Protestant details locution about the Warning

Did the Holy Spirit desert the Pope who excommunicated him? Luther was never reconciled to the Church and expressed hatred for it, can it get much worse than that? Pope Benedict reminded Catholics that we are entitled to disagree with Popes except where dogma is concerned. In this case, I accept that invitation, this is not dogma it is ecumenical and diplomatic 'fudging'.

"Moreover, because the preceding errors and many others are contained in the books or writings of Martin Luther, we likewise condemn, reprobate, and reject completely the books and all the writings and sermons of the said Martin, whether in Latin or any other language, containing the said errors or any one of them; and we wish them to be regarded as utterly condemned, reprobated, and rejected. We forbid each and every one of the faithful of either sex, in virtue of holy obedience and under the above penalties to be incurred automatically, to read, assert, preach, praise, print, publish, or defend them."

 

OK - agree to disagree point reached, I think! (I'm not necessarily saying that Leo X was wrong to excommunicate Luther in 1521 - neither party could have known the tragic turn that events took after that, nor that it would take half a millenium to patch things up!!) I've said enough now ... although I would still like to address the question of Fr Gobbi and 1332, which is really interesting.

 

OK. (It depends on your definition of 'patched up'. I didn't quote Fr. Gobbi and wouldn't do so).

 

This is all very, very interesting. Both of you are right on. I love it when someone else does the work for me!

 

Oh please DO QUOTE FR. GOBBI!! If I had time, I'd write the whole thing out. I'm having company in 15 min.

 

The passage in Fr Gobbi in which '1332' occurs is really interesting, as it points both to the events of the 16th century and philosophical errors of the 14th that created the conditions of possibiity for the breakdown that occurred two centuries later (during which, it should been said, there was ample time to buck the trend). Luther didn't just come out of nowhere.

The analysis accompanying the number '1332' is quite remarkable, and worth quoting in extenso

Here I'm going to have to get a bit technical (those who aren't theo-nerds can stop reading here). The identification in Gobbi of the early 14th century as the source of much later trouble concurs absolutely with the historical scholarship associated with the work of the nouvelle théologie (Henri de Lubac, Hans Urs von Balthasar, Jean Daniélou, Etienne Gilson) which was foundational both for Vatican II and for the 'hermeneutic of continuity' pursued by John Paul II and Benedict XVI.

These scholars pinpointed the start of the decline of Western Christian thought (leading ultimately to atheism/secular humanism) quite specifically in the period after the death of Thomas Aquinas (1274) in certain dubious theological and philosophical moves of the likes of Duns Scotus and William of Ockham. This is hard to summarize in the present context, but a number of things happened during this time which had disastrous effects further down the line:

i) an over-intellectualization of theological discourse (if you've ever read any 14th century theology, it reads like higher mathematics, logic gone crazy) and its divorce from living spirituality, i.e. a split between increasingly systematic theologians on a head trip and mystics who now travel on non-intersecting paths
ii) an exaggerated emphasis stress on God's will and absolute, inscrutable POWER as opposed to goodness (a seed which will produce a bitter harvest not so much with Luther as with Calvin). The pursuit of power logically then dominates and corrupts the human scientific enterprise as it takes off
iii) the Scriptures become an object for systematic dissection rather than being received meditatively as the Living Word of God as in the older tradition of lectio divina
iv) as Eastern Orthodox theologians (Chrestos Giannaras, John Zizioulas ...) are fond of reminding us, Western scholastic theology falls into an over-reliance on Augustine, losing contact with the Greek Fathers. Many of Luther's and Calvin's errors on the relationship between grace and nature - but also those of the Jansenists within Catholicism - can be traced back to a one-sided reading of the late Augustine during his polemics with Pelagius.

This is actually pretty subtle stuff, as anyone who has hacked their way through any of the scholarly literature on this period will know. At the start, the intellectual errors were minute, almost imperceptible. But it's like descending a mountain - make a tiny mistake at the top and once you get to the bottom, you'll be miles off the correct path. Which is exactly what happened to Western Christian thought over a period of several centuries.

My takehome from this is that we truly have a 'Faithful Adversary' who is far more intelligent than we are, a true master of the art of dialectics, capable of incredibly ingenious long-range planning. Whatever you do, DON'T count on defeating him with human arguments - you'll lose. Only in Christ's strength...

 

Wow! Thank you both Stephen and Peter B. Maybe we have to put this in the "mystery" column, although I have a hard time believing Luther is in heaven. Having said that I believe what was just shown is why the faithful are so "disoriented", myself included. Did Vatican 2 change church teaching? No, then why did everything seem to change? etc. One lesson I have taken away is trying to use scripture (who decides what it really means) to back up every little point. That also goes for apparitions.

 

What hope???

God's mercy is so infinite (see St. Faustina's diary), that there is hope for even anti-Christ types such as Nero and Hitler. NO ONE is outside of God's mercy, and the Catholic Church has never declared anyone in hell.

 

Technically very true Kathy K. Very pastoral. But what is the truth?

 

“To believe or not to believe theseterrible prophecies? Each one of you must take them in the context they are presented and analyze them with discernment. I want to finish with these two advices. The first one is from Saint Paul: “Do not look down on the prophecies. Examine everything and stay with the good”. The second is from Saint Peter Canisius: “There is less danger of believing and receiving what, with some probability, people of faith refer to us and that serve to edify our neighbor, than refusing all with a full hardly contempt spirit”.
http://oracionesydevocionescatolicas.com/private_revelations.htm

 

I had this same discussion with a priest who believes that it is a reasonable hope that all are saved. I quoted Our Lady at Fatima - 'Many souls go to hell....'. He said that the Church doesn't teach that. But it definitely doesn't teach that hell is empty either and Our Lady clearly stated at Fatima that it is not. St. Pio and many, many other saints have stated that souls can and do go to eternal damnation and Scripture is frighteningly clear on the matter.

 

We only know for sure where someone lands when the Church declares them a Saint. (And I firmly believe that will NEVER happen with an apostate.)

But when I hear protestant prophets like Rick Joyner or Terry Bennett describe visits with people on the other side, they talk about levels of heaven. Some of these people they meet in "the kingdom of the least". For all I know, they may be visiting people in Purgatory.

What I find encouraging is their teaching that "being saved" isn't the ticket, and we will answer for everything we ever did. Terry Bennett talks about witnessing his own father before the judgment seat of God. He said his father was saved, but didn't really serve the Lord, and "everything he ever did was burned up before his eyes." He said his father wailed, and gnashed his teeth. Sounds purgative to me.

They also talk about the cloud of witnesses, and how we will need to call on them for assistance during the tribulation. Very hopeful; the idea of our separated brothers and sisters opening their hearts to the intercession of the Saints.

I've always had great respect for our separated brothers and sisters who manage to walk with the Lord without the Saints, without the Blessed Mother and especially without the Sacraments. If I miss one daily Mass, I'm crawling on my belly!!!

 

I'm not saying hell is empty. I'm saying it's occupied by people who refuse the divine mercy of God!

 

The church teaches, or it use to before V2, that if you died and were in a state of mortal sin, you went to hell. My question, is that still true? does the church still teach that? what are the mortal sins? where does divine mercy fit into this? I am a big believer in divine mercy, does that mean I can go out and commit mortal sins and still get to heaven?

 

And, was V2 a way of the church saying it had been wrong for hundreds of years without saying it had been wrong?

 

I don't know the answer to this question but I do know what my heart tells me. For me no one knows what happens really to any of us in that instant before death. I like to think that the second before death could be a much longer period than a second on Gods time. The sinner next to Jesus on the cross was saved in an instant because he was truly repentive. Maybe in that second before death when it is just you and God you have that chance to repent too especially if in a state of mortal sin. I have no idea so I only hope that there are many many infinite seconds for people to truly humble themselves before The Lord with fear and trembling and just maybe with his ever love and grace He will grant them mercy. Those are people I pray for every day. The ones who are about to die. Just think if everyone did this each day how many souls could be saved if we asked with true faith and if it be God's will.

 

From St. Faustina

"God’s mercy sometimes touches the sinner at the last moment in a wondrous and mysterious way. Outwardly, it seems as if everything were lost, but it is not so. The soul, illumined by a ray of God’s powerful final grace, turns to God in the last moment with such a power of love that, in an instant, it receives from God absolution of sins and remission of punishment, while outwardly it shows no sign either of repentance or of contrition, because souls [at that stage] no longer react to external things. Oh, how beyond comprehension is God’s mercy! But - horror! - There are also souls who voluntarily and consciously reject and scorn this grace! Although a person is at the point of death, the merciful God gives the soul that interior vivid moment, so that if the soul is willing, it has the possibility of returning to God. But sometimes, the obduracy in souls is so great that consciously they choose hell; they [thus] make useless all the prayers that other souls offer to God for them and even the efforts of God Himself..." (Diary, 1698).

 

I'll tell you why it changed in three short sentences. ...The Church was meant to change and influence society, not the other way around; society influencing the Church. Thats exactly what happened. The back door was opened.

 

"This is the dawning of the age of aquarius, aquarius,aquarius. Let the sunshine, let the sunshine, the sunshine in".

 

My mistake and proof we need the Church. I thought Adam and Eve were in Hell until I read the Church teaches they are in Heaven. Then, I read some of the messages of the Divine Will to Luisa Piccarreta about Adam, oh how the Blessed Trinity loves Adam. And Eve too.

If we could just get across to atheists, agnostics, disbelievers God's love for humanity.