tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3413387109542176983.post8566826171392987865..comments2023-09-23T10:03:52.824-07:00Comments on HGL's F.B. writings: On obedience having limits. Answering two faithful from the flocks of the FSSPX.Hans Georg Lundahlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01055583255516264955noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3413387109542176983.post-8570155639282012842015-04-21T10:43:30.948-07:002015-04-21T10:43:30.948-07:001) got lost, here:
Mystagogy posts certainly fals...1) got lost, here:<br /><br /><a href="http://hglundahlsblog.blogspot.fr/2009/10/mystagogy-posts-certainly-false.html" rel="nofollow">Mystagogy posts certainly false allegation on St Robert Bellarmine</a>Hans Georg Lundahlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01055583255516264955noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3413387109542176983.post-13413397103805122732015-04-21T10:42:29.509-07:002015-04-21T10:42:29.509-07:00Short link disabled, new link, including surroundi...Short link disabled, new link, including surrounding messages:<br /><br /><b>deretour :</b> 1) <a href="http://hglundahlsblog.blogspot.fr/2009/10/mystagogy-posts-certainly-false.html" rel="nofollow"></a> 2) <a href="http://hglundahlsblog.blogspot.fr/2011/06/where-did-saint-basil-great-say-or.html" rel="nofollow">Pseudoquote identified. What De Romano Pontifice, book IV, chapter V really says (quote)</a> 3) <a href="http://hglundahlsblog.blogspot.fr/2009/10/further-faults-of-fact-in-mystagogy.html" rel="nofollow">Further faults of fact in the Mystagogy post</a>Hans Georg Lundahlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01055583255516264955noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3413387109542176983.post-79728870303710333292012-08-25T02:45:24.461-07:002012-08-25T02:45:24.461-07:00I was right now reading some things which might ve...I was right now reading some things which might very well have been secretly meant as answers from TFP and SSPX to above.<br /><br />1847 Our Lady appeared to St John Bosco. As far as I know he was already a priest. His only concern with youth cannot therefore have had any legitimate inclusion any more of marriage, as for instance St Francis of Sales at one point could have married a girl of fourteen legitimately.<br /><br />The second is Mgr Lefèbvre's principle, ONLY when the faith is at stake may one refuse obedience to the public authority of the Church.<br /><br />Note two things:<br /><br />1,a) I am neither priest nor subdeacon<br />1,b) priests do not necessarily know if I have been showed a path or not.<br /><br />2,a) If FSSPX or any other part of the Church pretends to know the right way for me and that it does not include marriage, they lie;<br />2,b) Their lie even concerns the faith, like the limits of ecclesiastical infallibility. St Robert Bellarmine says Popes are infallible ONLY when speaking to all of the Church, not when speaking on one particular person or case;<br />2,c) Therefore should they want to oblige me to celibacy on pretence of knowing more about me than I know myself, I am very much entitled to refuse obeying them, even if they should publically tell me so;<br />2,d) Any telling me so or any other pretence I have been disobedient has either not been public or if public not openly about me, and therefore it would not even be the public authority but only the secret goadings I would so far oppose.<br /><br />Reference for St Robert Bellarmine can be found on one of my blogs, where I cite the chapter that Paul Ballaster MISQUOTED or GAVE A MISQUOTE FROM, link to that message, with Latin text straight from second edition and my own English translation can be found on this short link: <a href="http://o-x.fr/nfmkc" rel="nofollow">http://o-x.fr/nfmkc</a>H. G. L.http://creavsevolu.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3413387109542176983.post-24875750497027840452012-08-15T02:24:24.046-07:002012-08-15T02:24:24.046-07:00I am afraid some seminary directors may have had a...I am afraid some seminary directors may have had an incomplete education in history.<br /><br />The fact that Gustave Thibon could get away with quoting Maurras as saying - and being right to say - the the Roman Emperors were right to persecute the first Christians as being too anarchic shows a certain lack in historic factuality and Church related apologetics.<br /><br />I actually read a book by Thibon (or the relevant part for that quote). If he had been alive I might have had to tell him that Maurras and Fustel de Coulanges being better at history than Michelet does not make them infallible.<br /><br />But if there really was a case of Royal and Catholic parents overriding roughhandedly their children's will, first of all I've never heard of it (the father of Frederick II of Prussia was a Protestant), and if I ever do, I expect to hear either the Church was not at all involved, or the Churchmen who were were bad Churchmen.<br /><br />Even in voluntary obedience, there is so much you can ask for royalty, who are few and have been raised to take care of the realm, and it would be wrong even to ask such obedience of a private citizen.<br /><br />France however had a legislation which was more parentalist than Catholic teaching. Part of the Council of Trent was not regisered by the French Parliaments, and that part was the consent of both husband and wife being sufficient even without parental consent. In French law a man taking away someone's daughetr to marry her against her <i>father's</i> will counted as a rapist up to the Revolution. Both Church and Monarchs have asked <i>of parents</i> the obedience to not insist on that privilege.Hans Georg Lundahlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01055583255516264955noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3413387109542176983.post-31230355261449042752012-08-13T07:50:38.425-07:002012-08-13T07:50:38.425-07:00In such a case, obedience is voluntary. The Church...In such a case, obedience is voluntary. The Church did not force a Prince or Princess to obey the royal parents about a marriage chosen for reasons of state. The prince or princess in question would have obeyed for:<br />- not objecting to marriage as opposed to celibacy (confer Libussa, martyr for chosing to be Christ's bride)<br />- not objecting in favour of someone else<br />- and not objecting by disgust for person chosen.<br /><br />The mother of St Francis of Sales was 14 when she married a man aged 43 or 63 (I've found both ages in different sources), and that could not have happened if she had very much not wanted to marry such an old man. Not among Christians.<br /><br />St Hedwig married Jagiello, and that could not have happened if she had seriously objected to marrying a recent Pagan, a warrior, and someone older than herself too.<br /><br />The will of the person in question was not simply overridden.<br /><br />As with a very other kind of ring than wedding rings, the Council of Elrond forces noone to take it who is not willing.Hans Georg Lundahlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01055583255516264955noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3413387109542176983.post-57036697608925317772011-12-09T13:52:21.349-08:002011-12-09T13:52:21.349-08:00Nous devons consentir sur ce point. Oui,
mais, le ...Nous devons consentir sur ce point. Oui,<br />mais, le soveriegns d'histoire avec le conivance d'Eglise envoyé leurs enfants être épousés pour le bon du royaume. <br /><br /><br /><br />I apollogize for my poor french.Brantignyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01609397972340635441noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3413387109542176983.post-49911206529853845882011-12-09T09:00:01.754-08:002011-12-09T09:00:01.754-08:00A point already made last month by the way, in seq...A point already made last month by the way, in sequel post:<br /><br /><a href="http://hglsfbwritings.blogspot.com/2011/11/more-on-obedience-and-its-limits-debate.html" rel="nofollow">More on obedience and its limits. Debate.</a>Hans Georg Lundahlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01055583255516264955noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3413387109542176983.post-9372480471199267912011-12-09T08:57:42.657-08:002011-12-09T08:57:42.657-08:00An answer, and, an answer that is beside the point...An answer, and, an answer that is beside the point. You and I are agreed on the one limit that if the content of the order is for the ordered person to sin, he must and therefore can disobey. But my point is if order passes out of the competence of the one giving order, it may also quite licitly be disobeyed.<br /><br />Like neither parent nor state has the right to mistreat children or subjects by imposing pseudo-cures for supposedly abnormal ire by the method seen in "Anger Management" (Hollywood) - and anyone imposing such a cure directly is in fact sinning and therefore that side of the order can and should be disobeyed, but the point is, even if I were not sinning by presumption in submitting to such a thing, I would not need to, since it is not for either state or parent of a grown man to decide he has problems managing his anger. That is up to him and God, and nobody else, except father confessor, if such be consulted.<br /><br />Look very well at this link:<br /><br /><a href="http://newadvent.org/summa/3104.htm#article5" rel="nofollow">http://newadvent.org/summa/3104.htm#article5</a><br /><br />The first instance of a man not always being bound to obey a superior is "nobody must obey a superior who orders a sin". But the second is the one that is being missed: no man is bound to obey a superior in a thing in which he is not superior to one. Neither father nor state has the right to use force to impose this marriage or deprive one of marriage. Nor to decide what a man eats. And of course not to decide what medical cures he submits to.Hans Georg Lundahlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01055583255516264955noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3413387109542176983.post-55603300553557206012011-11-29T07:28:27.986-08:002011-11-29T07:28:27.986-08:00Obeidiance to ones parent's (authority) is the...Obeidiance to ones parent's (authority) is the same as that owed to one's soveriegn. Instructions which are moral may be followed but those that would tend to lead to a sinful act or thought may be disobedied, because at the judgement it will be you who stands before Jesus alone. Therefore it is necessary to form a right conscience. No man has the right to make another sin.Brantignyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01609397972340635441noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3413387109542176983.post-92014575675775560832011-11-27T09:54:46.193-08:002011-11-27T09:54:46.193-08:00Taken from the Catechism of St. Pius X: 1 Q: What ...<i>Taken from the Catechism of St. Pius X: 1 Q: What does the Fourth Commandment: Honor thy father and thy mother, command?<br /><br />A: The Fourth Commandment: Honor thy father and thy mother, commands us to respect our parents, obey them in all that is not sinful, and assist them in their temporal and spiritual needs.<br />2 Q: What does the Fourth Commandment forbid?<br /><br />A: The Fourth Commandment forbids us to offend our parents by word or by deed or in any other way.<br />3 Q: What other persons does this Commandment include under the names of father and mother?<br /><br />A: Under the names of father and mother this Commandment also includes all our superiors, both ecclesiastical and lay, whom we must consequently obey and respect. Pax Christi Regis.</i><br /><br />My answer:<br /><br />"obey them in all that is not sinful" - should be taken as:<br />- all that is <i>neither</i><br />sinful for oneself to do<br /><i>nor</i><br />sinful for them to ask<br />see thereon Summa Theologica, II-II, whatever the Question is that is about Obedience.<br /><br /><a href="http://newadvent.org/summa/3104.htm#article5" rel="nofollow">Summa, II-II, Q. 104, A. 5:</a><br /><br />(a parallel is adduced for illustration in beginning of corpus, read it if you like):<br /><i>On like manner there are two reasons, for which a subject may not be bound to obey his superior in all things. First on account of the command of a higher power. For as a gloss says on Romans 13:2, "They that resist [Vulgate: 'He that resisteth'] the power, resist the ordinance of God" (cf. St. Augustine, De Verb. Dom. viii). "If a commissioner issue an order, are you to comply, if it is contrary to the bidding of the proconsul? Again if the proconsul command one thing, and the emperor another, will you hesitate, to disregard the former and serve the latter? Therefore if the emperor commands one thing and God another, you must disregard the former and obey God." Secondly, a subject is not bound to obey his superior if the latter command him to do something wherein he is not subject to him. For Seneca says (De Beneficiis iii): "It is wrong to suppose that slavery falls upon the whole man: for the better part of him is excepted." His body is subjected and assigned to his master but his soul is his own. Consequently in matters touching the internal movement of the will man is not bound to obey his fellow-man, but God alone. <br /><br />Nevertheless man is bound to obey his fellow-man in things that have to be done externally by means of the body: and yet, since by nature all men are equal, he is not bound to obey another man in matters touching the nature of the body, for instance in those relating to the support of his body or the begetting of his children. Wherefore servants are not bound to obey their masters, nor children their parents, in the question of contracting marriage or of remaining in the state of virginity or the like. But in matters concerning the disposal of actions and human affairs, a subject is bound to obey his superior within the sphere of his authority; for instance a soldier must obey his general in matters relating to war, a servant his master in matters touching the execution of the duties of his service, a son his father in matters relating to the conduct of his life and the care of the household; and so forth.</i>Hans Georg Lundahlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01055583255516264955noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3413387109542176983.post-56305132646533228742011-11-26T04:52:21.480-08:002011-11-26T04:52:21.480-08:00Be My Unwin Or Hooper, If You Like!
This link was...<a href="http://hglsfbwritings.blogspot.com/2011/09/be-my-unwin-or-hooper-if-you-like.html" rel="nofollow">Be My Unwin Or Hooper, If You Like!</a><br /><br />This link was added to the status discussion on FB.Hans Georg Lundahlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01055583255516264955noreply@blogger.com