Faith Focused Dating. Create your Free Profile and meet your Match! Sign Up for Free

info: Please Sign Up or Sign In to continue.

A place to learn, mingle, and share

This room is for discussion related to learning about the faith (Catechetics), defense of the Faith (Apologetics), the Liturgy and canon law, motivated by a desire to grow closer to Christ or to bring someone else closer.

Saint Augustine of Hippo is considered on of the greatest Christian thinkers of all time and the Doctor of the Church.
Learn More: Saint Augustine

Dec 15th 2013 new
(quote) Lynea-297530 said: Actually, that is not technically accurate. A person may have a lack of understanding (which firstly, is a gift from the Holy Ghost) due to a wrongly formed conscience, or another vice. Also, that person would have to have full contrition, not partial, so they can't be sorry (even in part) because of any pain due to sin, but because if injures God. Since that is not usually the case, both the form and matter are considered essential, and that is why the priest must have proper faculties, and well, he must be a validly ordained priest. However, many of the priests that are giving Confession (if not all) as far as what I've heard were ordained out of the SSPX before they came to the SSPX, and therefore, they have proper faculties to hear Confessions.
so therefore any confession of sins---exc for an absolutely perfect confession--wont do anyone any good.
I guess that shoots in the foot that vatican 2 text regarding the Holy Spirit not refusing to act thru other religions.
LOCKED
Dec 15th 2013 new
add to prior post any confession of sins outside of the catholic church without perfect contrition.
LOCKED
Dec 15th 2013 new
(quote) Tom-112790 said: so therefore any confession of sins---exc for an absolutely perfect confession--wont do anyone any good.
I guess that shoots in the foot that vatican 2 text regarding the Holy Spirit not refusing to act thru other religions.
Tom, the Sacrament of Confession/Penance absolves someone from the sins they've committed (with valid matter and form) --- not their disordered disposition. It does not make someone a saint. For instance, say you go to Confession and die as you are walking out. When you die, and you are in a state of grace, you will get to Heaven, but if you still have disordered habits, those will first bring you to Purgatory, until the disorder is purged.

The only way to interpret VII regarding the Holy Spirit and other religions is that truths --- that aren't necessarily expressly doctrinal, can be used by God as a means to actual graces --- but not as a blanket method for the truths themselves, but on an individual basis as God determines for each moment and each soul. These actual graces for any person, inside or outside the Church, only call a person to the Sacrament of the one true Faith, they do not sanctify. Those graces would be sanctifying graces, and the operative means that work ex opere operati are only via the means of the sacraments (so long as the validly Baptised recipient does not pose an obstacle to those graces via mortal sin and, if they are in a state of grace, to the degree that they are rightly disposed).
LOCKED
Dec 15th 2013 new
(quote) Lynea-297530 said: What was the point of shortening the OFFERTORY --- a departure from tradition by doing this to an essential part of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass --- and then expect parish members to stick around for Vespers? Nowadays, throughout the entire Church, the rampant attitude is that everyone is in a hurry, even on Sundays and Holy Days, and that worship in the Holy Sacrifice is akin to punching a "yes I'm holy" timecard, as if God needs us, and not the other way around. People even leave before the Mass is over, immediately after receiving our Lord. Or when Mass is over and they are still there, wait 20 seconds, and if most people aren't up and out of their pews already, call me a flying monkey*. (*Perhaps not the best way to describe my angst over this but you get the picture.)

Most Catholics wouldn't even know what Vespers are, and why they would want to remain there. Yes, the culture world is changing, as it always is, but the culture of the Church is maintained by extrinsic tradition, and we made a strict departure from that deliberately in VII, and what has it brought us?
We have seen radical changes in worship and beliefs. However, at this point in time is it not better to see someone at Mass who runs out the door like a firealarm has sounded rather than that person having made the decision not to attend Mass at all (like most based on the published statistics)? We all have the capacity to grow in faith and a small spark is often all it takes to ignite a burning fire of faith. We can but pray for our friends and relatives who would rather sleep in rather than attend Mass. At some point in time they may hunger for and treasure the Mass theheart .

LOCKED
Dec 15th 2013 new
Gabor, I agree with everything you said, but that was the first example that came to mind. There are infinite other examples, but it comes to a lack of catechesis mostly.
LOCKED
Dec 15th 2013 new
(quote) Lynea-297530 said: Tom, the Sacrament of Confession/Penance absolves someone from the sins they've committed (with valid matter and form) --- not their disordered disposition. It does not make someone a saint. For instance, say you go to Confession and die as you are walking out. When you die, and you are in a state of grace, you will get to Heaven, but if you still have disordered habits, those will first bring you to Purgatory, until the disorder is purged.

The only way to interpret VII regarding the Holy Spirit and other religions is that truths --- that aren't necessarily expressly doctrinal, can be used by God as a means to actual graces --- but not as a blanket method for the truths themselves, but on an individual basis as God determines for each moment and each soul. These actual graces for any person, inside or outside the Church, only call a person to the Sacrament of the one true Faith, they do not sanctify. Those graces would be sanctifying graces, and the operative means that work ex opere operati are only via the means of the sacraments (so long as the validly Baptised recipient does not pose an obstacle to those graces via mortal sin and, if they are in a state of grace, to the degree that they are rightly disposed).
lynea my original response was regarding CONDEMNATION. Purgatory is another matter.Go back and read the post i responded to.
LOCKED
Dec 15th 2013 new
Actually, Tom, I had read that post of yours first. In response to: "But if someone genuinely believes they are going to THE RIGHT church--how can God condemn them??If someone connivingly convinces someone to join a church that they inwardly know to be teaching error then the blame is on the conniver not the victim. "

God does not condemn them, those with a wrongly formed conscience condemn themselves.
LOCKED
Dec 15th 2013 new
(quote) Lynea-297530 said: Actually, that is not technically accurate. A person may have a lack of understanding (which firstly, is a gift from the Holy Ghost) due to a wrongly formed conscience, or another vice. Also, that person would have to have full contrition, not partial, so they can't be sorry (even in part) because of any pain due to sin, but because if injures God. Since that is not usually the case, both the form and matter are considered essential, and that is why the priest must have proper faculties, and well, he must be a validly ordained priest. However, many of the priests that are giving Confession (if not all) as far as what I've heard were ordained out of the SSPX before they came to the SSPX, and therefore, they have proper faculties to hear Confessions.
Any ordained priest may hear a person's confessionand give absolution only when a person is in serious danger of death.

Otherwise, to licitly and validly hear confessions and give asbsolution an ordained priest must have faculties, that is the permission and authority of the local Bishop in full communion with Rome, to do so.

So even if a preist had been validly and licitly ordained before becoming an SSPXER and then became one, he would be that comparative rarity among SSPX priests. but having become an SSPXer he would no longer have the proper faculties, permission and authority from the local Bishop to hear confessions.
LOCKED
Dec 15th 2013 new
(quote) Paul-866591 said: Any ordained priest may hear a person's confessionand give absolution only when a person is in serious danger of death.

Otherwise, to licitly and validly hear confessions and give asbsolution an ordained priest must have faculties, that is the permission and authority of the local Bishop in full communion with Rome, to do so.

So even if a preist had been validly and licitly ordained before becoming an SSPXER and then became one, he would be that comparative rarity among SSPX priests. but having become an SSPXer he would no longer have the proper faculties, permission and authority from the local Bishop to hear confessions.
I agree with what you said up until that last paragraph about it being rare that priests ordained outside the SSPX are joining the SSPX. I have a lot of friends who are SSPXers, and get invited to parties where i'm the only non-SSPXer, and I've seen many priests who are SSPX and were ordained outside the SSPX. (I live in an area where we have one of the largest SSPX communities in North America.)
LOCKED
Dec 15th 2013 new
(quote) Lynea-297530 said: To which Mark, from Brighton, Great Britain, provides further detail on these errors in his posts. He also gives background on the root of the issue: Modernism. He then ties these points to how these are promoted liturgically, explaining why the traditional Latin Mass was attacked from Modernists.

I agreed with Mark, and then Jerry and Paul started challenging me on my wording. Mind you, everyone left Mark --- who is infinitely more gifted at expressing himself --- completely alone.
I did respond to Mark's post where he posted a summery form of SSPX's list of supposed Vaticn II errors.

I said that the issues posted were utterly and completely false. I did not elaborate. But have commented on each of them so many times I will just repeat the fundamental and basic statement,the only one that really matters, that thee are , in fact, no errors in any Vatican II Document - Teaching. They are all historically, and factual consistent with Chruch teaching and Dogma.

As far as your comments on Summorum, both Jerry and I pointed out that nothing you claimed claimed was said in Summorum was actual said in Summorum. I paraphrased what Summorum did say and Jerry quoted some of Summorum's statements that directly contradicted what you said. You replied that we were both wrong and repeated your erroneous statements about Sumoorum and even went further. I relied by reiterating what I has said before, taken directly from summorum. Jerry again quoted Summorum. You again repeated your incorrecte statments about Summorum's contents and Jerry asked you you cite any authoritative source for your claims. To which you have yet to reply.



This topic has been automatically locked due to size. Any further discussion can be continued in a new topic.
LOCKED
Posts 191 - 200 of 200