About v2 volontary contradictions for the modernists to disolve Catholic faith into false religions.
"In fact, they do neither. After sixty years, we have no excuse for such evasions. What these qualifiers actually do is render a document contradictory—providing plausible deniability for the modernists who seek to subvert the faith, and for those who cannot bring themselves to face the truth."
Absolutely, thank you for framing it so clearly.
They have made an art of hiding their evil intent with the most repulsive feebleness promulgated as charity.
Thank you for this. Yes, nailing things down can sometimes be difficult but it is satisfying when it happens, and to hear that it resonates with others too.
True charity calls us to interpret the text in the worse possible way so we can identify error and prevent people from falling into it. False charity, as Dom Sarda calls it, wants us to ignore error, and thus allow people to fall into heresy.
Certain quotes in the article (Auctorem Fidei) caused me to reflect upon how men can be “unwittingly” deceived, but nevertheless damned. The author points out the difference between error and heresy, yet the passage in AF suggests the unwitting (ie., those in error, not heresy) are nevertheless damned. Certain scripture passages suggest the same: “If the blind follow the blind, both fall into the pit,” etc. “Blindness” suggesting (?) error rather than a comprehending rejection of dogma.
Perhaps the explanation is that such blindness and unwittingness is itself culpable in some circumstances (eg., “Because they loved not truth, I will send an operation of error, that they should believe lies.”), perhaps as a punishment for some antecedent sin or negligence.
In any case, that possibility might serve as a warning to those of us who think to have retained an orthodox faith, that we not be remiss in our own moral duties, lest such unwitting blindness fall upon us in consequence. That probably sounds preachy, but I’m mostly thinking about myself, and trying to work out what on the surface seems a mysterious reality (ie., those who unwittingly imbibe error being damned). “Unwitting” seems not to necessarily be synonymous with “innocently.”
About v2 volontary contradictions for the modernists to disolve Catholic faith into false religions.
"In fact, they do neither. After sixty years, we have no excuse for such evasions. What these qualifiers actually do is render a document contradictory—providing plausible deniability for the modernists who seek to subvert the faith, and for those who cannot bring themselves to face the truth."
Absolutely, thank you for framing it so clearly.
They have made an art of hiding their evil intent with the most repulsive feebleness promulgated as charity.
Thank you for this. Yes, nailing things down can sometimes be difficult but it is satisfying when it happens, and to hear that it resonates with others too.
True charity calls us to interpret the text in the worse possible way so we can identify error and prevent people from falling into it. False charity, as Dom Sarda calls it, wants us to ignore error, and thus allow people to fall into heresy.
Indeed. And after all these years, the opposite is uncharitable.
Certain quotes in the article (Auctorem Fidei) caused me to reflect upon how men can be “unwittingly” deceived, but nevertheless damned. The author points out the difference between error and heresy, yet the passage in AF suggests the unwitting (ie., those in error, not heresy) are nevertheless damned. Certain scripture passages suggest the same: “If the blind follow the blind, both fall into the pit,” etc. “Blindness” suggesting (?) error rather than a comprehending rejection of dogma.
Perhaps the explanation is that such blindness and unwittingness is itself culpable in some circumstances (eg., “Because they loved not truth, I will send an operation of error, that they should believe lies.”), perhaps as a punishment for some antecedent sin or negligence.
In any case, that possibility might serve as a warning to those of us who think to have retained an orthodox faith, that we not be remiss in our own moral duties, lest such unwitting blindness fall upon us in consequence. That probably sounds preachy, but I’m mostly thinking about myself, and trying to work out what on the surface seems a mysterious reality (ie., those who unwittingly imbibe error being damned). “Unwitting” seems not to necessarily be synonymous with “innocently.”
Well said Thanks.