Replies

You claim the excommunication only applies to individuals this is hogwash by Cardinal Humbert and the Patriarch . This is not true- I showed you the quote that it was Paul VI and Athenagoras I,. You are very stubborn. There is no reason to lift an excommunication of a few dead people unless the people who followed them through the current situation would have the excommunication lifted also. You do not make sense and you are not looking at the facts. Now you know as well as I do that electricity isn't in the Gospels and neither is the Trinity. That is obvious but they are implied implicitly. You will not find Sister Churches or the new false ecumenism in revalation or tradition and it is not a TRUE Developement of Doctrine and it is killing off large sectors of the church and leading souls to HELL.

I am telling you that Ratziner has admitted this idea of Sister Churches is not in the New Testament and he has admitted that the statements on ecumenism in Vatican II documents are new as well and not found in the new testament Ratzinger said "The text on the Church was kept open primarily because it was to be supplemented by a text on ecumenism which would develop a viewpoint only hinted at in the Church text. Taking both texts into account, we can view in a positive light the undeniably admitted ecumenical outlook of the schema on the Church....The ecumenical movement grew out of a situation unknown to the New Testament and for which the New Testament can therefore offer no guidelines." "Theological Highlights of Vatican II", p. 68.

So they are doing the same thing with the Orthodox with the "sister Church" concept- its not in tradition or in any Church documents prior to Vatican II.

Now this is how Cardinal Ratzinger thinks of sticking with tradition:on the concept of tradition in Vatican II’s Dei Verbum, again Cardinal Ratzinger writes:
"Vatican II’s refusal of the proposal to adopt the text of Lerins, familiar to, and, as it were, sanctified by two Church Councils, shows once more how Trent and Vatican I were left behind, how their texts were continually reinterpreted....Vatican II had a new idea of how historical identity and continuity are to be brought about. The static semper of Vincent of Lerins no longer seems to Vatican II adequate to express the problem." (L.Th.K., Vol. 13, p. 521)

Gee I guess this great Saint wasn’t updated enough for Cardinal Ratzinger. Didn’t Lerins understand the convenient “myth” of “modern man” enough??

Contrast this with what St. Vincent of Lerins had to say about evolution which would create something new NOT based in Tradition or RevelationVs. the proper sense of progress in the same “kind”, sense and meaning : On the "Development" of the Christian Faith
Chapter XXIII. On Development in Religious Knowledge. See http://www.chattablogs.com/hagioipateres/archives/009181.html.
[54.] But some one will say. perhaps, Shall there, then, be no progress in Christ's Church? Certainly; all possible progress. For what being is there, so envious of men, so full of hatred to God, who would seek to forbid it? Yet on condition that it be real progress, not alteration of the faith. For progress requires that the subject be enlarged in itself, (he means that concept versus this next concept) alteration, that it be transformed into something else. The intelligence, then, the knowledge, the wisdom, as well of individuals as of all, as well of one man as of the whole Church, ought, in the course of ages and centuries, to increase and make much and vigorous progress; but yet only in its own kind; that is to say, in the same doctrine, in the same sense, and in the same meaning.

[55.] The growth of religion in the soul must be analogous to the growth of the body, which, though in process of years it is developed and attains its full size, yet remains still the same. There is a wide difference between the flower of youth and the maturity of age; yet they who were once young are still the same now that they have become old, insomuch that though the stature and outward form of the individual are changed, yet his nature is one and the same, his person is one and the same. An infant's limbs are small, a young man's large, yet the infant and the young man are the same. Men when full grown have the same number of joints that they had when children; and if there be any to which maturer age has given birth these were already present in embryo, so that nothing new is produced in them when old which was not already latent in them when children. This, then, is undoubtedly the true and legitimate rule of progress, this the established and most beautiful order of growth, that mature age ever develops in the man those parts and forms which the wisdom of the Creator had already framed beforehand in the infant. Whereas, if the human form were changed into some shape belonging to another kind, or at any rate, if the number of its limbs were increased or diminished, the result would be that the whole body would become either a wreck or a monster, or, at the least, would be impaired and enfeebled.

[56.] In like manner, it behoves Christian doctrine to follow the same laws of progress, so as to be consolidated by years, enlarged by time, refined by age, and yet, withal, to continue uncorrupt and unadulterate, complete and perfect in all the measurement of its parts, and, so to speak, in all its proper members and senses, admitting no change, no waste of its distinctive property, no variation in its limits.

[57.] For example: Our forefathers in the old time sowed wheat in the Church's field. It would be most unmeet and iniquitous if we, their descendants, instead of the genuine truth of corn, should reap the counterfeit error of tares. This rather should be the result,-there should be no discrepancy between the first and the last. From doctrine which was sown as wheat, we should reap, in the increase, doctrine of the same kind-wheat also; so that when in process of time any of the original seed is developed, and now flourishes under cultivation, no change may ensue in the character of the plant. There may supervene shape, form, variation in outward appearance, but the nature of each kind must remain the same. God forbid that those rose-beds of Catholic interpretation should be converted into thorns and thistles. God forbid that in that spiritual paradise from plants of cinnamon and balsam darnel and wolfsbane should of a sudden shoot forth.

Therefore, whatever has been sown by the fidelity of the Fathers in this husbandry of God's Church, the same ought to be cultivated and taken care of by the industry of their children, the same ought to flourish and ripen, the same ought to advance and go forward to perfection. For it is right that those ancient doctrines of heavenly philosophy should, as time goes on, be cared for, smoothed, polished; but not that they should be changed, not that they should be maimed, not that they should be mutilated. They may receive proof, illustration, definiteness; but they must retain withal their completeness, theirintegrity, their characteristic properties.

[58.] For if once this license of impious fraud be admitted, I dread to say in how great danger religion will be of being utterly destroyed and annihilated. For if any one part of Catholic truth be given up, another, and another, and another will thenceforward be given up as a matter of course, and the several individual portions having been rejected, what will follow in the end but the rejection of the whole? On the other hand, if what is new begins to be mingled with what is old, foreign with domestic, profane with sacred, the custom will of necessity creep on universally, till at last the Church will have nothing left untampered with, nothing unadulterated, nothing sound, nothing pure; but where formerly there was a sanctuary of chaste and undefiled truth, thenceforward there will be a brothel of impious and base errors. May God's mercy avert this wickedness from the minds of his servants; be it rather the frenzy of the ungodly.

[59.] But the Church of Christ, the careful and watchful guardian of the doctrines deposited in her charge, never changes anything in them, never diminishes, never adds, does not cut off what is necessary, does not add what is superfluous, does not lose her own, does not appropriate what is another's, but while dealing faithfully and judiciously with ancient doctrine, keeps this one object carefully in view,-if there be anything which antiquity has left shapeless and rudimentary, to fashion and polish it, if anything already reduced to shape and developed, to consolidate and strengthen it, if any already ratified and defined to keep and guard it. Finally, what other object have Councils ever aimed at in their decrees, than to provide that what was before believed in simplicity should in future be believed intelligently, that what was before preached coldly should in future be preached earnestly, that what was before practiced negligently should thenceforward be practiced with double solicitude? This, I say, is what the Catholic Church, roused by the novelties of heretics, has accomplished by the decrees of her Councils,-this, and nothing else,-she has thenceforward consigned to posterity in writing what she had received from those of olden times only by tradition, comprising a great amount of matter in a few words, and often, for the better understanding, designating an old article of the faith by the characteristic of a new name.

--The Commonitory, ch. XXIII

It is time to get back to the faith of our fathers not the indulgent love affair with “modern man”.
We are updating ourselves out of existence. It is time to get back to sound doctrine and teaching not the “New Theology” which pope Pius XII condmened.

Don't get into UT Unum Sint- "One must ask what oligarchs are going to do the decentralization and just how will Pope John Paul II's Ut Unum Sint be implemented when it calls for a "new way of exercising the papacy"? We need the authorities to use their God-given centralized ecclesiastical authority to crack down on the bad prelates who are homosexual pederasts and pedophiles, instead of attacking innocent priests like Fr. Nicholas Gruner and Fr. Haley in the Richmond Diocese who was put on trial by Bishop Thomas Doran (which Stephen Brady has posted at Roman Catholic Faithful) and The Society of St. Pius X Bishops and Priests, while men like Hans Kung and Richard McBrien have free reign to publish and spread their democratic ecclesiologies, and heresies."