Posted on 04/14/2011 8:18:23 AM PDT by Grunthor
Catholic women overwhelmingly use birth control, despite an official ban by the church, a new study finds......
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
The floor of hell is paved with the skulls of bishops - it was true 1500 years ago and it is true now. However, when one rejects the Church in favour of one's own opinions, what separates that one from the Protestant Reformation? Luther campaigned on restoring the Church to its original form. So did Joseph Smith. So have uncounted multitudes of preachers and evangelists that have only one thing in common - their disdain for the Church right now.
Forgive my intrusion, Iscool, but I will ask your permission to get you to serve as an example here. Verdugo, what differentiates you from Iscool in terms of separation from the Church, except in specific nomenclature?
Excerps from "Mortalium Animos", Encyclical of Pope Pius XI, On Religious Unity, January 6, 1928.
2. 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 andatheism, 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.
3. But some are more easily deceived by the outward appearance of good when there is question of fostering unity among all Christians. 4. Is it not right, it is often repeated, indeed, even consonant with duty, that all who invoke the name of Christ should abstain from mutual reproaches and at long last be united in mutual charity? Who would dare to say that he loved Christ, unless he worked with all his might to carry out the desires of Him, Who asked His Father that His disciples might be "one"[1]. And did not the same Christ will that His disciples should be marked out and distinguished from others by this characteristic, namely that they loved one another: "By this shall all men know that you are my disciples, if you have love one for another"[2]? All Christians, they add, should be as "one": for then they would be much more powerful in driving out the pest of irreligion, which like a serpent daily creeps further and becomes more widely spread, and prepares to rob the Gospel of its strength. These things and others that class of men who are known as pan-Christians continually repeat and amplify; and these men, so far from being quite few and scattered, have increased to the dimensions of an entire class, and have grouped themselves into widely spread societies, most of which are directed by non-Catholics, although they are imbued with varying doctrines concerning the things of faith. This undertaking is so actively promoted as in many places to win for itself the adhesion of a number of citizens, and it even takes possession of the minds of very many Catholics and allures them with the hope of bringing about such a union as would be agreeable to the desires of Holy Mother Church, who has indeed nothing more at heart than to recall her erring sons and to lead them back to her bosom. But in reality beneath these enticing words and blandishments lies hid a mostgrave error, by which the foundations of the Catholic faith are completely destroyed.
5. Admonished, therefore, by the consciousness of Our Apostolic office that We should not permit the flock of the Lord to be cheated by dangerous fallacies, We invoke, Venerable Brethren, your zeal in avoiding this evil; for We are confident that by the writings and words of each one of you the people will more easily get to know and understand those principles and arguments which We are about to set forth, and from which Catholics will learn how they are to think and act when there is question of those schemes which have for their end the union in one body, whatsoever be the manner, of all who call themselves Christians.
8. This being so, it is clear that the Apostolic See cannot on any terms take part in their assemblies, nor is it anyway lawful for Catholics either to support or to work for such enterprises; for if they do so they will be giving countenance to a false Christianity, quite alien to the one Church of Christ.
9. These pan-Christians who turn their minds to uniting the churches seem, indeed, to pursue the noblest of ideas in promoting charity among all Christians: nevertheless how does it happen that this charity tends to injure faith? Everyone knows that John himself, the Apostle of love, who seems to reveal in his Gospel the secrets of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and who never ceased to impress on the memories of his followers the new commandment "Love one another," altogether forbade any intercourse with those who professed a mutilated and corrupt version of Christ's teaching: "If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house nor say to him: God speed you"[18]. For which reason, since charity is based on a complete and sincere faith, the disciples of Christ must be united principally by the bond of one faith. 10. So, Venerable Brethren, it is clear why this Apostolic See has never allowed its subjects to take part in the assemblies of non-Catholics: for the union of Christians can only be promoted by promoting the return to the one true Church of Christ of those who are separated from it, for in the past they have unhappily left it. To the one true Church of Christ, we say, which is visible to all, and which is to remain, according to the will of its Author, exactly the same as He instituted it.
I don't really care about what the Eastern Orthodox do or believe, same as I don't care about what Hindus believe. I don't see why any Eastern Orthodox should care about what the Catholic Church does. The Orthodox should not bring this subterfuge here, acting as if they are a Catholic, criticizing a real Catholic.
Your memory is as good as your doctrine. I have corrected you on this before. I follow the Bishop of Rome, without reservation; a cradle Roman Catholic and proud of it.
SSPX was excommunicated and should have stayed excommunicated. BXVI made a great mistake in dealing with those idiots. There may have been some worth bringing back into the Church, but that idiot Williamson and all of the stiff necked wonders who differentiate only from the example of Calvin in their terminology are not Catholic and need to be booted from the Faith permanently.
I've read your screeds. I know Serbian peasants who are far better Catholics and who show it every day than what you are handing out.
Ping to post. Apologies for omitting you.
Do you, Verdugo, consider Pope Benedict to be a valid pope?
verdugo:
Yes, I consider him a validly elected pope.
Do you see what you're doing, verdugo? This is why we say you haven't answered the question.
The wording I'm looking for from you is:
I consider Pope Benedict XVI to be a valid pope.
Leave "validly elected" out of the sentence, if you are able.
re: I know Serbian peasants who are far better Catholics and who show it every day than what you are handing out.
I know Protestants that are better Catholics than Catholics, yet that does not make them Catholic. They are outside of the Church, where their is no salvation. Hopefully, they will convert before they die.
As for the rest that you wrote it’s just character assasination. If god outs people in front of you that know more than you, He is giving you a nudge to elearn your faith better. To advance in knowledge. Detractions and character assasinations are the stuff of children who do not want to be bothered.
No little band of morons gets to second guess the Church. The Church includes the congregants of the five Sees. When a splinter group walks away and loudly brays that it alone contains the wit and wisdom of all of Christendom, how does that separate it from anything that the Reformation has spawned?
As for the rest that you wrote it’s just character assasination. If god outs people in front of you that know more than you, He is giving you a nudge to elearn your faith better. To advance in knowledge. Detractions and character assasinations are the stuff of children who do not want to be bothered.
The Church says what the Church says; it is not beholden to a splinter group. Splitters and quitters do not make the rules either in the 1500s or in the 1900s. You either accept the Church or you don't. If you don't and consider your own group's doctrines and pronouncements to supersede Church doctrines and pronoucements, then you have removed yourself from the Church.
Sneering at the congregants of four of the five original Sees as non Catholic removes you from Catholic consideration and those who have asked to have you removed from any FR Catholic Caucus are absolutely correct and I back them completely. Come on back when you declare your Christianity.
People often say, “It is better to be a good Protestant than a bad Catholic.” That is not true! That would mean that one could be saved without the true faith. No. A bad Catholic remains a child of the family, although a prodigal, and however great a sinner he may be, he still has a right to mercy. Through his faith, a bad Catholic is nearer to God than a Protestant, for he is a member of the household, whereas the heretic is not. And how hard it is to make him become one!
-St. Peter Eymard
re: The Church includes the congregants of the five Sees.
And what exactly does this mean to you? Are you saying that the schismatic Eastern Orthodox are part of :
The true Church of Jesus Christ the One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic and Roman Church (Mystici Corporis Christi, by Pope Pius XII (and the first Vatican Council)?
re: No little band of morons gets to second guess the Church. ...The Church says what the Church says; it is not beholden to a splinter group. Splitters and quitters do not make the rules either in the 1500s or in the 1900s. You either accept the Church or you don’t. If you don’t and consider your own group’s doctrines and pronouncements to supersede Church doctrines and pronoucements, then you have removed yourself from the Church.
Yes, that is what exactly what the schismatic Eastern Orthodox did. We agree.
Not where I come from. My family and friends say that one should follow Christ rather than men. And back it up with Scripture and the Fathers. Both bad Catholics and Protestants reject the Church of Christ.
And what exactly does this mean to you? Are you saying that the schismatic Eastern Orthodox are part of :
The true Church of Jesus Christ the One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic and Roman Church (Mystici Corporis Christi, by Pope Pius XII (and the first Vatican Council)?
More than either the secevacantists or the Feeneyites will ever be unless they repent of their rejection of the Church.
Yes, that is what exactly what the schismatic Eastern Orthodox did. We agree.
We disagree. Both the Latin and the Orthodox who engaged in petty excommunications may just wind up on the floor of hell because they put their own whims and self-important pufferies ahead of the Church and its requirements.
Please understand that I am not singling you out except to the extent that you are attempting to divide the Church. The Latin branch will suffer tremendously on its own; it needs the Orthodox as much as the Orthodox needs it. The first millennium was full of Orthodox heresies and the Pope stood like a bulwark against them. Yet, the second millennium was one failure upon another of the Latin branch. The Reformation is the everlasting shame of the Latins and don't you forget it. If it wasn't for the malfeasance of Rome, the Reformation would never have happened.
re: We disagree. Both the Latin and the Orthodox who engaged in petty excommunications may just wind up on the floor of hell because they put their own whims and self-important pufferies ahead of the Church and its requirements.Please understand that I am not singling you out except to the extent that you are attempting to divide the Church.
The Church is one, it is not divided. It is the true Church of Jesus Christ the One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic and Roman Church. It does not include the Eastern Orthodox, who have been schismatics since they split from the Church (moreover, they are objective heretics, denying many dogmas).
This is an undenial fact. It is reality. Anyone that denies this is living a lie.
“They went out from us, but they were not of us. For if they had been of us, they would no doubt have remained with us; but that they may be manifest, that they are not all of us”. (1 John 2-9)
2. 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 andatheism, 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.
3. But some are more easily deceived by the outward appearance of good when there is question of fostering unity among all Christians. 4. Is it not right, it is often repeated, indeed, even consonant with duty, that all who invoke the name of Christ should abstain from mutual reproaches and at long last be united in mutual charity? Who would dare to say that he loved Christ, unless he worked with all his might to carry out the desires of Him, Who asked His Father that His disciples might be "one"[1]. And did not the same Christ will that His disciples should be marked out and distinguished from others by this characteristic, namely that they loved one another: "By this shall all men know that you are my disciples, if you have love one for another"[2]? All Christians, they add, should be as "one": for then they would be much more powerful in driving out the pest of irreligion, which like a serpent daily creeps further and becomes more widely spread, and prepares to rob the Gospel of its strength. These things and others that class of men who are known as pan-Christians continually repeat and amplify; and these men, so far from being quite few and scattered, have increased to the dimensions of an entire class, and have grouped themselves into widely spread societies, most of which are directed by non-Catholics, although they are imbued with varying doctrines concerning the things of faith. This undertaking is so actively promoted as in many places to win for itself the adhesion of a number of citizens, and it even takes possession of the minds of very many Catholics and allures them with the hope of bringing about such a union as would be agreeable to the desires of Holy Mother Church, who has indeed nothing more at heart than to recall her erring sons and to lead them back to her bosom. But in reality beneath these enticing words and blandishments lies hid a mostgrave error, by which the foundations of the Catholic faith are completely destroyed.
5. Admonished, therefore, by the consciousness of Our Apostolic office that We should not permit the flock of the Lord to be cheated by dangerous fallacies, We invoke, Venerable Brethren, your zeal in avoiding this evil; for We are confident that by the writings and words of each one of you the people will more easily get to know and understand those principles and arguments which We are about to set forth, and from which Catholics will learn how they are to think and act when there is question of those schemes which have for their end the union in one body, whatsoever be the manner, of all who call themselves Christians.
8. This being so, it is clear that the Apostolic See cannot on any terms take part in their assemblies, nor is it anyway lawful for Catholics either to support or to work for such enterprises; for if they do so they will be giving countenance to a false Christianity, quite alien to the one Church of Christ.
9. These pan-Christians who turn their minds to uniting the churches seem, indeed, to pursue the noblest of ideas in promoting charity among all Christians: nevertheless how does it happen that this charity tends to injure faith? Everyone knows that John himself, the Apostle of love, who seems to reveal in his Gospel the secrets of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and who never ceased to impress on the memories of his followers the new commandment "Love one another," altogether forbade any intercourse with those who professed a mutilated and corrupt version of Christ's teaching: "If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house nor say to him: God speed you"[18]. For which reason, since charity is based on a complete and sincere faith, the disciples of Christ must be united principally by the bond of one faith. 10. So, Venerable Brethren, it is clear why this Apostolic See has never allowed its subjects to take part in the assemblies of non-Catholics: for the union of Christians can only be promoted by promoting the return to the one true Church of Christ of those who are separated from it, for in the past they have unhappily left it. To the one true Church of Christ, we say, which is visible to all, and which is to remain, according to the will of its Author, exactly the same as He instituted it.
The Church is one, it is not divided. It is the true Church of Jesus Christ the One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic and Roman Church. It does not include the Eastern Orthodox, who have been schismatics since they split from the Church (moreover, they are objective heretics, denying many dogmas).
Negative. It is the sedevacantists who are not of the Church. The five Sees are the Church, in spite of what the newly schismatic believe. When were the excommuications lifted? That gives us the time period when the antiCatholics have been operating.
This is an undenial fact. It is reality. Anyone that denies this is living a lie.
Son, you are living a lie. The Church is the Church: that of the five Sees. If you separate yourself from them, you separate yourself from the Church.
Including myself, my wife, and our six children. To date...
That's your erroneous opinion and that's all. Your error comes from have inbibed the novel modernist focus on only the "sinful" Church.
No matter what the popes would have done, the revolutions would have taken place. The Church is spotless, not one soul of good will leaves the Church, the Ark in the flood, outside of which there is no salvation.
Christ the Life of the Soul, by Abbot D Columba Marmion 1925
Chapter 5- THE CHURCH, THE MYSTICAL BODY OF CHRIST (pg 93)
"to procure this glory is the Church. Christ comes on earth to create and constitute the Church; it is the work to which all His existence converges, and He confirms it by His Passion and Death. His love for His Father led Jesus Christ to the mountain of Calvary but it was there to form the Church, and make of her, by purifying her in His Divine Blood, a spotless and immaculate Bride: Dilexit Ecclesiam et seipsum tradidit pro ea ut illam sanctificaret (Ephes 5:25-26).
This is what St. Paul tells us. Let us then see what this Church is, of which the name occurs so often under the great Apostle's pen as to be inseparable from that of Christ.
We may consider the Church in two ways: first as a visible, hierarchical society, founded by Christ to continue His sanctifying mission here below; she appears thus, as a living organism. But this point of view is not the only one; to have a complete idea of the Church, we must regard her, as the holy and invisible society of the souls that share by grace in Christ's Divine Sonship, and form the Kingdom He won by His Blood. That is what St. Paul calls the body of Christ, not of course, His physical body, but His mystical body. It is on this second point of view we shall principally dwell: we must not, however, pass over the first in silence.
It is true that the invisible Church, or the soul of the Church, is more important than the visible Church, but, in the normal economy of Christianity, it is only by union with the visible society that souls have participation in the possessions and privileges of the invisible kingdom of Christ*. END"
(* this means that one must be a baptized member of the visible Church to have participation in the possessions and privileges of the invisible kingdom of Christ)
_____________________________________________________
Today the modernists focus totally on the "sinful" Church, so much so, that few know that the Church is Holy, Spotless, and without blemish.
You are living in denial. Where does the current pope or any pope say that the Eastern Orthodox are part of the Catholic Church?
By the way, there are no lifting of excommunications. That is a big canard. I did a whole thread on the subject. I'm sure you read it. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2679932/posts:
The LIFTING THE ANATHEMAS HOAX
(DECEMBER 7, 1965)- THE ‘LIFTING’ OF THE ANATHEMAS-
On 7 December 1965, Cardinal Jan Willebrands read to the bishops of Vatican II the declaration of Pope Paul VI lifting the excommunication that the Envoy of Pope Leo IX had imposed on the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople, Michael Cerularius, in 1054. At the same time, in the Patriarchal Cathedral of Saint George in Constantinople, the synod of the Ecumenical Patriarchate ‘lifted’ the anathemas imposed on the papal ambassadors in 1054 by Patriarch Michael Cerularius and the patriarchal synod of Constantinople and subsequently ratified and adopted by all orthodox churches.
This document above of no juridical value whatsoever, just a nice gesture is all it is. Michael Cerularius remains an excommunicated.
1) For one, the Patriarch of Constantinople has no authority to bind any of the other Orthodox Churches, as a matter of fact his Patriarchy consists of only 3.5 million people.
2) Pope Paul VI has no authority to ‘lift” the excommunication of Michael Cerularius, since he died almost 1000 years ago. You can't “lift” the excommunication of a dead man, he is already in hell for all eternity. It's a different matter if a pope were to undertake to disprove the validity of an excommunication (like Joan of Arc), but that is not what Paul VI did, he just simply signed the declaration above.
Anything you post regarding Catholicism is empty if you are unable to claim Pope Benedict as your pope.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.