tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8918598045168602139.post7890857952915321048..comments2024-02-28T04:48:59.561+08:00Comments on The Pinoy Catholic: SSPX - Holy See discussions turning sour?Pedro Lorenzo Ruizhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06817125203522413704noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8918598045168602139.post-24734807528999173962012-10-03T13:23:53.772+08:002012-10-03T13:23:53.772+08:00Sorry just some points:
"Remember that when ...Sorry just some points:<br /><br />"Remember that when the pope beatifies or canonizes a dead Catholic, it is a solemn declaration that that person is enjoying the Beatific Vision and thus we Catholics here on earth (Church Militant) can invoke their intercession and imitate their example."<br /><br />-It has been the general understanding of many theologians that infallibility only covers canonizations and not beatifications. Also, in my understanding, infallibility has a negative effect on the pronouncement that the person canonized is indeed in heaven (and as to whether that person truly lived a holy life would be a different matter.) Kindly see http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02364b.htm<br /><br />"...To not accept it (Vatican II) and to claim that the Council committed an error is almost the same as accusing the Church as being fallible!"<br /><br />-Not to give Bishop De Mallerais a blanket defense, but I think it would be helpful for us to distinguish what kind of assent is required concerning Vatican II? I heared even a Novus Ordo priest tell his listeners that one does not give the same weight of Divine and Catholic faith with the recent council, in comparison with previous councils, since violation of the latter would be "anathema sit." Of course, those reaffirmed by Vatican II - being previously defined, remain infallible. It is my belief that to say that Vatican II and Lateran I committed errors, which are not part of faith and morals, or were not part of those defined (or covered by the definition) won't necessarily equate in saying that the Church is dogmatically fallible. It is therefore the task of the Church to authoritatively 'clarify' which are those (e.g. in Vatican II, except of course the previously declared dogmas) that are demanded of us to give our Divine and Catholic Faith, or at least the degree of assent we ought to render. I think this is the position of Bishop Fellay.The Postmodernisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17929532909934116268noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8918598045168602139.post-67229179330812065032012-10-02T18:54:20.869+08:002012-10-02T18:54:20.869+08:00It is absolutely a long way to go for the SSPX. An...It is absolutely a long way to go for the SSPX. And I believe the best way to help solve this problem is by praying for the best solution. (As of now, I believe that a FULL COMMUNION is the best solution). There are people inside the Society who LOVES the Church (believe it or not) so we really need to pray for a reconciliation, as oppose to the battle cry of a "Famous Father Up there in Rank 1" who wishes nothing but the re-excommunication of the Society.Little Tarcisiushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06145678965978032773noreply@blogger.com