Comments on: False Teachers – What is a Catholic to Do?

By: Peter Aiello

Peter Aiello — Thu, 25 Oct 2018 04:25:13 +0000

Vatican II, in Dei Verbum 21 says: “Therefore, like the Christian religion itself, all the preaching of the Church must be nourished and regulated by Sacred Scripture.”
Scripture is the most certain source of Catholic teaching. Everything else needs to take note of what is in Scripture. This also applies to all of us.

By: Donald Link

Donald Link — Wed, 24 Oct 2018 16:39:38 +0000

Of course, the flip side of the false teaching coin is the teacher (read cleric) who has time and knowledge for everything from environment to economics but scarcely can put together a complete paragraph about an article of faith. Many parishes have have a dozen committees and groups for everything from natural gardening to bunco but little on the Catechism unless the subject turns to replenishing the local soup kitchen.

By: Stephen

Stephen — Fri, 12 Oct 2018 10:27:48 +0000

In reply to RbM.

RbM, I accept that this is your belief!

We are all on a journey to try and get to heaven. Best wishes and God bless!

Stephen

By: RbM

RbM — Fri, 12 Oct 2018 01:32:57 +0000

In reply to Stephen.

INFALLIBILITY

It is the naysayers of our time that would like to convince souls the conditions of infallibility must be kept in the minutest scientific detail and that Infallibility is very rare.

This idea that the infallibility of the Pope is a rare event is false. The Pope is infallible was when speaking concerning faith and morals ALL THE TIME, EVERY TIME…

The following quote from the first Vatican council is misinterpreted to support the “Recognize and Resist” faction of the traditionalists…

First Vatican Council

1869 to 1870 A.D. under Pope Blessed Pius IX

The 20th of 21 Ecumenical Councils

FIRST DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION
ON THE CHURCH OF CHRIST

“If then, any should deny that it is by the institution of Christ the Lord and by Divine right, that Blessed Peter should have a perpetual line of successors in the Primacy over the Universal Church, or that the Roman Pontiff’ is the successor of Blessed Peter in this primacy; let him be anathema.”

This is not saying that that there will always be a Pope on the Chair of Peter.

It doesn’t say that. Read it again…

It says that if anyone denies that Blessed Peter should have a perpetual line of successors in the Primacy over the Universal Church… let him be anathema.

SHOULD DOES NOT MEAN WOULD…!!!

Almighty God NEVER assured you that there would always be a Pope…

Pope Pius IX said that no one should deny that there “should” be a Pope, not that there necessarily “would” be one…!!!

The sin of presumption may get the best of you, if you don’t watch out.

I sorry to tell you, but Our Heavenly Father very well may have seen fit to take the Papacy away from us. And there is nothing to stop Him from doing so.

The gates of hell do not prevail over the faith if there is no Pope

Yet Pope Pius IX declared in Dei Filius:

“We therefore, following the footsteps of our predecessors, have never ceased, by the virtue of our Apostolic office, from teaching and defending Catholic truths and condemning doctrines of error.”

Cardinal Manning continues to instruct us further on the definition:

“In like manner all censures, whether for heresy or with a note less than heresy, are doctrinal definitions in faith and morals, and are included in the words in doctrina de fide vel moribus definienda.

“In a word, the whole magisterium or doctrinal authority of the Pontiff as the supreme Doctor of all Christians is included in this definition of his infallibility.

And also all legislative or judicial acts, so far as they are inseparably connected with his doctrinal authority; as for instance, all judgments, sentences, and decisions, which contain the motives of such acts as derived from faith and morals. Under this will come laws of discipline, canonization of Saints, approbation of religious Orders, of devotions, and the like; all of which intrinsically contain the truths and principles of faith, morals, and piety.”

(“The Vatican Council”, page 94, 1871 edition)

There are other fine works including:

“When does the Church speak Infallibly?”, by Father Thomas Francis Knox (1870 edition)

“Familiar Explanation of Christian Doctrine”, by Father Mueller (1875 edition.)

THE TESTS OR NOTES WHEREBY AN EX CATHEDRA ACT MAY BE DISCERENED

Excerpts from “The Dublin Review”, Volume 16, pages 193-196, 1871 (Read attentively)

“It has been said e.g. that an Act, to be ex cathedra, must be formally addressed to the whole Church; or must anathematize dissidents; or must expressly state the obligation of assent, which it is intended to impose. . . that no universal criterion can be laid down; no cut – and – dry rule which can be applied to every instance: but that theologians are often left to judge from the circumstances of some individual case:

This was (Cardinal Henry Manning’s) view which he expressed in his Pastoral (letter) and this is certainly the inference which would naturally be derived from the Vatican Definition.

The Pontiff is infallible whenever “in discharge of the office of Pastor and Doctor of all Christians, by virtue of his supreme Apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine regarding faith or morals to be held by the Universal Church”: but what are those particular instances in which he intends so to define, is to be decided by theologians, according to circumstance intrinsic and extrinsic, on each particular occasion.

Some indeed have seemed to suppose, that one limitation has been expressed by the very word “define”: that to “define” necessarily implies some accurate and scientific expression of doctrine; and that no flowing and rhetorical exposition can constitute a “Definition.”

But as (Cardinal Manning) points out (Page 88 of his Pastoral letter), “Definire is ‘finem imponere’ or ‘finaliter judicare:’” and such final determination may be made by a flowing and rhetorical, no less than by a scientific and precise declaration.

The matter is beyond possibility of doubt by the case of the “Mirari vos” (Encyclical Letter).

Never did a more rhetorical Act than this issue from the Holy See; and nevertheless three years afterwards, in his “Singulari Nos,” Gregory XVI informed the universal Episcopate, that in that earlier Encyclical he had “defined the Catholic doctrine” “which alone it is lawful to follow” on the various very important “heads” which he proceeded to enumerate.

Nor, lastly, has the Vatican Council spoken expressly on the comparative frequency of ex cathedra Acts.

At the same time we do think that one conclusion is readily deducible from its declarations; that such Acts are by no means “rare” – as a distinguished French theologian has said they are, – but on the contrary, that Pius IX alone has issued a very considerable number. We are here, however, referring not to the “Pastor AEternus,” but to the earlier “Dei Filius;” and therein to the following passage: –

Now, the “Pastor Aeternus” declares that the Pope is infallible whenever “in discharge of the office of Pastor and Doctor of all Christians, by virtue of his supreme Apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine regarding faith or morals to be held by the Universal Church.”

But this is the very thing which, in the “Dei Filius,” the Council testifies that he “has never ceased” from doing…!!!

The number of his ex- cathedra acts, then, must be very considerable.

The same conclusion follows from a similar expression of Pius IX in the “Quanta cura;” and is also established, as we pointed out at the time (October issue, 186, pp. 529-532), by the episcopal address presented to him at Rome.

At last, however, we admit that the number is not inconsiderable of those Pontifical Acts, in regard to which no absolute certainty is attainable, whether they are or are not ex cathedra. But we doubt extremely whether there is any one doctrine, taught in any one of those Acts, which is not also defined in others, of who’s ex cathedra character there can be no reasonable doubt.

Such indubitable ex cathedra utterances e.g. are the “Unam sanctam,” which was republished by Leo X as dogmatic in the Fifth Lateran Ecumenical Council; and the “Mirari vos,” of which its author, three years later, testified the ex- cathedra character to the universal Episcopate.”

Hope this helps…

We have literally been lied to our whole lives, about everything…

The brain cramp that results from trying to reconcile a reprobate clergy with the teachings of the Church is inevitable.

The whole world turned its back on God and His moral government with the death of the Angelic Pope, Pope Pius IX.

The Chair is not empty.

The Chair, is not there…

RbM

By: Stephen

Stephen — Wed, 10 Oct 2018 21:11:29 +0000

In reply to RbM. So, if we deny a pope is Pope we can disregard him? Sounds like dangerous territory to me!

By: Tyler Lefebvre

Tyler Lefebvre — Wed, 10 Oct 2018 17:47:28 +0000

Monsignor, is Akita approved? I have read Bishop Ito’s letter and he only approved the statue, not the apparitions.

By: RbM

RbM — Wed, 10 Oct 2018 15:39:39 +0000

Look, Peter was not confirmed in the faith when Christ rebuked him…

The Apostle Paul may have rebuked some fella named Simon, but it was NOT Saint Peter…!!!

Jesus also prayed for Peter that his faith fail not. Now, either His prayer was answered or it wasn’t…!!!

Peter’s faith NEVER FAILED. NEVER..!!!

The Roman’s know full well what real papal infallibility truly is. And they are using it against an ignorant church of people who have no idea that the papacy has been taken away from them…!!!

A Catholic CANNOT recognize a true Pope and then disobey him…

!!!…THAT IS HERESY…!!!

The papacy is infallible, all the time, every time. There has never been a time in all of Church history when a Pope has taught error, EVER…!!!!!

Now, what I’m about to tell you will be rejected by EVERYONE..!!!

We lost the papacy when we lost the Papal States..

Pope Pius IX was the last true Pope of Rome…!!!

To separate the temporal and spiritual authority of the Church is to DESTROY the very work of God…!!!

And that’s exactly what these people have done.

The whole world rejected God and His Vicar on earth with the death of the Angelic Pope, Pope Pius IX.

RbM

By: mulier

mulier — Wed, 10 Oct 2018 06:56:14 +0000

Thank you for that, Monsignore. God bless you +

By: RAY - PORTSMOUTH - UK

RAY - PORTSMOUTH - UK — Wed, 10 Oct 2018 06:41:22 +0000

In reply to Deb Brunsberg.

Dear Deb
I would agree with you wholeheartedly that we should focus on Jesus in the here and now and to ensure that we do all that He has commanded us.
But – do not forget that Our Lord Himself also told us to watch for the ‘signs of the times’ – read Matthew Chapters 24 and 25 in full and then recall Christ’s own words recorded in the following excerpt from Luke’s gospel:
“Watch therefore, and pray always that you may be counted worthy to escape all these things that will come to pass, and to stand before the Son of Man” – Luke 21:36.
Jesus, Our Lord, Himself gave us plenty of signs and portents to watch for – and I don’t think we dare call those ‘dubious claims’!!
I feel also that Matthew 25 verses 31-44 need to be taken very seriously indeed by all of us who like to think ourselves followers of Jesus – because it makes it quite clear there how we will all ultimately be judged on that Great Day – maybe coming along much, much sooner than anyone might like to think . . . . . . .
Pray, Pray, Pray . . . God bless all and give us the grace to obey His word!

By: Debbie

Debbie — Tue, 09 Oct 2018 22:36:40 +0000

In reply to Debbie. Ah, Msgr. I see the P word is not to be used on your blog or the stars will appear, damn is my biggest problem, say that one way more then I like.