What is "Living Magesterium"?
Mar 14, 2018 20:11:08 GMT
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2018 20:11:08 GMT
Q. What is "Living Magesterium"?
Often we hear of this phrase "Living Magesterium" mostly from Vatican II apologists trying to attach itself and its errors to the perennial Magesterium of the Church. Which is wrong of course. And some sedevacantists use this term as an excuse to claim when there is a fault with the pope, who cannot err, they say, to personally judge him out of office.
In an analogous understanding, neo-modernsits try to parallel "Living Magesterium" as the same as a "Living Tradition". Which it isn't.
Often we hear of this phrase "Living Magesterium" mostly from Vatican II apologists trying to attach itself and its errors to the perennial Magesterium of the Church. Which is wrong of course. And some sedevacantists use this term as an excuse to claim when there is a fault with the pope, who cannot err, they say, to personally judge him out of office.
In an analogous understanding, neo-modernsits try to parallel "Living Magesterium" as the same as a "Living Tradition". Which it isn't.
The term “Living Magisterium” is a relative neologism. The earliest entry on the question is found in the 1912 edition of the Catholic Encyclopedia under “Tradition and the Living Magisterium” written by Rev. J. Bainville. Also, what you may not know is that Rev. Bainvel is also the author of the book, “Is There Salvation Outside the Catholic Church?” which teaches that there is a disjunction between the body and the soul of the Church and just about every non-Catholic is a member of the soul of the Church, and being a member of the soul of the Church is all that is necessary for salvation. Therefore any Hindu as a Hindu, Jew as a Jew, Moslem as a Moslem, etc., etc., can obtain salvation by being secret members of the “soul of the Church”. All this was made possible by first creating the “living magisterium” which permits the mutation of Catholic doctrine and, of course, setting aside dogma as the rule of faith.
Modernist, like from George Tyrrell to his fellow Jesuit Pope Francis/Bergoglio, always equivocate mixing dangerous errors with Catholic truth. Fr. Jean Vincent V. Bainville was also a Jesuit. St. Alphonsus said that a single bad book can destroy a monastery. This superficially innocent entry in the 1912 Catholic Encyclopedia contains the seeds of every argument used by Fr. Bainville in overturning the Catholic dogma that there is no salvation outside the Church which he denied in typical Neo-modernist style by 1) equivocating definitions, 2) qualifying categorical propositions, and 3) moving dogmatic truths from the category of truth/falsehood to the category of authority/obedience. The last of these permits all the limitations that restrict the application of laws, commands, precepts, etc. to excuse anyone from conforming to revealed Truth. That is where Bainville's theory of "living magisterium" leads and was intended to lead. It is not easily evident from the encyclopedia entry but, in hindsight, its footprints are clearly seen.
There is frequent reference by the Neo-modernist hierarchy to John XXIII's opening address at Vatican II where he said that the truths of our faith are one thing and the manner in which they are expressed another. The entire theme of Vatican II was to drive a wedge between dogmas and how they are articulated. This has invariably been done under the pretext of a deepening of understanding by a "living magisterium". Most recently, it is the argument used by supporters of pope Francis to destroy the sacrament of Marriage and all Catholic morality. (Drew)
Modernist, like from George Tyrrell to his fellow Jesuit Pope Francis/Bergoglio, always equivocate mixing dangerous errors with Catholic truth. Fr. Jean Vincent V. Bainville was also a Jesuit. St. Alphonsus said that a single bad book can destroy a monastery. This superficially innocent entry in the 1912 Catholic Encyclopedia contains the seeds of every argument used by Fr. Bainville in overturning the Catholic dogma that there is no salvation outside the Church which he denied in typical Neo-modernist style by 1) equivocating definitions, 2) qualifying categorical propositions, and 3) moving dogmatic truths from the category of truth/falsehood to the category of authority/obedience. The last of these permits all the limitations that restrict the application of laws, commands, precepts, etc. to excuse anyone from conforming to revealed Truth. That is where Bainville's theory of "living magisterium" leads and was intended to lead. It is not easily evident from the encyclopedia entry but, in hindsight, its footprints are clearly seen.
There is frequent reference by the Neo-modernist hierarchy to John XXIII's opening address at Vatican II where he said that the truths of our faith are one thing and the manner in which they are expressed another. The entire theme of Vatican II was to drive a wedge between dogmas and how they are articulated. This has invariably been done under the pretext of a deepening of understanding by a "living magisterium". Most recently, it is the argument used by supporters of pope Francis to destroy the sacrament of Marriage and all Catholic morality. (Drew)