One of the weaknesses of AOTM is the hard to see line between good and evil. Oftentimes speakers who aren't even Catholic, as was the case for this January meeting, will be invited to hold forth in defense of an erroneous position, or what appeared to be a Sedevacantist one on the part of Christopher Ferrara as noted by Novus Ordo Watch, recently. And even if the position is discernibly erroneous, it might be so poorly or ambiguously formed that it's difficult to understand, and as simple as it was in this case, Chris Ferrara did some light footwork and included a wiggle word, "effectively" to cover the untenable position. So despite having Shea admit that membership in the Church is necessary for salvation, it was really unclear just what church he was talking about, although for Ferrara never took him to task on this point, as Shea histrionically waved his hands about people listening to Relevant Radio and reading his books.
So, with all of the urgency and seriousness of an intramural softball game, there's a vague suggestion of there being competition, but you can't tell who's in the winning side, much less the right side. Was it a victory for Catholic truth? We doubt that. There might've been some hard hits but there were no killer blows. That's why we included this poll you can vote on it.
One way of seeing success is in looking for numbers, or possibly even the results of such initiatives. Sometimes large groups get together outside of their ecclesiastical venues to change events outside the bubble. This is apparent in France, where Catholic youth, though few in numbers, have given significant voice to their faith, disrupting Buddhist interfaith prayer ceremonies in Cathedrals or blocking events celebrating sexual perversion. These evenings may have brought some unfavorable comments from the effeminates in the chancery, but they seem to have done little else. Like the Remnant, a lot of whining, not much winning. Not to be too negative, for these events have been well-received with large numbers in attendance, sometimes close to 400 with a bowling alley, smokehouse atmosphere and some jocularity among the participants which keeps the men coming back for more, but after these hard working people go home, are they left with any palpable cause for their faith? Do they believe the faith? At least they know something is wrong, even if they don't know what to do about it.
For this year's Shea appearance, the video was also recorded, and although the organizers at AOTM insisted that people don't want to be recorded saying controversial things, to let their hair down, the video has appeared.
Last year, the Voris vs. Shea debate was much better attended and the sides between the Neoconservative, aberrosexual friendly, AmChurch, Modernist position was more resolutely opposed by Michael Voris. Since then, Voris and the Remnant crowd have had a tiff, and Chris Ferrara couldn't be moved this year to admit that the Hut of Apologetics Mafia had been vanquished, while insisting that the winners were the men in attendance. As usual, we're not really sure what the debate was about. Maybe we're just daft? Perhaps it was a victory for the Thrice Defined Dogma?Although several times, the dogma of Nulla Salus Extra Ecclesiam was raised, Shea offered no objection, qui tacet non consentire. Unfortunately, Shea's quiescent Feeneyism didn't stop him from invoking the charge of anti-Semitism, his trump ace in the hole whenever he attacks real Catholics. If anything, such fervent defense of the status quo with respect to the Jews is an especially significant uniting factor between Remnant and Shea, so much so does Michael Warning suggest that now that Shea is no longer working for Patheos, he'll be working at the Remnant managing their comments section. Let's not forget Michael Matt's betrayal of Bishop Williamson in 2009, when he published an especially cloying account of an interfaith prayer with a fellow traveller who just happened to be Jewish, on an airplane flight. Never mind that, it's especially interesting to see on his part the near approval for one of the most prolific, if not the most huge defenders of AmChurch in the apologetics world, their apparent unanimous agreement on No Salvation Outside of the Catholic Church notwithstanding, even though Shea probably believes that the Old Covenant is salvific and to say otherwise is anti-Semitic.
Anyway see for yourself at AOTM's site:
Should it not read 'Qui tacet consentire '? Silence indicates consent. .
Should it not read 'Qui tacet consentire '? Silence indicates consent. .
I'd rather drink turpentine & piss on a brush fire than attend this "debate".
... didn't stop him from invoking the charge of anti-Semitism, his trump ace in the hole whenever he attacks real Catholics.
I noticed this quite a bit at Shea's site about 5 years ago (the last time I visited Patheos sites with any regularity). Someone asks how can one group be saved by accepting Christ and the other be saved by rejecting Christ? Shea then went into a tirade of sophistry including accusations of anti-Semitism, posted a picture of then Pope Benedict XVI lighting a menorah, etc. I remember that post not because of its spiritual or rhetorical value, but because my cousins were teaching their children about logical fallacies and used Shea's blog as an example of a modern sophist. He slanders anyone who disagrees with him, and most people in a blog comments section do not have the time or the rhetorical skills to defend themselves against being slandered as an anti-Semite so they quietly go away or get banned if they persist and voila, he "won" the debate and "proved" the person's guilt.
You also noted that ...Shea probably believes that the Old Covenant is salvific and to say otherwise is anti-Semitic
Yeah, probably true.
while I make no claims to being a mind reader, I suspect him of doublethink, holding two contradictory positions and not having any difficulties with it. Also, papolatry in extremis.
Please anyone enlighten me kindly about the alledged betrayal of Michael Matt of Bishop Williamson.
So despite having Shea admit that membership in the Church is necessary for salvation, it was really unclear just what church he was talking about, although for Ferrara never took him to task on this point, as Shea histrionically waved his hands about people listening to Relevant Radio and reading his books.
I don't think either of the two were affirming the Feeneyite position on extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
Objectively speaking Jews need to believe and be baptised or else be condemned - Chris Ferrara
Tear the Vatican Document on the Jews and throw it in the dustbin says Chris Ferrara
Chris Ferrara unknowingly uses an irrational premise and supports magisterial heresy
There can be mission Ad Gentes with Feeneyism or Cushingism. We can choose.For Pope Francis and the Jesuits it is mission with Cushingism
Chris Ferrara - Mark Shea debate : both are theologically rejecting the dogma EENS
You're trapped in the treadmill of your own closed system, Lionel.
Join the Catholic Church and discover that history is linear.
Thank you for the link. Sad affaire. That oughtn' have been a hill to die on for a bishop regardless.
Whether or not you agree with the Bishop, it's mighty strange that merely questioning the details of a historical event should result in having one's life turned upside down. Seems to me that as a Catholic bishop, you can public ally question the entire rationale for your vocation, the Incantation with impunity, but boy, you'd better not question certain events in the middle of the twentieth century.
Just like Chris Ferrara and Mark Shea, even Tancred at The Eponymous Flower does not affirm the Feeneyite interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus, with respect to Vatican Council II.
1.For Tancred the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance are explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).They are relevant.
So in other words there must be known cases of the baptism of desire(BOD) and being saved in invincible ignorance (I.I), without the baptism of water, for Tancred. So in this way BOD and I.I,being known, are exceptions for him.Right Tancred?
2.Since being saved in invincible ignorance ( without the baptism of desire) is explicit, objectively visible in the present times(2016) for Tancred, LG 16 is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. It contradicts Feeneyite EENS. Correct Tancred?
3.So it was important for Chris Ferrara to mention being saved in invincible ignorance, during the debate with Mark Shea. Since being saved in invincible ignorance is relevant to EENS. It is also relevant for Tancred and the SSPX bishops and priests.
4.So Chris Ferrara would say every one needs to enter the Church for salvation, explicitly all Jews ( and other non Catholics) need to enter the Church to avoid going to Hell( Cantate Domino, Council of Florence 1441). But then theologically, Chris and Mark, would say that being saved in invincible ignorance is an exception to EENS. So Chris would contradict himself(Mark does not affirm the dogma EENS traditionally). Theologically Chris is saying not every one needs to formally enter the Church in the present times, since there are known exceptions.
This is not the Feeneyite position or the centuries old, tradiditional interpretation of EENS.
For St. Robert Nellarmine and St. Francis Xavier there were no known exceptions to EENS.
Their interpretation cannot be the teaching of the Holy Spirit.Since the Holy Spirit cannot teach an irrationality nor teach something new, which is a break with the old magisterium of the Catholic Church.
See the difference!
Tancred I agree 100%!!!!!
Obviously Catholicism has not worked for you, Lionel.
Try God direct.
I am affirming the offical teaching of the Catholic Church interpreted without the common irrational premise and inference, to achieve a non traditional conclusion.I am not saying anything new.
Matt is the same heretical troll that has been plaguing this fine web. Crush his malevolent comments. Maricusa
Matt's MO is pure and contumeleous off-topic, and humorless ridicule.
Matt the Heretic says that "history is linear." How quaint and old-fashioned! The same pernicious lie of Teilhard de Chardin and his science fiction about the Omega Point and the Cosmic Christ (blasphemous fantasies) towards which all is happily evolving. It is the same, tired pseudo-poetry and pseudo-theology that camouflages the satanic rejection of objective truth to promote ever-evolving, progressive developments so that Catholic Truth can be rejected in the name of progress. History is cyclical, not linear---as the historical record proves very clearly (except for liberal heretics who prefer their own pathologies to reality, and the gullible fools who believe them). RC
I can't watch anything from Remnant anymore. It's just constantly MM going "i don't know. I just don't know anymore, Chris. What do you think's happening?" And then Chris, lighting up like his wife just had her first baby (watch w/out the sound), gleefully relates the whole sordid scandal and then MM after egging him on for about 15 minutes, suddenly says, "But we're not sede-vacantists, we support the pope and are loyal sons of his, we don't even go to SSPX chapels, we are in full communion w/Francis and just criticizing him like he asked us to do as long as we continue to support N.O. hierarchy, sacraments, contraception, abortion, sodomy, divorce, sacrilege etc. etc. but I don't know what our friends the "neo catholics" are thinking, Chris, to criticize us for criticizing Francis (when he asked us to (and so did Benny & JP2 & P6(ha!)) while still walking along w/him. They need to keep walkin' along, but to criticize at whine and cheese pilgrimages and conferences the way we do. Well, that's all for now--but Remnant TV will be back w/a new show in about a week or so--so stay posted.
However, they have stooped to a new low and are using "stripper" photo tease to gain viewers. Meanwhile, you say they never report on the abuse scandal (but like Phil Lawler -- perhaps will soon be "Catholic Remnant" (like "Catholic Culture" and "Catholic Answers")w/salaries to match--specially if SSPX deal w/new reform of the reform trannie ben frannie rite goes down) but now they are beating the dead horse of Bernie Law. Oh yeah--not Bernardin, not McCarrick, not O'Malley/Wuerl/Lynch/ Lori, but Law! Same Law (as if Remnant don't know) who was the first beneficiary of trannie frannie's stroke inducing temper tantrums.
See John Hoax Allen leaping to cover up the tantrum:
"The clerical sex scandal and its real ramifications. Michael J. Matt tracks down clerical sex scandal cover-up man, Cardinal Bernard Law, living in a posh Renaissance palace in Rome. Plus, why is the Vicar General of this Catholic diocese posing on Facebook with a stripper. And, finally, first it was Gay Days at Disneyland but is Gay Day at Lourdes next?
Post a Comment