am a conservative Catholic, and there is room for everyone—because it is Christ Who Speaks through me==PROVIDED I USE FREE CHOICE TO SAY YES. i can onlyh think for myself, and have NO idea what is in the MIND OF OUR LORD==== that is not mine to know–heretical activity/thoughts cause people to believe they have better knowledge of the MIND OF GOD than others. that’s HERESY.

Breakdown of common responses in this category:

Each position expresses a subset of preferred comprehension of pieces of the Whole. The inherent problem is each position implies a superiority in accessing THE MIND OF GOD. I am a conservative Catholic, have no problem with TLM or the Vatican Council II R E Q U E ST for an enlightening flood from the Holy Ghost infused into the Church.

THE HERESY IS IN CALLING THE OTHER AN HERETIC (implicit demand on a the One Body to uniformly act–vs free will exloration and interim punitive judgment called heresy.) So

NO TO WOMEN PRIESTS;

NO SEX OUTSIDE OF MARRIAGES AMONG CATHOLICS UNTIL BLESSED BY THE MINISTRY OF THE CHURCH

REQUIREMENT OF CONFESSION FOR THE FORGIVENESS OF SINS THROUGH THE MINISTRY OF THE CHURCH.

SANCTITY OF LIFE FROM CONCEPTION TO NATURAL DEATH

UNBREAKABLE MARRIAGES BROUGHT TOGETHER BY
G O D
This means IF GOD DID NOT INITIATE AND SANCTIFY THE UNION PRIOR TO THE CATHOLIC MARRIAGE BLESSING, THEN A MARRIAGE NEVER EXISTED—read the CCL----the Church law has not changed. The provision of Annulment is a grace of forgiveness–not an accusatory statement against the partner.
Special note re True Marriage a marriages forced externally
The insignifica of what constitutes a True Marriage versus a hopeful gamble ceremony has changed. I have had two marriages, both orchestrated by myself. I have two anullments. I promised God i would never marry again—because i had FAITH and TRUST in God, but not in either spouse. I forced my free will on the Priest and Church Ministry–and expected God to make things work. I was wrong and i am unworthy of marriage.

I am a shamed woman. I DO NOT HAVE NOR HAVE I EVER HAD ----THE REQUISIT QUALITIES TO ABIDE IN A TRULY CATHOLIC MARRIAGE. If i had to pass a Marriage Test, that was anything like a U.S. citizen test—NEITHER MARRIAGE WOULD HAVE BEEN blessed. in all humility and shame, i pray to St. Mary Magdalen whose love and humanity made her uniquely special to Christ the Man-God. But they did not marry, or engage in sexual activity or activity leading to the same. That’s how MUCH gut-strength it takes to ask our Triune God for enlightened strength, guidance; when to listen and feel, and how to discern what we are Guided by the Holy Ghost, and the Word by authority of His Father==HOW TO PROCEED. it’s so difficult. i am as my screen name states a sinning Catholic.

re the perceptual schism pre and post Vat. II,

before deciding on the position you register in the Soul you have,while belonging to God, retreat to a foundation of being borne a sinful creature and challenge one’s own deeper conscieous. Improving/perfecting our own sinful natures is a f/t job

we can live as ONE BLOOD, ONE BODY–all parts of the Same God—. Doing this will NOT allow any time to assess our positions, vs other’s. If we are Catholics, then we back off of each other–and stick to self-examination, confession and Communion.

The directorate of CCL is clear. Fight with that—not each other. love, m…

 

[SemperFidelis]

A Traditional Catholic that denies the VII teaching on ecumenism

And what teaching was that? Maybe this one:

For it is only through Christ’s Catholic Church, which is “the all-embracing means of salvation,” that they can benefit fully from the means of salvation. We believe that Our Lord entrusted all the blessings of the New Covenant to the apostolic college alone, of which Peter is the head, in order to establish the one Body of Christ on earth to which all should be fully incorporated who belong in any way to the people of God.

Vatican II was not Dogmatic, and changed nothing. How can a Traditional Catholic be heterodox for questioning (not rejecting) something where nothing new was pronounced?

 

[sinningcatholic]

And what teaching was that? Maybe this one:

For it is only through Christ’s Catholic Church, which is “the all-embracing means of salvation,” that they can benefit fully from the means of salvation. We believe that Our Lord entrusted all the blessings of the New Covenant to the apostolic college alone, of which Peter is the head, in order to establish the one Body of Christ on earth to which all should be fully incorporated who belong in any way to the people of God.

Vatican II was not Dogmatic, and changed nothing. How can a Traditional Catholic be heterodox for questioning (not rejecting) something where nothing new was pronounced?

 

[sinningcatholic]

This debate is unworthy of those bright minds defending their ‘particular position.’ The practices of TLM are authorized by virtue of their NON-heresy. Heresy is VERY specific, and unless the TLM authorizes pro-active statements, practices or promotes activities NOT in CCL–there is no heresy.

A scholarly set of books, multiply translationed from Hebrew proper, Aramaic dialect, Greek, and later commentary–properly marked —the Armenian Coptic Fathers (The Sacre Pagina) is availabe. The books give direct translations, the contemporary menaning and the impact those meaning had to the original recipients. The translations today are far from rich, original and authentic in meaning—redaction and translingual lapsing leaves us arguing about pre and post Vatican II differences.
READ------then post. READ -READ- READ SACRE PAGINA BOOK SERIES.

 

[Daprato]

This debate is unworthy of those bright minds defending their ‘particular position.’ The practices of TLM are authorized by virtue of their NON-heresy. Heresy is VERY specific, and unless the TLM authorizes pro-active statements, practices or promotes activities NOT in CCL–there is no heresy.

A scholarly set of books, multiply translationed from Hebrew proper, Aramaic dialect, Greek, and later commentary–properly marked —the Armenian Coptic Fathers (The Sacre Pagina) is availabe. The books give direct translations, the contemporary menaning and the impact those meaning had to the original recipients. The translations today are far from rich, original and authentic in meaning—redaction and translingual lapsing leaves us arguing about pre and post Vatican II differences.
READ------then post. READ -READ- READ SACRE PAGINA BOOK SERIES.

You miss the point entirely, which may be due to the poor labeling of the Catholic Circle Chart. A “TLM-only” Catholic would be one that would either suggest ONLY the Tridentine Mass is valid (incorrect) or that it is “more valid” or “better” than the Pauline Mass (also incorrect.)

 

[SemperFidelis]

which may be due to the poor labeling of the Catholic Circle Chart.

Probably…

A “TLM-only” Catholic would be one that would either suggest ONLY the Tridentine Mass is valid (incorrect)

Most “TLM-only” Catholics regard the NO as valid, including the SSPX.

or that it is “more valid”

Something can’t be “more valid,” it’s either valid or it’s not.

or “better” than the Pauline Mass (also incorrect.)

I know several people who think this, which is probably why they go to the TLM in the first place. There’s a reason the FSSP, ICRSS, etc. don’t offer the NO, and this reason is probably because they think the TLM is “better.” The Holy See doesn’t seem to mind, so why do you?

 

[St_Isidore]

Of course not. By definition Orthodox Christians are schismatics and Protestants are heretics. There is no Church teaching that suggests that either group is automatically precluded from the opportunity of eternal life in Christ due to their choice of religion.

So according to V2 one not need be Catholic, and can be heretic, schismatic, or of another religion, and still be saved.

What ever did happen to that Universal Truth that Outside the Universal Church, i.e. the Catholic Church, there is no Salvation?

In any event, liberals/modernists/New Order Catholics or whatever else they call themselves, should cease and desist from being in opposition to SSPX, SSPV, CMRI, etc., since these CATHOLICS are not deprived from Salvation according to the V2.

BTW, I am not SSPX but am Catholic, and as any true good Catholic can see, the SSPX is without a doubt, Catholic.
To say otherwise would deny the original way of the Mass and Worship, and this denial would be nonsensical jargon.

 

[SemperFidelis]

So according to V2 one not need be Catholic, and can be heretic, schismatic, or of another religion, and still be saved.

What ever did happen to that Universal Truth that Outside the Universal Church, i.e. the Catholic Church, there is no Salvation?

In any event, liberals/modernists/New Order Catholics or whatever else they call themselves, should cease and desist from being in opposition to SSPX, SSPV, CMRI, etc., since these CATHOLICS are not deprived from Salvation according to the V2.

BTW, I am not SSPX but am Catholic, and as any true good Catholic can see, the SSPX is without a doubt, Catholic.
To say otherwise would deny the original way of the Mass and Worship, and this denial would be nonsensical jargon.

I doubt you’ll get an answer, Daprato isn’t too good at directly answering questions. I’ve probably got over ten questions that have gone unanswered by him in the last week.

 

[otjm]

So according to V2 one not need be Catholic, and can be heretic, schismatic, or of another religion, and still be saved.

You might read what Vatican 2 actually said, since that is not even close.

What ever did happen to that Universal Truth that Outside the Universal Church, i.e. the Catholic Church, there is no Salvation?

Again, thie issue is not as you have stated it. Vatican 2 did not change that. It did make a clear statement of what had been believed before Vatican 2; however, rather than create side issues and deril the thread, the issue is well expanded on in other threads.

 

[Daprato]

I doubt you’ll get an answer, Daprato isn’t too good at directly answering questions. I’ve probably got over ten questions that have gone unanswered by him in the last week.

If you had the ability to frame a clear, declarative question, I would try to answer it. Instead you make inflammatory statements you label as questions which I ignore for the most part…

 

[SemperFidelis]

If you had the ability to frame a clear, declarative question, I would try to answer it. Instead you make inflammatory statements you label as questions which I ignore for the most part…

I actually asked the same question about ten different times in the most straightforward and declarative way possible (in bold at the end of my posts in its own paragraph), not to mention the several other unanswered questions, that were just as straightforward. I’m guessing you didn’t answer, because you didn’t have an answer. Once again, I rest my case.

 

[Sure]

So according to V2 one not need be Catholic, and can be heretic, schismatic, or of another religion, and still be saved.

What ever did happen to that Universal Truth that Outside the Universal Church, i.e. the Catholic Church, there is no Salvation?

In any event, liberals/modernists/New Order Catholics or whatever else they call themselves, should cease and desist from being in opposition to SSPX, SSPV, CMRI, etc., since these CATHOLICS are not deprived from Salvation according to the V2.

BTW, I am not SSPX but am Catholic, and as any true good Catholic can see, the SSPX is without a doubt, Catholic.
To say otherwise would deny the original way of the Mass and Worship, and this denial would be nonsensical jargon.

Isidore,

This argument has been refuted many times. Vatican II documents say nothing of the sort. Nothing contradicts the teaching of outside the Church there is no salvation. The passage that the fringe traditionalist sites use to make their argument is grossly misinterpreted. The Church has long taught that sacramental grace can be obtained by non-catholic churches but the grace itself is accessed through the Church. Think of baptism. The Church has long held that baptism by, say an anglican minister is valid so long as proper form and matter is used. In this case, the non-catholic church is accessing the grace of the Catholic Church in the administration of this Sacrament. This is nothing new. And just like before, schismatics and heretics who are culpable cannot obtain salvation.

 

[sinningcatholic]

You miss the point entirely, which may be due to the poor labeling of the Catholic Circle Chart. A “TLM-only” Catholic would be one that would either suggest ONLY the Tridentine Mass is valid (incorrect) or that it is “more valid” or “better” than the Pauline Mass (also incorrect.)

hi, and yes i am obviously missing some point. Gratis for providing the ‘out’ of misinterpreting a chart due to labeling. That was honesly not the point i am missing. Jesus Christ is Himself Truth; incapable of contradiction. Heresy would be to claim otherwise.

This eliminates the exclusivity of OUR own perceptions, as null and void outside of absolute Truth of Jesus Christ as our Only Savior-- and Fully Bodily, Physically Present following Transubstantiation; another heresy if claimed otherwise.

Our own perceptions are in metaphor (at least in my head) like this: Which of these two Gospel accounts is the OnlyTruth?

(Each metaphoric attendee represents the two Eucharistic Masses.)

A ‘best dressed’ person attends mass, ascribing to the Gospel story of persons excised out of the Wedding Feast, as improperly dressed, or secondly

A second person does not dress up, ascribing to Christ’s Gentle Call, ‘Come to Me, all you who [are burdened and weary of life/ or labor], and I will give your rest.’

If we genuinely participate as best we can in the Mysteries of the One Holy Catholic and Apostalic Church–the ONLY Church where the True Seven Sacraments can be received–the other issues hopefully fade in to irrelevence, obscurity, and an evil distraction promoting consternation among brothers. maureen

 

[Daprato]

hi, and yes i am obviously missing some point. Gratis for providing the ‘out’ of misinterpreting a chart due to labeling. That was honesly not the point i am missing. Jesus Christ is Himself Truth; incapable of contradiction. Heresy would be to claim otherwise.

This eliminates the exclusivity of OUR own perceptions, as null and void outside of absolute Truth of Jesus Christ as our Only Savior-- and Fully Bodily, Physically Present following Transubstantiation; another heresy if claimed otherwise.

Our own perceptions are in metaphor (at least in my head) like this: Which of these two Gospel accounts is the OnlyTruth?

(Each metaphoric attendee represents the two Eucharistic Masses.)

A ‘best dressed’ person attends mass, ascribing to the Gospel story of persons excised out of the Wedding Feast, as improperly dressed, or secondly

A second person does not dress up, ascribing to Christ’s Gentle Call, ‘Come to Me, all you who [are burdened and weary of life/ or labor], and I will give your rest.’

If we genuinely participate as best we can in the Mysteries of the One Holy Catholic and Apostalic Church**–the ONLY Church where the True Seven Sacraments can be received**–the other issues hopefully fade in to irrelevence, obscurity, and an evil distraction promoting consternation among brothers. maureen

That’s not true. Both the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox have valid sacraments…