https://tradicat.blogspot.com/search?q=lamont
+ JMJ Dr. Lamont has written a response to the criticisms levied against the Open Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church. For me, here's the pivotal point in the response: Catholics must judge for themselves in reading the letter whether this evidence is sufficient or not. My primary concern is that people will arrive at and act upon the sede-vacantist conclusion of this thought process. Dr. Lamont then makes an statistical argument and goes on to state: We should therefore accept that Pope Francis has publicly and persistently upheld the heresies listed above. At this point it is obvious that Dr. Lamont has personally come to the conclusion and made this private judgement for himself. He is definitely entitled to hold his personal opinion. However, the statistical argument is flawed because he assigned a low probability that Pope Francis is not meaning to make heretical statements etc. ... But he has no data to support such an assumption. So ....
+ JMJ I noticed that Dr. Lamont has posted a follow-up article on the infallibility of canonizations. Given this new article, I thought it would be a good idea to widen the perspective with a better version of the email that I posted a few weeks ago . Now I know that I am not a license theologian, as is Dr. Lamont ,and I am quite confident that he would dismiss my thoughts with a "he has no standing on this topic". Which would be partly correct and partly incorrect. Even someone with no standing can point out the issues that I believe Dr. Lamont fails to adequately address or only does so in an off handed manner. So, for the record, I have attached a modified version of my article . I would like to draw your attention to one assertion that Dr. Lamont makes: Many supporters of the infallibility of canonizations have argued that it is impossible for a canonisation to be in error, because the public veneration of someone in the liturgy who is in fact no...
+ JMJ Updated: I found a reference and have made a correction marked 'updated' and in Red. For many people, it seems this crisis is about lines in the sand . Archbishop Lefebvre and many Catholics like him, drew the line at Catholic Dogma, Doctrine and Principles. Others kept on moving it further and further back. Now a number of people (how many is hard to tell) have finally refused to move their line in the sand. The question is: What are they going to do about it. More importantly, what are you going to do about it? I don't think I've said it clearly enough when I've talked about the 'Resistance' and Sedevacantists departure from the foundation of Catholic Dogma, Doctrine, and Principles. I'll try to make it clearer: You cannot resolve this conflict by joining the "other" side. For clarification, by other side I mean the modernists et al who are attempting to re-make the Catholic Church in thei...
+ JMJ I was taught ... a long time ago ... that as a Catholic ... overthrowing a tyrant can be done ... but on one condition: That you have practical certainty that the state of the country afterwards will be better. Applied to the situation of Pope Francis, who has the makings of a great tyrant, the principle holds. What happens if only a part of the bishops find Pope Francis guilty of the crime of heresy? The most probably outcome is schism - like the Western Schism . ... Once they declare Pope Francis deposed, they will elect a new 'Pope' ... and then ... as long as Pope Francis is alive ... there will be two claimants to the See of Peter. Somehow, I don't think this will be an improvement. P^3 Further comment on Dr. Lamont's recent article on LifeSiteNews from a reader of Tradicat: I don't want to question the great knowledge of John Lamont.But ... Archbishop [Lefebvre] was a man of the Church. He had a very profound "sensu...
+ JMJ Looking back to 2012, I came across and article by Dr. Lamont that sheds some perspective on the state of the game in 2012. P^3 Source: Oriens Journal
+ JMJ I won't be posting as 'frequently' for a while. Things are busy right now and I have number of projects that have been languishing in the wings. So I need to make headway on them. Below are some items that caught my eye. I will include commentary where I think appropriate. P^3 Popes Past Present and Future Tradicat: Is Pope Francis still the Vicar of Christ? This question is popping up a whole lot and the key thing to remember is that every argument is based on theories. Humans, unfortunately, seek to make simple what is complex. They take mental shortcuts to make themselves comfortable with a situation, usually trying to find someone to blame. There is no definitive doctrine or dogma on the matter of dealing with an apparently heretical pope. The theological ink being spilt will no doubt help in the future but for now we have to hold on to the actually defined Truths of the Catholic Church. I have concluded that people who ascrib...
+ JMJ This early edition of the round-up was brought about by the announcement that Church Militant T.V. was ceasing operations April 1st. Perhaps it is an April Fools Joke, but I suspect not :-). So this time, I've added some additional sub-titles. Comments below P^3 TradicatArticles Wars and Rumours of Wars Tradicat: The shooting wars continue with people taking sides and basically making fools of themselves. The non-shooting wars in which people are still dying (i.e. abortion and other things such as 'extrauterine children' ) is something that strikes at the heart of Western Civilization. Relations Become Complicated Between Israel and the Holy See | FSSPX News Church leaders in Holy Land condemn ‘wanton attack’ in Gaza | Crux The Alabama Embryo Decision—The Politics and Reality of Recognizing “Extrauterine Children” | Reproductive Health | JAMA | JAMA Network Crisis of the Catholic Church Tradicat: The crisis continues to heat up with the fa...
+ JMJ This article by Dr. Lamont provides both clarity and perspective for those having issues with Pope Francis, these days who isn't? I've highlighted below what I believe are some of the key points. In case you haven't realized, these lenten / semi-retired posts are tending in a direction. The first direction is to provide some context to what is going on right now. This context will be usesful in performing an analysis of some of the reactions to the 'crisis'. P^3 Courtesy of Rorate Caeli: Article: "Considerations on the dubia of the four cardinals"
+ JMJ Just a quick note as I see that another person has jumped on the "Canonizations are not Infallible" bandwagan. First a list of the current links that I've noticed: https://onepeterfive.com/paul-vi-not-saint/ https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2018/08/the-authority-of-canonisations-do-all.html https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2018/10/de-mattei-true-and-false-saints-in.html https://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/4137-the-canonization-crisis-part-ii http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02364b.htm This reference to Dr. Lamont's is telling: “ We need not hold that the canonizations of John XXIII and John Paul II were infallible, because the conditions needed for such infallibility were not present. Their canonizations are not connected to any doctrine of the faith, they were not the result of a devotion that is central to the life of the Church, and they were not the product of careful and rigorous examination. But we need not exclude ...
+ JMJ Rorate has posted a piece by Dr. Lamont worth reading here about active participation in the liturgy. This is one of the cultural divides between the Pre/Post conciliar cultures - participating in the liturgy. Some would think (erroneously) that it means that laity should share more of the roles and responsibilities of the Priest (ie usurp). Answer: Wrong. Dr. Lamont provides insight to this phenom and a perspective that is needed in the Church today! P^3
+ JMJ In this crisis it is critical to make the correct distinctions - less we depart from the sure path of Catholic Doctrine. Dr. Mirus and a number of other people have failed to do so ... Dr. Lamont has made the correct distinctions ... Pray and Study that you may do so ... P^3
+ JMJ There's a bit of a fluffle over the canonization of Pope Paul VI. So - in 60 minutes I'm going to try to provide some perspective that I believe is lacking from both Drs. Lamont and Kwasniewski in their articles or that people not used to reading academic article might overlook For reference here's links to the articles. https://onepeterfive.com/paul-vi-not-saint/ https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2018/08/the-authority-of-canonisations-do-all.html For some back ground from Ott's Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma page 299: The secondary object of the Infallibility is truths of the Christian teaching on faith and morals, which are not formally revealed, but which are closely connected with the teaching of Revelation. (Sent. certa.) This doctrine is a necessary consequence of the doctrine of Infallibility which has the purpose "of preserving and of truly interpreting the deposit of Holy Faith" (D 1836). The Church could not achieve this pur...
+ JMJ Fr. Gleize's study on "The Question of Papal Heresy" , has caused a few people to, unknowingly, enter into mental gymnastics as they "jump" to conclusions and "leap" through flaming hoops. I've seen Fr. Gleize have the same affect a few years ago when he penned another scholarly article. My suspicion is that the ability to read a long academic article is not a skill easily learned. I now consider myself fortunate to have read over a hundred such articles for my under-grad thesis, although I definitely did not think so at the time. So, if you're going to read Fr. Gleize, Dr. Lamont, Dr. Shaw et al, you're going to have to exert yourself and if necessary draw a mind-map of the concepts as they are described. Why? Because the concepts and principles being discussed are not simple and require deep study to master.
+ JMJ In dealing with an erring Pontiff, the proper distinctions need to be made in order avoid compounding the crisis with further errors - as do the sedevacantists and "Conservatives". The meme is quite appropriate because the error of excess is exceedingly easy to effect! Dr. Lamont has outlined on Rorate some of the key distinctions that need to be made in order to navigate this particular epoch in the life of the Church. P^3 Courtesy of Rorate Caeli
Introduction The recent and continuing interactions between the Vatican and the SSPX have been a great opportunity for prayer and reflection. The basis for the disagreement is theological and not liturgical. As noted by Dr. Lamont (2012), the SSPX theological position on the four key controversial aspects of the Second Vatican Council are base on prior theological work that resulted from relevant magisterial pronouncements. So it is difficult to understand the apparent rejection of the theological position of the SSPX.
+ JMJ Reblogged from The Vatican and SSPX – An Organizational Culture Perspective August 29,2012. Introduction The recent and continuing interactions between the Vatican and the SSPX have been a great opportunity for prayer and reflection. The basis for the disagreement is theological and not liturgical. As noted by Dr. Lamont (2012), the SSPX theological position on the four key controversial aspects of the Second Vatican Council are base on prior theological work that resulted from relevant magisterial pronouncements. So it is difficult to understand the apparent rejection of the theological position of the SSPX.
+ JMJ Reblogged from The Vatican and SSPX – An Organizational Culture Perspective August 29,2012. Introduction The recent and continuing interactions between the Vatican and the SSPX have been a great opportunity for prayer and reflection. The basis for the disagreement is theological and not liturgical. As noted by Dr. Lamont (2012), the SSPX theological position on the four key controversial aspects of the Second Vatican Council are base on prior theological work that resulted from relevant magisterial pronouncements. So it is difficult to understand the apparent rejection of the theological position of the SSPX.
+ JMJ Retirement is so much fun!!! The appeal to Cardinal Sodano (see Rorate) has caused a bit of a stir across the spectrum of Catholicism. Interestingly, it didn't hit the front page over at CMTV - I had to dig into the daily news briefing to click on this link which lead to Edward Pentin's piece . I had expected some sort of commentary - but after announcing the document - just crickets. I will reiterate my belief that while WE do not know the identity of the signatories to the document - beyond Professor Shaw - We do know there are signatories. This is very interesting as, aside from the group of theologians who intervened in the case of the Novus Ordo Missae , I am not aware of anyone calling out the Pope on a document with theological censures since John XXII. Pray that the Pope listens and supports the Teaching of the Church!!! P^3
+ JMJ Well there is certainly a lot to write about since I 'retired' from blogging. The first is obviously the latest from Archbishop Pozzo. It has created a bit of a stir on either side of the SSPX divide (Sede, Resistance, Liberals, Modernists). Of key note in the interview is not what he says (NB: La Stampa is not unbiased in regards to the SSPX) about the Personal Prelature (we've known about this since 2001 in various versions), but about the resistance to a regularization that does not require acceptance of Nostra Aetate: Two main issues seem to be at stake. One is Pope Francis’ ardent desire for pastoral unity within the Catholic Church together with the healing of theological rifts. The second concerns the serious implications for the future of key documents in Vatican II such as 1) “Nostra Aetate”- widely celebrated all over the world last year on the 50th anniversary of its publication - which refers to the nature of the Catholic Church...
- Get link
- X
- Other Apps
- Get link
- X
- Other Apps
Comments