|
Post by Voxxkowalski on Aug 13, 2016 6:24:06 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Past Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 12, 2016 7:02:02 GMT -5
In this time of near apostasy in the Church, I personally do not understand all the squabbling about the una cum clause. I currently attend the Latin Mass in a church where the Priest is valid (89 yrs old), and it is a Church in the diocese. As there are not many options for many people in the locales in which we live, I do not understand where one clause, namely the una cum clause, warrants keeping people's from the Latin Mass. I may be off the wall, but I personally think if Francis is NOT Pope, saying he IS Pope, isn't going to make him one!
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on Nov 12, 2016 7:50:42 GMT -5
Exactly Veronica....and something that gets overlooked is the laity have no responsability or culpability in the matter whatsoever...if naming the wrong man as pope is a heretical sin...then the sin is only on the clergy who named the wrong man. Catholics have become so protty anymore they forget the divide between sheep and shepherd.
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Nov 12, 2016 13:35:48 GMT -5
In my opinion, it's not a sin at all. In regards to the naming of an antipope who is an undeclared heretic, the priest cannot be guilty of something that the Church has not authoritatively bound him too.
Francis is the man who most of the world, including most Catholics recognize as Pope. It is also an apparent fact that most Catholics no longer grasp what that means, but that is besides the point.
The issue here is not what is true, the real question is what is the status of this truth.
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on Nov 12, 2016 14:06:35 GMT -5
In my opinion, it's not a sin at all. In regards to the naming of an antipope who is an undeclared heretic, the priest cannot be guilty of something that the Church has not authoritatively bound him too. Francis is the man who most of the world, including most Catholics recognize as Pope. It is also an apparent fact that most Catholics no longer grasp what that means, but that is besides the point. The issue here is not what is true, the real question is what is the status of this truth. Exactly true...If I get accused one more time of saying the gates of hell have prevailed because I assert that the throne of Peter is Presently empty I could scream! The issue is the Man not the office. The fact is clear that the sedes respect the office of Pope far more than the neo-cons and R&R crowd who actually accept as POSSIBLE the Holy Spirit would allow a true Pope to spew voluminous spiritual error to millions of Catholics. The Church has not failed Man...Man has failed his Church.
|
|
Deleted
Past Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 12, 2016 16:27:34 GMT -5
In my opinion, it's not a sin at all. In regards to the naming of an antipope who is an undeclared heretic, the priest cannot be guilty of something that the Church has not authoritatively bound him too. Francis is the man who most of the world, including most Catholics recognize as Pope. It is also an apparent fact that most Catholics no longer grasp what that means, but that is besides the point. The issue here is not what is true, the real question is what is the status of this truth. Exactly true...If I get accused one more time of saying the gates of hell have prevailed because I assert that the throne of Peter is Presently empty I could scream! The issue is the Man not the office. The fact is clear that the sedes respect the office of Pope far more than the neo-cons and R&R crowd who actually accept as POSSIBLE the Holy Spirit would allow a true Pope to spew voluminous spiritual error to millions of Catholics. The Church has not failed Man...Man has failed his Church. Voxxkowalski, I agree with you that "The Church has not failed Man...Man has failed his Church" and that the "sedes respect the office of the Pope far more than the neo-cons and R&R crowd". What about Francis being an apostate? He seems to uphold every religion except Catholicism. He even states not to prostelytize. I find the following in the Bible to be very appropriate for our time: 2 Thessalonians, Chapter 2 vs 10: "And in all seduction of iniquity to them that perish; because they receive not the LOVE of the TRUTH, that they might be saved. Therefore God shall send them the operation of error, to believe lying". (emphasis added)
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Nov 12, 2016 18:23:32 GMT -5
Exactly true...If I get accused one more time of saying the gates of hell have prevailed because I assert that the throne of Peter is Presently empty I could scream! The issue is the Man not the office. The fact is clear that the sedes respect the office of Pope far more than the neo-cons and R&R crowd who actually accept as POSSIBLE the Holy Spirit would allow a true Pope to spew voluminous spiritual error to millions of Catholics. The Church has not failed Man...Man has failed his Church. Voxxkowalski, I agree with you that "The Church has not failed Man...Man has failed his Church" and that the "sedes respect the office of the Pope far more than the neo-cons and R&R crowd". What about Francis being an apostate? He seems to uphold every religion except Catholicism. He even states not to prostelytize. I find the following in the Bible to be very appropriate for our time: 2 Thessalonians, Chapter 2 vs 10: "And in all seduction of iniquity to them that perish; because they receive not the LOVE of the TRUTH, that they might be saved. Therefore God shall send them the operation of error, to believe lying". (emphasis added) The truth about Francis' status is a separate one from the "una cum" prayer in the mass.
|
|
Deleted
Past Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 12, 2016 18:55:40 GMT -5
Voxxkowalski, I agree with you that "The Church has not failed Man...Man has failed his Church" and that the "sedes respect the office of the Pope far more than the neo-cons and R&R crowd". What about Francis being an apostate? He seems to uphold every religion except Catholicism. He even states not to prostelytize. I find the following in the Bible to be very appropriate for our time: 2 Thessalonians, Chapter 2 vs 10: "And in all seduction of iniquity to them that perish; because they receive not the LOVE of the TRUTH, that they might be saved. Therefore God shall send them the operation of error, to believe lying". (emphasis added) The truth about Francis' status is a separate one from the "una cum" prayer in the mass. Sorry for getting off topic! I have been told that one should not attend Mass where the Una Cum prayer is in the Mass. That by doing so one is uniting themselves with Francis and agreeing that Francis is Pope, and therefore I am condoning everything Francis does or stands for by attending.
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Nov 12, 2016 19:31:24 GMT -5
The truth about Francis' status is a separate one from the "una cum" prayer in the mass. Sorry for getting off topic! I have been told that one should not attend Mass where the Una Cum prayer is in the Mass. That by doing so one is uniting themselves with Francis and agreeing that Francis is Pope, and therefore I am condoning everything Francis does or stands for by attending. This is a debunked position of a small faction of imbalanced "sedevacantists." I would be happy to discuss it with you in a separate thread, but let it suffice to say: flee from these people who tell you such things.
|
|
Deleted
Past Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 12, 2016 20:12:22 GMT -5
Sorry for getting off topic! I have been told that one should not attend Mass where the Una Cum prayer is in the Mass. That by doing so one is uniting themselves with Francis and agreeing that Francis is Pope, and therefore I am condoning everything Francis does or stands for by attending. This is a debunked position of a small faction of imbalanced "sedevacantists." I would be happy to discuss it with you in a separate thread, but let it suffice to say: flee from these people who tell you such things. Thanks Pacelli! What I was being told about the uma cum didn't appeal to my common sense and that is all I had to go on. I look forward to an in depth discussion on the subject and am appreciative for your help! I will start a separate thread.
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on Nov 12, 2016 21:18:22 GMT -5
Sorry for getting off topic! I have been told that one should not attend Mass where the Una Cum prayer is in the Mass. That by doing so one is uniting themselves with Francis and agreeing that Francis is Pope, and therefore I am condoning everything Francis does or stands for by attending. This is a debunked position of a small faction of imbalanced "sedevacantists." I would be happy to discuss it with you in a separate thread, but let it suffice to say: flee from these people who tell you such things. Doesnt Father Cekada hold this view?
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Nov 13, 2016 12:51:01 GMT -5
This is a debunked position of a small faction of imbalanced "sedevacantists." I would be happy to discuss it with you in a separate thread, but let it suffice to say: flee from these people who tell you such things. Doesnt Father Cekada hold this view? He did not always, but yes, he did adopt it at some point, never retracting or explaining why he changed. John Lane tried to correct him to no avail.
|
|
|
Post by michaelwilson on Dec 30, 2016 10:17:54 GMT -5
I don't insert the name of Francis or of my local bishop when I read the prayers in the canon of the Mass; but I don't think that there is a solid reason to miss Mass because the priest that is celebrating the Mass does. The case of the Great Western Schism comes to mind; depending where Catholics lived, the priest celebrating the Mass would be inserting the name of a false Pope into the Canon; but there wasn't any penalty for assisting at those Masses, after all the smoke and dust had cleared.
|
|
|
Post by kim on Feb 9, 2017 15:59:14 GMT -5
The truth about Francis' status is a separate one from the "una cum" prayer in the mass. Sorry for getting off topic! I have been told that one should not attend Mass where the Una Cum prayer is in the Mass. That by doing so one is uniting themselves with Francis and agreeing that Francis is Pope, and therefore I am condoning everything Francis does or stands for by attending. That's what my priest says.
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on Feb 10, 2017 0:31:36 GMT -5
Sorry for getting off topic! I have been told that one should not attend Mass where the Una Cum prayer is in the Mass. That by doing so one is uniting themselves with Francis and agreeing that Francis is Pope, and therefore I am condoning everything Francis does or stands for by attending. That's what my priest says. Well he is wrong and he is more than welcome here to defend his wrongness.
|
|