Total Posts:53|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Vatican II Heresy -- Lumen Gentium #16

sedevacantist
Posts: 37
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/15/2016 5:48:26 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
The documents of Vatican II are riddled with heresies such as the one I am about to present here. If one would like me to provide more, simply request it.

Lumen Gentium #16:
"But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator. In the first place amongst these there are the Muslims, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful God, who on the last day will judge mankind."

Source:
http://www.vatican.va...

This, of course, is outright blasphemy. Catholics, unlike Muslims, worship the Most Holy Trinity. It is not arduous for someone to recognize that Catholics and Muslims do not worship the same God. In fact, it was the the Council of Florence that dogmatically defined the following:

"...the holy Roman Church, founded on the words of our Lord and Savior, firmly believes, professes and preaches one true God, almighty, immutable and eternal, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. [...] Therefore it [the Holy Roman Church] condemns, rejects, anathematizes and declares to be outside the Body of Christ, which is the Church, whoever holds opposing or contrary views." (Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Bull Cantate Domino, 1442, ex cathedra)

This dogma is rooted in what Our Lord revealed in the Sacred Scriptures. Specifically, this understanding is revealed in St. Matthew 10:33:
"But whoever denies me before others, I will deny before my heavenly Father."

On this same note, consider the following:

"Therefore, they must instruct them in the true worship of God, which is unique to the Catholic religion." (Pope Gregory XVI, Summo Iugiter Studio #6, May 27, 1832)

Read Summo Iugiter Studio here:
http://www.papalencyclicals.net...

"The holy universal Church teaches that it is not possible to worship God truly except in her..." (Pope Gregory I, The Papal Encyclicals, Vol. 1, pp. 231)

Therefore, Muslims cannot truly worship the same God as Catholics, as this is exclusive the the Catholic Church. The statement made in Lumen Gentium is even worse when we consider it carefully. It states that Muslims worship the God "who on the last day will judge mankind." To say this is to deny the deity of Christ, as He is the one who will judge mankind on the last day. Muslims do not accept this truth.

"If anyone does not say that He, Jesus Christ, will come to judge the living and the dead, he is a heretic." (Pope Damasus I, Council of Rome, Can. 15)
"Reveal to the faithful the wolves which are demolishing the Lord's vineyard."
- Pope Clement XIII, Encyclical Christianae Reipublicae, 1766
bulproof
Posts: 25,168
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/15/2016 5:52:20 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/15/2016 5:48:26 PM, sedevacantist wrote:
The documents of Vatican II are riddled with heresies such as the one I am about to present here. If one would like me to provide more, simply request it.

Lumen Gentium #16:
"But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator. In the first place amongst these there are the Muslims, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful God, who on the last day will judge mankind."

Source:
http://www.vatican.va...

This, of course, is outright blasphemy. Catholics, unlike Muslims, worship the Most Holy Trinity. It is not arduous for someone to recognize that Catholics and Muslims do not worship the same God. In fact, it was the the Council of Florence that dogmatically defined the following:

"...the holy Roman Church, founded on the words of our Lord and Savior, firmly believes, professes and preaches one true God, almighty, immutable and eternal, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. [...] Therefore it [the Holy Roman Church] condemns, rejects, anathematizes and declares to be outside the Body of Christ, which is the Church, whoever holds opposing or contrary views." (Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Bull Cantate Domino, 1442, ex cathedra)

This dogma is rooted in what Our Lord revealed in the Sacred Scriptures. Specifically, this understanding is revealed in St. Matthew 10:33:
"But whoever denies me before others, I will deny before my heavenly Father."

On this same note, consider the following:

"Therefore, they must instruct them in the true worship of God, which is unique to the Catholic religion." (Pope Gregory XVI, Summo Iugiter Studio #6, May 27, 1832)

Read Summo Iugiter Studio here:
http://www.papalencyclicals.net...

"The holy universal Church teaches that it is not possible to worship God truly except in her..." (Pope Gregory I, The Papal Encyclicals, Vol. 1, pp. 231)

Therefore, Muslims cannot truly worship the same God as Catholics, as this is exclusive the the Catholic Church. The statement made in Lumen Gentium is even worse when we consider it carefully. It states that Muslims worship the God "who on the last day will judge mankind." To say this is to deny the deity of Christ, as He is the one who will judge mankind on the last day. Muslims do not accept this truth.

"If anyone does not say that He, Jesus Christ, will come to judge the living and the dead, he is a heretic." (Pope Damasus I, Council of Rome, Can. 15)

I mean how can you argue with what some men have claimed and agree with what other men have claimed?
Bloody ridiculous.
hahahahahahaha
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/15/2016 5:54:30 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/15/2016 5:48:26 PM, sedevacantist wrote:
The documents of Vatican II are riddled with heresies such as the one I am about to present here. If one would like me to provide more, simply request it.

Lumen Gentium #16:
"But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator. In the first place amongst these there are the Muslims, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful God, who on the last day will judge mankind."

Source:
http://www.vatican.va...

This, of course, is outright blasphemy. Catholics, unlike Muslims, worship the Most Holy Trinity. It is not arduous for someone to recognize that Catholics and Muslims do not worship the same God. In fact, it was the the Council of Florence that dogmatically defined the following:

"...the holy Roman Church, founded on the words of our Lord and Savior, firmly believes, professes and preaches one true God, almighty, immutable and eternal, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. [...] Therefore it [the Holy Roman Church] condemns, rejects, anathematizes and declares to be outside the Body of Christ, which is the Church, whoever holds opposing or contrary views." (Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Bull Cantate Domino, 1442, ex cathedra)

This dogma is rooted in what Our Lord revealed in the Sacred Scriptures. Specifically, this understanding is revealed in St. Matthew 10:33:
"But whoever denies me before others, I will deny before my heavenly Father."

On this same note, consider the following:

"Therefore, they must instruct them in the true worship of God, which is unique to the Catholic religion." (Pope Gregory XVI, Summo Iugiter Studio #6, May 27, 1832)

Read Summo Iugiter Studio here:
http://www.papalencyclicals.net...

"The holy universal Church teaches that it is not possible to worship God truly except in her..." (Pope Gregory I, The Papal Encyclicals, Vol. 1, pp. 231)

Therefore, Muslims cannot truly worship the same God as Catholics, as this is exclusive the the Catholic Church. The statement made in Lumen Gentium is even worse when we consider it carefully. It states that Muslims worship the God "who on the last day will judge mankind." To say this is to deny the deity of Christ, as He is the one who will judge mankind on the last day. Muslims do not accept this truth.

"If anyone does not say that He, Jesus Christ, will come to judge the living and the dead, he is a heretic." (Pope Damasus I, Council of Rome, Can. 15)

Was Pope Paul VI not infallible when he signed off on this document?
sedevacantist
Posts: 37
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/15/2016 7:41:49 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/15/2016 5:54:30 PM, desmac wrote:

Was Pope Paul VI not infallible when he signed off on this document?

No, as he was not a pope. I previously stated that the documents of Vatican II are riddled with heresies. This is an undeniable fact, as I have already displayed one of these heresies. "Pope" Paul VI was a heretic himself. I can provide several examples of "pope" Paul VI heresies, but I will go ahead and give you one.

The Catholic Church teaches that there is only one true Church, which no one can be saved outside of. She also teaches that all non-Catholic religions are false, as there is only one true Church.

"The holy universal Church teaches that it is not possible to worship God truly except in her and asserts that all who are outside of her will not be saved." (Pope Gregory I, The Papal Encyclicals, Vol. 1, pp. 230)

This is also a teaching by Our Lord and Sacred Scriptures. All other religions outside of the Catholic Church belong to Satan himself. If someone shows esteem for or regards false religions as good or deserving respect, then they deny Our Lord and is (by definition) an apostate.

"Certainly such attempts can nowise be approved by Catholics, founded as they are on that false opinion which considers all religions to be more or less good and praiseworthy, since they all in different ways manifest and signify that sense which is inborn in us all, and by which we are led to God and to the obedient acknowledgment of His rule. Not only are those who hold this opinion in error and deceived, but also in distorting the idea of true religion they reject it, and little by little." (Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos #2, Jan. 6, 1928)

Read Mortalium Animos here:
http://w2.vatican.va...

Yet, this is what "pope" Paul VI said:

"Ecumenism began in this way; as respect for non-Christian religions..." (Paul VI, L'Osservatore Romano, Nov. 16, 1972, pp. 1)

He even referred to non-Christian religions as "noble." (Paul VI, L'Osservatore Romano, Oct. 11, 1973, pp. 10) He did not stop there, of course:

"...a disconcerting picture opens up before our eyes: that of religions, the religions invented by man; attempts that are sometimes extremely daring and noble..." (Paul VI, L'Osservatore Romano, Jan 20. 1972, pp. 1)

"...non-Christian religions, which the Church respects and esteems..." (Paul VI, L'Osservatore Romano, Dec. 22, 1977, pp. 2)

"...overcome divisions, by developing a mutual respect between the different religious confessions." (Paul VI, L'Osservatore Romano, Dec. 18, 1969, pp. 2)

"We greet with respect the representatives of all the other religions who have honored us by their presence." (Paul VI, L'Osservatore Romano, Dec. 17, 1970, pp. 7)

"We welcome with sincere respect the Japanese delegation of the Konko-kyo religion." (Paul VI, L'Osservatore Romano, July 14, 1977, pp. 12)

It was "pope" Paul VI who stated Gandhi was "[e]ver conscious of God's presence." (Paul VI, L'Osservatore Romano, Oct. 9, 1969, pp. 5)

All of these quotes show a genuine disconnect between "pope" Paul VI and what the Catholic Church actually teaches. In fact, Paul VI did not stop at praising a Hindu man (Gandhi) for being "[e]ver conscious of God's presence." He went on to state the following about Hinduism:

"Thus in Hinduism, men contemplate the divine mystery and express it through an inexhaustible abundance of myths and through searching philosophical inquiry. They seek freedom from the anguish of our human condition either through ascetical practices or profound meditation or a flight to God with love and trust. [...] The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions. She regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings which, though differing in many aspects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men." (Paul VI, Nostra Aetate #2, Oct 28, 1965)

Read Nostra Aetate here:
http://www.vatican.va...

"Religious and cultural differences in India, as you have said, are honored and respected. [...] We are pleased to see that this mutual honor and esteem is practices..." (Paul VI, L'Osservatore Romano, Sept. 12, 1975, pp. 2)

Since Paul VI is honoring and esteeming false religions, he is also honoring and esteeming the worshiping of false gods.

"Likewise we cannot omit a reference to the non-Christian religions. These, in fact, must no longer be regarded as rivals, or obstacles to Evangelization..." (Paul VI, L'Osservatore Romano, Oct. 10, 1974, pp. 7)

All of these statements made by Paul VI very clearly show he is a heretic and an apostate. Perhaps the most bothersome statement made by the man is the following:

"We are happy to welcome Your Holiness today. [...] You come to us from Asia, the cradle of ancient religions and human traditions which are rightly held in deep veneration." (Paul VI, Address to Dalai Lama, Sept 30, 1973)

Read Address to Dalai Lama here:
https://w2.vatican.va...

"We know the fame of your temple, and the wisdom that is represented so vividly by the images contained therein." (Paul VI, Message to Pagan Shinto Priests, March 3, 1976)

Read Message to Pagan Shinto Priests here:
https://w2.vatican.va...

I will conclude this examination of "pope" Paul VI heresies with the following:

"They should consider the testimony of Christ Himself that 'those who are not with Christ are against Him,' [Lk. 11:23] and that they disperse unhappily who do not gather with Him. Therefore 'without a doubt, they will perish forever, unless they hold the Catholic faith whole and inviolate.' [Athanasian Creed]" (Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos #13, Aug. 15, 1832)

Read Mirari Vos here:
http://www.papalencyclicals.net...

Now, does the fact that Paul VI was a heretic change his infallible decrees? Of course it does. St. Robert Bellarmine, who was a Cardinal and Doctor of the Church, made the following statements:

"A pope who is a manifest heretic automatically (per se) ceases to be pope and head, just as he ceases automatically to be a Christian and a member of the Church." (De Romano Pontifice, II, 30)

"This principle is most certain. The non-Christian cannot in any way be Pope, as Cajetan himself admits (ib. c. 26). The reason for this is that he cannot be head of what he is not a member [...] and a manifest heretic is not a Christian, as is clearly taught by St. Cyprian (linb. 4, epist. 2), St. Athenasius (Scr. 2 cont. Arian.), St. Augustine (lib. De great. Christ. Cap. 20), St. Jerome (contra Lucifer.) and others; therefore the manifest heretic cannot be Pope." (De Romano Pontifice, II, 30)

[Continues on next post...]
"Reveal to the faithful the wolves which are demolishing the Lord's vineyard."
- Pope Clement XIII, Encyclical Christianae Reipublicae, 1766
sedevacantist
Posts: 37
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/15/2016 7:41:52 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/15/2016 5:54:30 PM, desmac wrote:

Now, let's consider what was defined as dogma at the Council of Florence:

"The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the Catholic Church before the end of their lives..." (Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, "Contate Domino," 1441)

"For not every sin, however grave it may be, is such as of its own nature to sever a man from the Body of the Church, as does schism or heresy or apostasy." (Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis Christi, June 29, 1943)

"'No one who merely disbelieves in all (these heresies) can for that reason regard himself as a Catholic or call himself one. For there may be or may arise some other heresies, which are not set out in this work of ours, and, if any one holds to one single one of these he is not a Catholic' (S. Augustinus, De Haeresibus, n. 88)." (Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum #9)

Read Satis Cognium here:
http://w2.vatican.va...

It is a fact that someone who is a heretic is not a Catholic, as the Doctors of the Church and popes declared above. This is a dogmatic fact. It is also a fact that a pope who is a heretic is not really a pope at all.

"No one, therefore, unless in communion with Peter can share in his authority, since it is absurd to imagine that he who is outside can command in the Church." (Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum #15)

Pope Paul IV issued a Papal Bull that declared an election of a heretic as pope to be both null and void:

"6. In addition, [by this Our Constitution, which is to remain valid in perpetuity We enact, determine, decree and define:] that if ever at any time it shall appear that any Bishop, even if he be acting as an Archbishop, Patriarch or Primate; or any Cardinal of the aforesaid Roman Church, or, as has already been mentioned, any legate, or even the Roman Pontiff, prior to his promotion or his elevation as Cardinal or Roman Pontiff, has deviated from the Catholic Faith or fallen into some heresy:

(i) the promotion or elevation, even if it shall have been uncontested and by the unanimous assent of all the Cardinals, shall be null, void and worthless;
(ii) it shall not be possible for it to acquire validity (nor for it to be said that it has thus acquired validity) through the acceptance of the office, of consecration, of subsequent authority, nor through possession of administration, nor through the putative enthronement of a Roman Pontiff, or Veneration, or obedience accorded to such by all, nor through the lapse of any period of time in the foregoing situation;
(iii) it shall not be held as partially legitimate in any way;
(iv) to any so promoted to be Bishops, or Archbishops, or Patriarchs, or Primates or elevated as Cardinals, or as Roman Pontiff, no authority shall have been granted, nor shall it be considered to have been so granted either in the spiritual or the temporal domain;
(v) each and all of their words, deeds, actions and enactments, howsoever made, and anything whatsoever to which these may give rise, shall be without force and shall grant no stability whatsoever nor any right to anyone;
(vi) those thus promoted or elevated shall be deprived automatically, and without need for any further declaration, of all dignity, position, honour, title, authority, office and power." (Bull Cum ex Apostolatus Officio, Feb. 15, 1559)

Read Bull Cum ex Apostolatus Officio here:
http://www.dailycatholic.org...

Finally, The Catholic Encyclopedia stated the following:

"Of course, the election of a heretic, schismatic, or female [as Pope] would be null and void." ("Papal Elections," 1914, Vol. 11, pp. 456)

Summary:
"Pope" Paul VI was a heretic and an apostate. As such, he was not a true Catholic or a true pope. Therefore, he never defined anything infallibly.
"Reveal to the faithful the wolves which are demolishing the Lord's vineyard."
- Pope Clement XIII, Encyclical Christianae Reipublicae, 1766
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/15/2016 7:46:43 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/15/2016 7:41:52 PM, sedevacantist wrote:
At 6/15/2016 5:54:30 PM, desmac wrote:

Now, let's consider what was defined as dogma at the Council of Florence:

"The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the Catholic Church before the end of their lives..." (Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, "Contate Domino," 1441)

"For not every sin, however grave it may be, is such as of its own nature to sever a man from the Body of the Church, as does schism or heresy or apostasy." (Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis Christi, June 29, 1943)

"'No one who merely disbelieves in all (these heresies) can for that reason regard himself as a Catholic or call himself one. For there may be or may arise some other heresies, which are not set out in this work of ours, and, if any one holds to one single one of these he is not a Catholic' (S. Augustinus, De Haeresibus, n. 88)." (Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum #9)

Read Satis Cognium here:
http://w2.vatican.va...

It is a fact that someone who is a heretic is not a Catholic, as the Doctors of the Church and popes declared above. This is a dogmatic fact. It is also a fact that a pope who is a heretic is not really a pope at all.

"No one, therefore, unless in communion with Peter can share in his authority, since it is absurd to imagine that he who is outside can command in the Church." (Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum #15)

Pope Paul IV issued a Papal Bull that declared an election of a heretic as pope to be both null and void:

"6. In addition, [by this Our Constitution, which is to remain valid in perpetuity We enact, determine, decree and define:] that if ever at any time it shall appear that any Bishop, even if he be acting as an Archbishop, Patriarch or Primate; or any Cardinal of the aforesaid Roman Church, or, as has already been mentioned, any legate, or even the Roman Pontiff, prior to his promotion or his elevation as Cardinal or Roman Pontiff, has deviated from the Catholic Faith or fallen into some heresy:

(i) the promotion or elevation, even if it shall have been uncontested and by the unanimous assent of all the Cardinals, shall be null, void and worthless;
(ii) it shall not be possible for it to acquire validity (nor for it to be said that it has thus acquired validity) through the acceptance of the office, of consecration, of subsequent authority, nor through possession of administration, nor through the putative enthronement of a Roman Pontiff, or Veneration, or obedience accorded to such by all, nor through the lapse of any period of time in the foregoing situation;
(iii) it shall not be held as partially legitimate in any way;
(iv) to any so promoted to be Bishops, or Archbishops, or Patriarchs, or Primates or elevated as Cardinals, or as Roman Pontiff, no authority shall have been granted, nor shall it be considered to have been so granted either in the spiritual or the temporal domain;
(v) each and all of their words, deeds, actions and enactments, howsoever made, and anything whatsoever to which these may give rise, shall be without force and shall grant no stability whatsoever nor any right to anyone;
(vi) those thus promoted or elevated shall be deprived automatically, and without need for any further declaration, of all dignity, position, honour, title, authority, office and power." (Bull Cum ex Apostolatus Officio, Feb. 15, 1559)

Read Bull Cum ex Apostolatus Officio here:
http://www.dailycatholic.org...

Finally, The Catholic Encyclopedia stated the following:

"Of course, the election of a heretic, schismatic, or female [as Pope] would be null and void." ("Papal Elections," 1914, Vol. 11, pp. 456)

Summary:
"Pope" Paul VI was a heretic and an apostate. As such, he was not a true Catholic or a true pope. Therefore, he never defined anything infallibly.

So no continuity of Papal authority.
sedevacantist
Posts: 37
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/15/2016 8:08:31 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/15/2016 7:46:43 PM, desmac wrote:

So no continuity of Papal authority.

Fr. Edmund O'Reilly stated the following in regard to the Great Western Schism:

"We may here stop to inquire what is to be said of the position, at that time, of the three claimants, and their rights with regard to the Papacy. In the first place, there was all through, from the death of Gregory XI in 1378, a pope - with the exception, of course, of the intervals between deaths and elections to fill up the vacancies thereby created. There was, I say, at every given time a pope, really invested with the dignity of the Vicar of Christ and Head of the Church, whatever opinions might exist among many as to his genuineness; not that an interregnum covering the whole period would have been impossible or inconsistent with the promises of Christ, for this is by no means manifest, but that, as a matter of fact, there was not such an interregnum." (The Relations of the Church to Society " Theological Essays, pp. 287)

Fr. O'Reilly tells us that "an interregnum covering the whole period" would not be "impossible or inconsistent with the promises of Christ..." The Great Western Schism lasted for 39 years! Fr. O'Reilly does not exclude the possibility of something even greater happening. Of course, there are vacancies every time a pope dies. The longest being between Pope Marcellinus and Pope Marcellus, which lasted for more than three and a half years. So what is your objection to a long-term vacancy of the Holy See?
"Reveal to the faithful the wolves which are demolishing the Lord's vineyard."
- Pope Clement XIII, Encyclical Christianae Reipublicae, 1766
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/15/2016 8:10:39 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/15/2016 8:08:31 PM, sedevacantist wrote:
At 6/15/2016 7:46:43 PM, desmac wrote:

So no continuity of Papal authority.

Fr. Edmund O'Reilly stated the following in regard to the Great Western Schism:

"We may here stop to inquire what is to be said of the position, at that time, of the three claimants, and their rights with regard to the Papacy. In the first place, there was all through, from the death of Gregory XI in 1378, a pope - with the exception, of course, of the intervals between deaths and elections to fill up the vacancies thereby created. There was, I say, at every given time a pope, really invested with the dignity of the Vicar of Christ and Head of the Church, whatever opinions might exist among many as to his genuineness; not that an interregnum covering the whole period would have been impossible or inconsistent with the promises of Christ, for this is by no means manifest, but that, as a matter of fact, there was not such an interregnum." (The Relations of the Church to Society " Theological Essays, pp. 287)

Fr. O'Reilly tells us that "an interregnum covering the whole period" would not be "impossible or inconsistent with the promises of Christ..." The Great Western Schism lasted for 39 years! Fr. O'Reilly does not exclude the possibility of something even greater happening. Of course, there are vacancies every time a pope dies. The longest being between Pope Marcellinus and Pope Marcellus, which lasted for more than three and a half years. So what is your objection to a long-term vacancy of the Holy See?

So no continuity of Papal authority.
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/15/2016 8:13:46 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/15/2016 5:48:26 PM, sedevacantist wrote:
The documents of Vatican II are riddled with heresies such as the one I am about to present here. If one would like me to provide more, simply request it.

Lumen Gentium #16:
"But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator. In the first place amongst these there are the Muslims, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful God, who on the last day will judge mankind."

Source:
http://www.vatican.va...

This, of course, is outright blasphemy. Catholics, unlike Muslims, worship the Most Holy Trinity. It is not arduous for someone to recognize that Catholics and Muslims do not worship the same God. In fact, it was the the Council of Florence that dogmatically defined the following:

"...the holy Roman Church, founded on the words of our Lord and Savior, firmly believes, professes and preaches one true God, almighty, immutable and eternal, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. [...] Therefore it [the Holy Roman Church] condemns, rejects, anathematizes and declares to be outside the Body of Christ, which is the Church, whoever holds opposing or contrary views." (Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Bull Cantate Domino, 1442, ex cathedra)

This dogma is rooted in what Our Lord revealed in the Sacred Scriptures. Specifically, this understanding is revealed in St. Matthew 10:33:
"But whoever denies me before others, I will deny before my heavenly Father."

On this same note, consider the following:

"Therefore, they must instruct them in the true worship of God, which is unique to the Catholic religion." (Pope Gregory XVI, Summo Iugiter Studio #6, May 27, 1832)

Read Summo Iugiter Studio here:
http://www.papalencyclicals.net...

"The holy universal Church teaches that it is not possible to worship God truly except in her..." (Pope Gregory I, The Papal Encyclicals, Vol. 1, pp. 231)

Therefore, Muslims cannot truly worship the same God as Catholics, as this is exclusive the the Catholic Church. The statement made in Lumen Gentium is even worse when we consider it carefully. It states that Muslims worship the God "who on the last day will judge mankind." To say this is to deny the deity of Christ, as He is the one who will judge mankind on the last day. Muslims do not accept this truth.

"If anyone does not say that He, Jesus Christ, will come to judge the living and the dead, he is a heretic." (Pope Damasus I, Council of Rome, Can. 15)

Look up Chrislam
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
sedevacantist
Posts: 37
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/15/2016 8:14:35 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/15/2016 8:10:39 PM, desmac wrote:

So no continuity of Papal authority.

Perhaps you are not familiar with the position of the sedevacantist. Sede is Latin for "chair" and Vacante is Latin for "empty." So, a sedevacante period is simply a period where the chair of St. Peter is empty. This occurs every time a pope dies, for example. A sedevacantist simply believes that the chair of St. Peter is currently empty. That does not mean the chair will never be filled again.
"Reveal to the faithful the wolves which are demolishing the Lord's vineyard."
- Pope Clement XIII, Encyclical Christianae Reipublicae, 1766
sedevacantist
Posts: 37
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/15/2016 8:15:15 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/15/2016 8:13:46 PM, brontoraptor wrote:

Look up Chrislam

I am familiar with.
"Reveal to the faithful the wolves which are demolishing the Lord's vineyard."
- Pope Clement XIII, Encyclical Christianae Reipublicae, 1766
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/15/2016 8:18:12 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/15/2016 8:14:35 PM, sedevacantist wrote:
At 6/15/2016 8:10:39 PM, desmac wrote:

So no continuity of Papal authority.

Perhaps you are not familiar with the position of the sedevacantist. Sede is Latin for "chair" and Vacante is Latin for "empty." So, a sedevacante period is simply a period where the chair of St. Peter is empty. This occurs every time a pope dies, for example. A sedevacantist simply believes that the chair of St. Peter is currently empty. That does not mean the chair will never be filled again.

Third time lucky, no continuity of Papal authority
sedevacantist
Posts: 37
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/15/2016 8:19:50 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/15/2016 8:18:12 PM, desmac wrote:

Third time lucky, no continuity of Papal authority

No one is suggesting this except for you, to my knowledge. I am not suggesting this, which was made clear in my last two posts to you.
"Reveal to the faithful the wolves which are demolishing the Lord's vineyard."
- Pope Clement XIII, Encyclical Christianae Reipublicae, 1766
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/15/2016 8:26:37 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/15/2016 8:19:50 PM, sedevacantist wrote:
At 6/15/2016 8:18:12 PM, desmac wrote:

Third time lucky, no continuity of Papal authority

No one is suggesting this except for you, to my knowledge. I am not suggesting this, which was made clear in my last two posts to you.

You claimed that Paul VI was a heretic, and, therefore, not a true Catholic or Pope. thus for the 15 years from 1963 to 1978 there was no Pope. Hence, as I keep saying, there is no continuity of Papal authority.
sedevacantist
Posts: 37
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/15/2016 8:31:09 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/15/2016 8:26:37 PM, desmac wrote:

You claimed that Paul VI was a heretic, and, therefore, not a true Catholic or Pope. thus for the 15 years from 1963 to 1978 there was no Pope. Hence, as I keep saying, there is no continuity of Papal authority.

Well, I guess it depends on how precise you want to be in what you mean. There have been more than 200 popes. Therefore, there have been more than 200 instances in which the chair of St. Peter was empty. Let's say it took exactly one year to pick a new pope each time. That would equal out to over 200 years of vacancy. Does that mean the chair of St. Peter has not continued throughout the years? Not at all. So what is your objection to the vacancy of the Holy See today? Why are you directly associating the vacancy today with a lack of continual Papal authority?
"Reveal to the faithful the wolves which are demolishing the Lord's vineyard."
- Pope Clement XIII, Encyclical Christianae Reipublicae, 1766
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/15/2016 8:33:31 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/15/2016 8:31:09 PM, sedevacantist wrote:
At 6/15/2016 8:26:37 PM, desmac wrote:

You claimed that Paul VI was a heretic, and, therefore, not a true Catholic or Pope. thus for the 15 years from 1963 to 1978 there was no Pope. Hence, as I keep saying, there is no continuity of Papal authority.

Well, I guess it depends on how precise you want to be in what you mean. There have been more than 200 popes. Therefore, there have been more than 200 instances in which the chair of St. Peter was empty. Let's say it took exactly one year to pick a new pope each time. That would equal out to over 200 years of vacancy. Does that mean the chair of St. Peter has not continued throughout the years? Not at all. So what is your objection to the vacancy of the Holy See today? Why are you directly associating the vacancy today with a lack of continual Papal authority?

It is vacant today? Is Francis not a Pope either?
sedevacantist
Posts: 37
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/15/2016 8:34:35 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/15/2016 8:33:31 PM, desmac wrote:

It is vacant today? Is Francis not a Pope either?

That is correct, the chair of St. Peter is vacant today. And yes, "pope" Francis is an antipope.
"Reveal to the faithful the wolves which are demolishing the Lord's vineyard."
- Pope Clement XIII, Encyclical Christianae Reipublicae, 1766
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/15/2016 8:36:12 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/15/2016 8:34:35 PM, sedevacantist wrote:
At 6/15/2016 8:33:31 PM, desmac wrote:

It is vacant today? Is Francis not a Pope either?

That is correct, the chair of St. Peter is vacant today. And yes, "pope" Francis is an antipope.

How many of the 200 you mentioned have been "true" Popes in your opinion?
sedevacantist
Posts: 37
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/15/2016 8:39:53 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/15/2016 8:36:12 PM, desmac wrote:

How many of the 200 you mentioned have been "true" Popes in your opinion?

Every pope has been legitimate from St. Peter all the way to Pope Pius XII. Obviously I am excluding the antipopes such as Benedict XIII.
"Reveal to the faithful the wolves which are demolishing the Lord's vineyard."
- Pope Clement XIII, Encyclical Christianae Reipublicae, 1766
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/15/2016 8:43:30 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/15/2016 8:39:53 PM, sedevacantist wrote:
At 6/15/2016 8:36:12 PM, desmac wrote:

How many of the 200 you mentioned have been "true" Popes in your opinion?

Every pope has been legitimate from St. Peter all the way to Pope Pius XII. Obviously I am excluding the antipopes such as Benedict XIII.

But include the Borgias and Medicis.
I am sure the RC church will approve your views.
sedevacantist
Posts: 37
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/15/2016 8:52:22 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/15/2016 8:43:30 PM, desmac wrote:

But include the Borgias and Medicis.
I am sure the RC church will approve your views.

Pope Alexander VI, Pope Leo X, Pope Clement VII (1523-1534), and Pope Leo XI were not antipopes. They were not public heretics or apostates.
"Reveal to the faithful the wolves which are demolishing the Lord's vineyard."
- Pope Clement XIII, Encyclical Christianae Reipublicae, 1766
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/15/2016 8:54:33 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/15/2016 8:52:22 PM, sedevacantist wrote:
At 6/15/2016 8:43:30 PM, desmac wrote:

But include the Borgias and Medicis.
I am sure the RC church will approve your views.

Pope Alexander VI, Pope Leo X, Pope Clement VII (1523-1534), and Pope Leo XI were not antipopes. They were not public heretics or apostates.

What, in your opinion, defines an antipope?
sedevacantist
Posts: 37
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/15/2016 8:57:06 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/15/2016 8:54:33 PM, desmac wrote:

What, in your opinion, defines an antipope?

This is not my opinion. An antipope is a false claimant to be the pope.
"Reveal to the faithful the wolves which are demolishing the Lord's vineyard."
- Pope Clement XIII, Encyclical Christianae Reipublicae, 1766
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/15/2016 9:05:51 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/15/2016 8:57:06 PM, sedevacantist wrote:
At 6/15/2016 8:54:33 PM, desmac wrote:

What, in your opinion, defines an antipope?

This is not my opinion. An antipope is a false claimant to be the pope.

So, Who, over the last 2,000 years have been antipopes?
sedevacantist
Posts: 37
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/15/2016 9:09:51 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/15/2016 9:05:51 PM, desmac wrote:

So, Who, over the last 2,000 years have been antipopes?

I will go ahead and provide you with a source to answer your question, but I have to go ahead and ask where you are going with this. To me, this discussion appears to be going off topic.

List of antipopes:
https://en.wikipedia.org...
"Reveal to the faithful the wolves which are demolishing the Lord's vineyard."
- Pope Clement XIII, Encyclical Christianae Reipublicae, 1766
bulproof
Posts: 25,168
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/16/2016 5:11:02 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/15/2016 9:09:51 PM, sedevacantist wrote:
At 6/15/2016 9:05:51 PM, desmac wrote:

So, Who, over the last 2,000 years have been antipopes?

I will go ahead and provide you with a source to answer your question, but I have to go ahead and ask where you are going with this. To me, this discussion appears to be going off topic.

List of antipopes:
https://en.wikipedia.org...

So I guess your bedroom constitutes the entire holy roman catholic faithful?
How does your god talk to you and are you sure it's not your neighbours dog.?
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
sedevacantist
Posts: 37
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/16/2016 6:22:11 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/16/2016 5:11:02 AM, bulproof wrote:

So I guess your bedroom constitutes the entire holy roman catholic faithful?

I am not sure I follow. Are you suggesting that there are no Catholics who share the same understanding as me? If so, then you are massively incorrect. There are plenty of sedevacantists.
"Reveal to the faithful the wolves which are demolishing the Lord's vineyard."
- Pope Clement XIII, Encyclical Christianae Reipublicae, 1766
bulproof
Posts: 25,168
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/16/2016 6:27:39 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/16/2016 6:22:11 AM, sedevacantist wrote:
At 6/16/2016 5:11:02 AM, bulproof wrote:

So I guess your bedroom constitutes the entire holy roman catholic faithful?

I am not sure I follow. Are you suggesting that there are no Catholics who share the same understanding as me? If so, then you are massively incorrect. There are plenty of sedevacantists.
Define plenty.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
sedevacantist
Posts: 37
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/16/2016 6:43:28 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/16/2016 6:27:39 AM, bulproof wrote:

Define plenty.

I by no means have a number. I can reference you to several sedevacantist groups, such as the Most Holy Family Monastery, Novus Ordo Watch, True Restoration Radio, etc.
"Reveal to the faithful the wolves which are demolishing the Lord's vineyard."
- Pope Clement XIII, Encyclical Christianae Reipublicae, 1766
annanicole
Posts: 19,782
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/16/2016 6:52:51 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/16/2016 6:43:28 AM, sedevacantist wrote:
At 6/16/2016 6:27:39 AM, bulproof wrote:

All you've done is proved that the Roman Catholic Church has at times contradicted itself, officially. One "infallible leader" contradicts another "infallible leader". One "council" contradicts another one. Then the "councils" contradict the "infallible leader."
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."