Monday, May 17, 2010

Cardinal Newman versus Pius X

THE OATH AGAINST MODERNISM
Pope Pius X
Given by His Holiness St. Pius X September 1, 1910.

I sincerely hold that the doctrine of faith was handed down to us from the apostles through the orthodox Fathers in exactly the same meaning and always in the same purport. Therefore, I entirely reject the heretical misrepresentation that dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to another different from the one which the Church held previously.

http://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/P10MOATH.HTM

10 comments:

  1. As a young Catholic I was committing a mortal sin if i ate food three hours before communion. I was sinning if I ate meat on Friday. And there are other dogmas that have changed in Catholicism. Talk about a crazy religion. Not to mention Penance and Confession.

    And yet i grew up thinking all this was true. I remember when i was saved back in 1984, and I was quite hungry on Ashe Wednesday, and my driving buddy had a Peporoni pizza, and offered me a piece, and i ate it. i felt very guilty a few minutes later.

    I thank the Lord he has helped me see his Word is my authority, and it is final and sufficient.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Trad-Romanist (if not outright Sedevacantist) "Tradition In Action" site has collected lots of evidence on how J.H. Newman was an intellectual father of Vatican II liberalism - and thus anathema to hardcore RC conservatives:

    "The renown and influence that came to him after his death were not due to his orthodoxy, but precisely the opposite, because of his Liberalism. In the first half of the 20th century, it was the modernist intellectual movements who championed his thinking as ahead of his times. “Newman was a man so various. A primer of infidelity could be compiled from his works," said Thomas Huxley. (p. 34)"

    http://www.traditioninaction.org/bkreviews/A_028br_Newman.htm

    It seems that on the long run, Newman's conversion was a Pyrrhic victory for Romanism. He infected the RCC with liberal virus ("doctrine of development" being an inherently un-traditionalist theory.)

    ReplyDelete
  3. > donsands said:
    > As a young Catholic I was
    > committing a mortal sin if i ate
    > food three hours before
    > communion. I was sinning if I
    > ate meat on Friday.

    Don, the "mortal sin" was not in eating within the period of time set aside for the minor fast before Mass nor the eating of meat on Friday - but in disobeying due authority.

    > DS: And there are other dogmas
    > that have changed in Catholicism.

    sw: No dogmas have ever changed in the Catholic Church. The things you've named here are disciplines, not dogmas.

    > DS: Talk about a crazy religion.

    sw: Talk about misrepresenting that religion!

    > DS: Not to mention Penance and Confession.

    sw: Penance is the call to repentance, which is part of the Sacrament of Reconciliation, which includes Confession and Penance.

    > DS: And yet i grew up thinking
    > all this was true.

    sw: Too bad you had poor catechesis and even sadder that you still do not understand Catholicism and attack that which you do not know.

    > DS: I remember when i was saved
    > back in 1984, and I was quite
    > hungry on Ashe Wednesday, and my
    > driving buddy had a Peporoni
    > pizza, and offered me a piece,
    > and i ate it. i felt very guilty
    > a few minutes later.

    sw: Again, the "guilt" would not be in merely eating - we ALL eat. The guilt is in violating a precept.

    > DS: I thank the Lord he has
    > helped me see his Word is my
    > authority, and it is final and
    > sufficient.

    sw: Ask the Lord to allow your heart to be open to His Truth and to reconsider His Church, which you obviously did not understand when you left it.

    In JMJ,
    Scott<<<
    CathApol Blog

    ReplyDelete
  4. CathApol said:
    the "mortal sin" was ... in disobeying due authority.

    Colossians 2: 16Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day— 17things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ. 18Let no one keep defrauding you of your prize by delighting in self-abasement and the worship of the angels, taking his stand on visions he has seen, inflated without cause by his fleshly mind, 19and not holding fast to the head, from whom the entire body, being supplied and held together by the joints and ligaments, grows with a growth which is from God.


    sw: No dogmas have ever changed in the Catholic Church. The things you've named here are disciplines, not dogmas.

    Pope Pius X:
    Therefore, I entirely reject the heretical misrepresentation that dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to another different from the one which the Church held previously.

    Seems strange that the Pope might say such a thing about sthg that never happened.
    Aren't the Marian dogmas...you know, dogmas?


    sw: Too bad you had poor catechesis and even sadder that you still do not understand Catholicism and attack that which you do not know.

    Note how Windsor here, without any possible way to know and thus out of ignorance attacks Don's priest(s) and clergy as incapable of teaching or mistaken! That's some arrogance!


    Peace,
    Rhology

    ReplyDelete
  5. "Penance is the call to repentance, which is part of the Sacrament of Reconciliation, which includes Confession and Penance."

    I have one Mediator, and that is Christ my Lord.
    I have no need of a priest my friend, to forgive me for my sins, especially by saying 10 Our Fathers, and 10 Hail Marys. Bad dogma there CathApol.

    Bottom line: Catholicism has a gospel of grace+works. And Paul said, "let this twisted gospel be exposed, and anyone who preaches be accursed. Even if an angel from heaven preached it, let him be accursed.

    I believe we are saved by grace alone, through faith alone, because of Christ Jesus alone, because the Scriptures teach this, and they are our authority alone, and most of all, for the glory of God alone.

    Have a good evening my friend.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Pius wrote Pascendi dominici gregis against modernism 3 years before the Oath. Bishop O'Dwyer's Defense of Newman following Pascendi here. Pius responds favorably to O'Dwyer's defense here (english at bottom). Pius stands by Pascendi in the Oath 2 years later, and so is presumably not altering his position on Newman (I am not aware of any further comment on Newman from him following his response to O'Dwyer).

    In the Oath, Pius also writes "I also reject the error of those who say that the faith held by the Church can contradict history, and that Catholic dogmas, in the *sense in which they are now understood*, are irreconcilable with a more realistic view of the origins of the Christian religion." which seems to echo the theme of development to some degree.

    ReplyDelete
  7. >> CathApol said:
    >> the "mortal sin" was ... in
    >> disobeying due authority.

    Alan posts:
    > Colossians 2: 16Therefore no one
    > is to act as your judge in regard
    > to food or drink or in respect to
    > a festival or a new moon or a
    > Sabbath day— 17things which are a
    > mere shadow of what is to come;
    > but the substance belongs to
    > Christ. 18Let no one keep
    > defrauding you of your prize by
    > delighting in self-abasement and
    > the worship of the angels, taking
    > his stand on visions he has seen,
    > inflated without cause by his
    > fleshly mind, 19and not holding
    > fast to the head, from whom the
    > entire body, being supplied and
    > held together by the joints and
    > ligaments, grows with a growth
    > which is from God.

    sw: Yes! And Jesus Christ, our Head, has left men whom He selected as bishops of His Church to lead His Church until He returns again. To be disobedient to those whom He has left in authority is to be disobedient to Him.
    "He that heareth you heareth me; and he that despiseth you despiseth me; and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me." (Luke 10:16)

    >> sw: No dogmas have ever changed
    >> in the Catholic Church. The
    >> things you've named here are
    >> disciplines, not dogmas.
    >
    Alan responds:
    > Pope Pius X:
    > Therefore, I entirely reject the
    > heretical misrepresentation that
    > dogmas evolve and change from one
    > meaning to another different from
    > the one which the Church held
    > previously.

    sw: I find it a bit amazing that Alan would cite Pope St. Pius X AFFIRMING that dogmas do not change and REJECTING "heretical misrepresentation" of the dogmas!

    > Alan continues: Seems strange
    > that the Pope might say such a
    > thing about sthg that never
    > happened.

    sw: He's REJECTING those who say such has happened!

    > Alan asks: Aren't the Marian
    > dogmas...you know, dogmas?

    sw: Certainly, and they have not "changed."

    >> sw: Too bad you (don) had poor
    >> catechesis and even sadder that
    >> you still do not understand
    >> Catholicism and attack that
    >> which you do not know.
    >
    > Alan states: Note how Windsor
    > here, without any possible way to
    > know and thus out of ignorance
    > attacks Don's priest(s) and
    > clergy as incapable of teaching
    > or mistaken! That's some
    > arrogance!

    sw: Well, it was either his catechesis OR Don himself just blocked out a proper catechesis. Either way, Don misrepresented the Catholic teaching on these matters and that is why I spoke out. I speak not from arrogance, but to provide the truth in Catholic teaching.

    In JMJ,
    Scott<<<
    CathApol Blog

    ReplyDelete
  8. You know CathApol, I may have misrepresented Catholicism, a little.

    Here's waht I was trying to say. As a young lad, the priests and nuns tell me I can not receive the wafer at Mass, unless I have not eaten anything three hours prior to Communion.
    They say it will be a sin if I do this act. They didn't say, it's a say because you disobeyed a priest.

    Communion was so holy that you couldn't have food in your stomach unless it was digested for three hours. If you did then it was a sin against God.

    And if you ate meat on Friday, it was a sin against God, not against the priest. Or the Pope, or all the Cardinals.

    This is doctrines of man. And they need to be crushed under the feet of the Church; the saints of the Lord, along with Satan. And they shall be shortly.

    Like I said a couple comments ago, Catholicism is a religion of works+grace=salvation.

    How do you respond to that Cath? If you want that is.

    ReplyDelete
  9. And CathApol continues his longstanding practice in missing the point.

    Yes! And Jesus Christ, our Head, has left men whom He selected as bishops of His Church to lead His Church until He returns again.

    And yet no response to the Colossians psg I cited. Just a naked and blind appeal to Rome's authority to order you to do what the Bible says NOT to do. And yeah, that was kinda my point.


    "He that heareth you heareth me; and he that despiseth you despiseth me

    Oh, do you believe the apostles are still alive today?
    See, I always thought that reading the NT is how we hear the apostles, since, you know, they wrote the NT. Boy, was I wrong!


    I find it a bit amazing that Alan would cite Pope St. Pius X AFFIRMING that dogmas do not change and REJECTING "heretical misrepresentation" of the dogmas!

    Not strange at all. Pius X says he rejects that dogmas evolve. Why take an oath that they don't, if in fact nobody was saying they did?
    That would be contrary to pretty much all of Xtian practice - heresies and challenges make us refine the faith. Especially given the massive --duh-- value of this proposition, I'd say the burden of proof is on you to show us all current Roman doctrines in the Bible. Go for it!


    He's REJECTING those who say such has happened!

    And wouldn't ya know, that means there's disunity and disagreement within Romanism. Y'all sound like a bunch of Protestants. Which is it and how can we know? Why won't the Magisterium step in and clear it all up?



    Certainly, and they have not "changed."

    Being declared "dogma" whereas they were not "dogma" before certainly seems like a change to me.
    Or maybe you could show us in the Bible where each of the Marian dogmas are derived.


    Well, it was either his catechesis OR Don himself just blocked out a proper catechesis.

    Right. Couldn't possibly be that those clergymen were right and --gasp!-- a layman like you is wrong. Why should I trust you, again, over Roman clergy? Help me out.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Since partim-partim is a totally valid POV in RCC, one wonders how CathApol can escape the clutches of self-contradiction.
    Seems pretty hopeless to me, but I suppose he could always just miss the point again.

    ReplyDelete