Read the Oath below carefully and then answer the question: Would you sign it?
Even though most sincere Catholics of good will in our day, including a great many clergymen, are likely to think that this is just an exercise in mere speculation, it is nothing of the sort. This very demand has been made of traditional Catholics as a requirement for canonical regularity, or what is sometimes loosely called, “full communion.” Most recently, it has been reported that the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate may be required to sign just such a statement.
You see, each one of the three propositions above are set forth, albeit in language less precise, in the text of the Second Vatican Council (numbers one and two in Unitatis Redintegratio, Article 3; the third in Nostra Aetate, Article 4).
Knowing this, if you were asked to sign a statement acknowledging that the content of Vatican II (which includes not only the propositions above, but also others equally disturbing) is an integral part of the Tradition of the Catholic Church, would you sign it?
Perhaps the better question is why would anyone in authority in the Church demand a pledge of fidelity to propositions that are so clearly offensive to Our Blessed Lord and the Holy Catholic faith? Is this the “diabolical disorientation” affecting the sacred hierarchy of which the Virgin Mary forewarned Fatima visionary Sr. Lucia?
These are not questions of importance for so-called “traditionalists” alone, but for everyone who calls themselves Catholic, and yet the majority, it seems, are unaware of the extent of the current crisis. With them in mind, I implore you to share this far and wide.
So, would you sign it? Answer below and feel free to explain your choice in the comment box.
[yop_poll id=”3″]
Ego non subscribere… I will not sign, because I am a Catholic. No one, neither priest nor prelate, has the authority to command me to swear an oath which departs from the Deposit of the Faith handed on from the Apostles. Such authority does not exist.
Can a Protestant be in a state of grace?
If he has been baptized with the correct formula, never committed a mortal sin, never heard of the Catholic Church to reject it, I guess so. This is very unlikely! What say you Fathers?
Bubbles that is what the old Baltimore Catechism states. The “baptized, and free of all mortal sin” still applies. The catechism also implied that that was pretty tough to do (all through life).
I voted the wrong way by accident
With Bubbles’ explanation above, the first proposition I suppose is possible (to the extent baptism is considered a liturgical activity – not sure if it is in the above proposition). However, as pointed out, it is highly unlikely to occur.
Proposition two – “but also” – depends on what is meant by that – instead of the RCC, or along with and through the RCC? That may make a difference, although I would still be queasy about signing off. Of course, this is the whole problem with V.II documents- they are so vague and frankly, poorly written, that you can twist them almost any way you want to.
Certainly the third proposition is a no go. Therefore the answer is no.
I would never sign such a thing. I would walk away while the neo-cons call me “disobedient”.
@pooh bear
“can a protestant be in a state of grace?”
If they have not reached the age of reason and have been baptised then they are Catholic and in a state of Grace.
If they have reached the age of reason and commited a mortal sin, then they need to make a perfect act of contrition.
So yes, a protestant can be in a state of grace.
Follow on question would be, can they be saved.
Under the following conditions they can be saved.
1. Invincible (inculpable) ignorance: They must be in this state or all bets are off.
2. Possess Supernatural Faith: The minimum explicit requirements for this are belief in God and that he punishes the bad and rewards the good.
3. Be trying to live a life according to God’s will as they understand it.
4. Lastly, they need to make a perfect act of charity / contrition.
If a ‘protestant’ or anyone else who is likewise outside the Church of Christ, dies in this state, following these principles, then they are saved.
How many were or weren’t we won’t know until we die.
Attached is a link to my own recent posting on the topic.
Cheers!
http://tradicat.blogspot.ca/2014/01/outside-church-there-is-no-salvation.html
thoughts
item 1: The liturgical actions of the heretics and schismatics.
This requires some clarification because:
a. Any sacraments that they have a vestiges from when they were in the Church.
The “lit actions” of the protestants are simple to handle. Anything beyond baptism and marriage is their own concoction and void.
It is less clear with respect to the schismatics. If a person is culpable for their schism, then they are unable to receive grace from the valid sacraments that they have.
If a person is not culpable (ala invincible ignorance) then they present no barrier to the flow of grace from the valid sacraments – even if the celebrant is in a culpable state.
Cheers!
To the modernist oath I would add:
I firmly hold that all religions are acceptable in the eyes of God, as evidenced by the ecumenical practices of the post-conciliar pontiffs, especially those of St John Paul II “The Great” of happy and blessed memory, especially the Assisi ecumenical gatherings, as true manifestations of how the “civilization of love” will be brought about without the conversion of all mankind to the Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic faith.
Furthermore, I firmly declare and hold that there is no contradiction between the pre- and post-conciliar magisterium of the Holy Catholic Church; denying or questioning this is to considered an act of insubordination worthy of the greatest punishments. Bringing these wretched souls back into the fold of Christ is to be considered of greater urgency than calling to conversion pagans, infidels, heretics, and schismatics, and proclaiming the uncompromising gospel of Christ to the nations.
Regarding article three of the above oath, Pope Francis has the following advice:
1) “A battle exists, a battle in which the eternal salvation of us all is at stake…. Either you are with Jesus or you are against him“.
Morning Meditation, Domus Sanctae Marthae, October 11, 2013
2) “[T]here are many people, Christians and non-Christians alike, who ‘lose their lives’ for truth. And Christ said ‘I am the truth’, therefore whoever serves the truth serves Christ”.
Angelus, June 23, 2013
3) “You are wrong because you cannot possess truth“.
Address to the Young People from the Italian Diocese of Piacenza-Bobbio, August 23, 2013
Hope everyone finds this helpful.
I was confused for a moment; thought that was supposed to be the Oath Against Modernism. Couldn’t figure out why it was saying such crazy stuff.
@lam
I had to read it twice as well!!!
No, I would not sign………”After all, we have not been fighting for over 40 years against the modernist TSUNAMI, only to be washed away by an ebb tide.”…….from “Renew the earth with the True Mass”…..SSPX.
How does a Catholic sin against faith?……..A Catholic sins against faith by infidelity, apostasy, heresy, indifferentism, and by taking part in non-Catholic worship……..from ‘My Catholic Faith’ a Manual of Religion…..
There appears to be at least a little hope for the Franciscans of the Immaculate, thanks in particular to the laity that have risen up to defend the holy founders and the Order which has been, is, and will be faithful to the Holy Father.
The rebellious ones still are in the fray though and seeking to cover up some of the draconian measures and keep the lies going. One wrote a book that is uncomplimentary to the founders and Order. He was denied permission to publish it so made copies himself and sent to friaries to stir up an attitude of disobedience in places. Apparently he will now go ahead with the publishing. Perhaps he and others went to sympathetic ears in the Vatican when he could not publish his views the first time. He and the others should have left to form an Order in their own image but wanted to take down the FFI. Kind of like liberal ones in the Roman Church who stay on and try to change things to their views.
Pray please for the Order! This website is a good one and charitable and is getting the word out: http://pray4thefriars.wordpress.com/
May the truth come out and may the Holy Father be benevolent. And even though persecution from within the Church is the stuff of saints, may this one stop and a kind, fatherly, holy man be found to be superior.
Magdalen,
What exactly are the signs of hope for the FFI? If anything, the situation seems discouraging. According to the site you linked (Jan 19 post): “The Volpi Commission is imposing the friars to sign a loyalty pledge to CVII and Novus Ordo Mass.” So, it looks like the FFI will be forced to take an oath for modernism, just as Mr Verrechio outlines in the article above.
Yes, but it seems some of the lies leveled against the founders and Order are being exposed now. Also an awful measure that the commissar wanted to impose was finally denied. He has hurt the Order terribly! There is no reconciling going on.
There is still hope that the Order can be placed under Ecclesia Dei.
This is how the seminary life was until the commissar shut the seminary this month: http://stim.immacolata.com/index.php?option=com_webplayer&view=video&wid=2
I think it is fabulous! You would think that this is what the Church would want and need as the Order was growing and spreading holiness through its shrines and missions and publications, etc. But, no, the persecution came from within. Apparently Fr. Manelli knew it would happen. It is his time for passion.
Magdalen,
What is the ‘awful measure that the commissar wanted to impose”? It is difficult for us who don’t have the sources other have to be teased with these little snippets of information and not be told the whole story.
Thought it was the Anti-Modernist Oath for a second there, and voted “Yes…” Oops.
I do not know what this particular draconian measure was that was avoided. That information has not leaked out.
Just the start of what is to come from the lovely administration of “Bishop of Rome Francesco”.
Such an oath is diabolical. It is an insult to God. It is an insult to the Apostles, Martyrs, Fathers and Doctors, Saints and Laity.
No. I wouldn’t sign such a thing. It surely breaks the vows of one’s baptism.
It’s still mind-bending, or faith-bending, to think this stuff was signed off, however, by the Vatican 50 years ago.
No Catholic _can_ sign this. Unfortunate and inconvenient, perhaps, but yes, this _is_ irreconcilable. Kyrie eleison!