|
Post by RitaMarita on Jan 13, 2024 6:09:21 GMT -5
I thought it might be worth having a thread specifically for what Guerard des Lauries says on the "Una Cum" issue. From what I understand he basically says that if one has the option to go to a "non una cum" Mass that they should go to it but if not that having access to the Mass is more important. He also says that every case is different. My Spanish isn't that great though. So, perhaps someone who knows it better can verify this? sededelasabiduria.es/2017/12/08/misas-una-cum-los-2-delitos-entrevista-a-mons-guerard-de-lauriers/
|
|
|
Post by RitaMarita on Jan 13, 2024 6:11:26 GMT -5
8 1/2 minute video in French by Bishop Geurard des Lauriers on the "una cum" issue.
|
|
alyosha
Junior Member
Whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God
Posts: 60
|
Post by alyosha on Jan 13, 2024 9:34:51 GMT -5
Thank for posting this Rita. I wish I could read the original interview in Sodalitium, but I can’t access their early issues.
Anyway, you are correct. Bishop des Lauriers explains that, in his opinion, the una cum mass is an offense of sacrilege and schism, and those who participate willingly on the mass also partake in this offense.
However, there are mitigating factors that can excuse an individual from this offense, namely:
1- Extrinsic factors that force the participation (a familiar reason for instance) 2- Ignorance 3- When, in a careful case by case matter, there is no other way to receive the sacraments.
I’m simplifying his position, but I can translate the interview later if anyone is interested.
Let me also state that I didn’t think my respect for Bp. des Lauriers could go any higher, but it just did. I think he is, alongside Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange, the greatest theologian of the 20th century.
|
|
John Lewis
Full Member
Reviewing the Knowledge
Posts: 379
|
Post by John Lewis on Jan 13, 2024 23:49:16 GMT -5
His Una Cum teaching is novel and not found in Church teaching. alyosha, please review the forum refuting this error. His thesis is also very novel.
|
|
alyosha
Junior Member
Whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God
Posts: 60
|
Post by alyosha on Jan 14, 2024 4:51:11 GMT -5
I disagree. I think his theological analysis is perfect. Also, the current times are unprecedented in the history of the church, so a degree of novelty is to be expected.
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Jan 14, 2024 11:00:18 GMT -5
I disagree. I think his theological analysis is perfect. Also, the current times are unprecedented in the history of the church, so a degree of novelty is to be expected. Novelty and private judgment are the foundation of doctrinal error and heresy. If any novel understanding is needed to explain this crisis, no one should be putting it forward without it being reviewed by Rome. Since we do not have Rome to look at novelties at present, Catholics must not publicly put forth these ideas, believe them or act upon them until Rome approves them. Those with novel propositions should be remaining silent with their ideas, put them in a sealed envelope and mail them to the Holy See when that can happen again to be reviewed for their orthodoxy. Until that time, we must only rely on what has already been taught by the Church or as explained by the theologians. There is a solution to understanding the crisis which fits perfectly within the existing theology, so no novelty is needed. It's just that most will not even look at it, as it goes against the various developed narratives and inadequate solutions that have grown over the last 50 years or so.
|
|
alyosha
Junior Member
Whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God
Posts: 60
|
Post by alyosha on Jan 14, 2024 11:10:32 GMT -5
Pacelli, this is the first time I disagreed with virtually everything you said. I don’t agree that there is a satisfactory solution at all, far from it. I don’t agree that we are bound to stay silent as opposed to propose a theoretical solution, as long as you don’t demand ascent from others and stays in the realm of personal opinion.
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Jan 14, 2024 11:15:15 GMT -5
Pacelli , this is the first time I disagreed with virtually everything you said. I don’t agree that there is a satisfactory solution at all, far from it. I don’t agree that we are bound to stay silent as opposed to propose a theoretical solution, as long as you don’t demand ascent from others and stays in the realm of personal opinion. Do you understand what the solution is prior to saying this? It's been put forth on this forum for years, but buried in various threads.
|
|
alyosha
Junior Member
Whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God
Posts: 60
|
Post by alyosha on Jan 14, 2024 11:34:37 GMT -5
Pacelli, I think I heard the position yes, either here or somewhere else. Also, you explained with detail in my thread about my objections to sedevacantism. I don’t hold the position, but I think that the only theologically sound version of sedevacantism is the Cassiciacum thesis, totalism seems untenable to me.
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Jan 14, 2024 12:20:51 GMT -5
Pacelli , I think I heard the position yes, either here or somewhere else. Also, you explained with detail in my thread about my objections to sedevacantism. I don’t hold the position, but I think that the only theologically sound version of sedevacantism is the Cassiciacum thesis, totalism seems untenable to me. On this forum, we are arguing that the solution is to believe everything that the Church has taught prior to Vatican II, and not deviate from that belief to solve the crisis. We cannot create new heresies or errors to solve the crisis, and the answer must be completely consistent with Catholic theology. Obviously there is much more that can be said, but that's a snapshot. Fwiw, I agree with your rejection of "totalism" as understood by the common understanding of that term. I will also say that the term is a made up word, and it's not tightly defined, so I am obviously being general here with its meaning. Since it's vague, with no clear meaning, some "totalists" may be orthodox in their belief. I also believe that the thesis, as applied just to the pope is a theological error, but not heresy, but when applied to the universal episcopate is heretical.
|
|
alyosha
Junior Member
Whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God
Posts: 60
|
Post by alyosha on Jan 14, 2024 12:47:08 GMT -5
Pacelli, I understand, but I hold that this position leads to untenable theological conclusions. I define "totalism" as simply believing that currently there is no one occupying the Papal office.
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Jan 14, 2024 12:55:22 GMT -5
Pacelli , I understand, but I hold that this position leads to untenable theological conclusions. I define "totalism" as simply believing that currently there is no one occupying the Papal office. Totalism also can mean that the papal office along with all episcopal offices throughout the world are vacant, meaning that the apostolic succession has either ended or is interrupted, which is heretical. I do not see how the papal office being ended automatically leads to untenable theological conclusions. There are both orthodox and unorthodox conclusions that can be derived from a long term state of sedevacante. Obviously, the unorthodox conclusions must be rejected. This does not mean that the long term state of sedevacante with orthodox conclusions derived from this must be rejected.
|
|
alyosha
Junior Member
Whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God
Posts: 60
|
Post by alyosha on Jan 14, 2024 13:06:40 GMT -5
Pacelli, you already know one of these conclusions, It was my first thread here. The use of private judgment to conclude lack of authority from the magisterium is illicit in my understanding. There are others, but this is a subject for another time.
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Jan 14, 2024 13:38:51 GMT -5
Pacelli , you already know one of these conclusions, It was my first thread here. The use of private judgment to conclude lack of authority from the magisterium is illicit in my understanding. There are others, but this is a subject for another time. I agree, if you mean the magisterium of a pope, not an undeclared antipope.
|
|
John Lewis
Full Member
Reviewing the Knowledge
Posts: 379
|
Post by John Lewis on Jan 14, 2024 19:06:56 GMT -5
I disagree. I think his theological analysis is perfect. If it so perfect, why does it continue to evolve? How many versions of the thesis are there? We cannot count them because no-one really knows.... #problematic
|
|