|
Post by marcellusfaber on Jun 10, 2023 10:28:19 GMT -5
I have discovered recently that a woman whom I used to sing with at Mass has apostatised to an Eastern Schismatic Church. I believe that she was lead into this by her husband, whom I also knew, as they met at the 'Indult' Mass which I used to attend. It is a good feminine quality for a woman to follow her husband, but it is very saddening that he has lead them both to schism and likely damnation. They also have a young son.
This is not the only case in Britain recently, as I believe this was brought on by the influence of one man in Oxford, whom I also know, on a circle of friends. So far I have heard that five adults have apostatised, three in Oxford to the Russian Schismatic Church.
Out of your charity, please pray for these misguided people. I will be organising some Masses for them and will pass the cap round to friends of these people. If anyone else wishes to contribute, please let me know.
|
|
|
Post by marcellusfaber on Jun 12, 2023 4:48:44 GMT -5
Thanks for the suggestion. I have written an e-mail to them.
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Jun 12, 2023 7:57:27 GMT -5
I will certainly pray for them. As this crisis continues, the "orthodox" appear for many to be the solution, but it's just another false solution among many others. While there are many well meaning "orthodox" who grow up in the various sects under that title, and do not know where the Church is, it is deplorable for a Catholic to knowingly go into schism and reject the Church, and flee to a thousand year old schismatic and heretical sect thinking they have found the Church. The Orthodox are like professional art thieves, who unlike amateurs (the Protestants) have stolen beautiful and magnificent works of art, and whereas the authorities on earth will not force them to return what they have stolen, they display it openly, as though it belongs to them, giving the appearance that they are the true and rightful owners. Catholics who have been scandalized by this crisis see the beauty and magnificence of these orthodox liturgies and rites, and say "there is the Church," but ignore the sad fact that the orthodox have stolen what they have from the Church and have absolutely no lawful right to any of it. The only thing that can be said about them is that at least they have preserved intact what they took, unlike their Protestant partners in crime, and have done well in that, so that when or if they return what is not theirs to the Church, it will returned as it was 1,000 years ago, beautiful and uncorrupted. Outside of their liturgies, however, they have been corrupted on matters of doctrine. They have followed the world, not Our Lord, the Commandments or even the natural law itself, by teaching the lawfulness of divorce and contraception, for example. There is divorce in the orthodox sects, at least if it is only up to three times, and they do go to Communion in that state, seeing no problem with it, despite the words of Our Lord forbidding the practice of divorce. If they choose to use contraceptives, violating the natural law, they also continue to receive the sacraments, as that is also permissible now according to their corrupted teaching. I posted this some years back demonstrating from their own words their corruption of doctrine: tradcath.proboards.com/thread/1876/heresies-orthodox-own-wordsThis excellent 1955 article by Fr. Englert also explains the doctrinal corruption of the so called Orthodox: tradcath.proboards.com/thread/2006/eastern-orthodox-theology-englert-1955If you have any communication with them, feel free to send them the above links. Hopefully, if they are not so hardened in their schism yet, and may be open to looking at it.
|
|
|
Post by marcellusfaber on Jun 12, 2023 9:04:49 GMT -5
Thank you, Pacelli. I did send them the article from Fr Englert, and I was told that the husband had read it. I do have a comment on this article though: at one point it is stated that the Eastern Schismatics have valid Sacraments and implies that many of the ignorant laity receive grace from these Sacraments. I do not believe that this is correct. It is my understanding that the Sacraments can only confer grace when administered by a minister approved in some way by the Catholic Church. There is also a point later on in the article when it is stated that a young priest was possibly 'over-zealous' in refusing communion to a schismatic woman who did not see the difference between the Church and her sect; this sort of comment leads me to believe that some priests in 1950s America were sadly ignorant of the Church's law. Otherwise I found the article helpful. This article from the American Quarterly Catholic Review, which I found in one of the resource forums, I found very useful also: drive.google.com/file/d/1_V6tVucRWsnN1ClxXButXJ6QQLFNB4Yl/viewThis, in part, is what I wrote to these friends And part of the reply I received: As you can see, she avoided my question about the indissolubility of marriage, which I believe eviscerates the Eastern Schismatic position, it being so ridiculous. Even if their perverse interpretation of the words of Our Lord in the Gospel of St Matthew were correct, how, for example, in the case of the Russian Schismatics can there have been in 1900 195 reasons for divorce? Surely, even according to their own argument, there could only be one? I have not taken them up on their offer to discuss the points of contention with them, for I don't believe myself well enough informed on the subject. I also believe that I should be avoiding these people as vitandi, is that correct?
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Jun 12, 2023 22:09:50 GMT -5
Thank you, Pacelli. I did send them the article from Fr Englert, and I was told that the husband had read it. I do have a comment on this article though: at one point it is stated that the Eastern Schismatics have valid Sacraments and implies that many of the ignorant laity receive grace from these Sacraments. I do not believe that this is correct. It is my understanding that the Sacraments can only confer grace when administered by a minister approved in some way by the Catholic Church. There is also a point later on in the article when it is stated that a young priest was possibly 'over-zealous' in refusing communion to a schismatic woman who did not see the difference between the Church and her sect; this sort of comment leads me to believe that some priests in 1950s America were sadly ignorant of the Church's law. Otherwise I found the article helpful. This article from the American Quarterly Catholic Review, which I found in one of the resource forums, I found very useful also: drive.google.com/file/d/1_V6tVucRWsnN1ClxXButXJ6QQLFNB4Yl/viewThis, in part, is what I wrote to these friends And part of the reply I received: As you can see, she avoided my question about the indissolubility of marriage, which I believe eviscerates the Eastern Schismatic position, it being so ridiculous. Even if their perverse interpretation of the words of Our Lord in the Gospel of St Matthew were correct, how, for example, in the case of the Russian Schismatics can there have been in 1900 195 reasons for divorce? Surely, even according to their own argument, there could only be one? I have not taken them up on their offer to discuss the points of contention with them, for I don't believe myself well enough informed on the subject. I also believe that I should be avoiding these people as vitandi, is that correct? Hello Marcellus Faber, This topic is much bigger than just the orthodox. If a Protestant, for example, baptizes his baby, the baby does in fact become a Catholic, a member of the Church, and is in the state of grace. He would remain in that state until he becomes at least 14, according to the opinion of theologians. So, the sacraments can be effective outside the Church, even if unlawfully used. To dive into the topic of whether the invincibly ignorant may receive grace from sacraments from sects who have valid sacraments is a big topic, and would require sources, as it's big topic of theology. We know for example, that baptism would still have the the sacramental effect on infants, or young children, but what about older people? It's an interesting question, and in my opinion, better left to the theologians. Regarding your friends, if you think your instruction would be well received, I would encourage you to keep trying, but if your are certain that they have hardened and will not hear the truth, then I would urge you to let them go, as they have chosen their fate, a sad fate at that, but we all have a choice for better or worse.
|
|