Will Salza Ever Shutup? He Continues To Make Himself Look Foolish
There is an expression, "know when to quit!". It goes to show you how prideful this pseudo theologian is. How many more times does Fr. Kramer have to point out how idiotic Salza's theology is...
From Fr. Kramer:
John Salza ignorantly says, "Fr Kramer . . . just said a heretic can also be an infidel. We make all the proper distinctions in our book, approved by scholars who forgot more theology than Fr Kramer ever knew."
Salza forgets that heresy is a species of infidelity:
Romans 15:31 - St. Paul speaks of Jews as being "infidels"; to be freed "from the infidels in Judea" 《απο των απειθουντων εν τη ιουδαια 》
St. Thomas explains that heresy is a species of infidelity:
Sed contra est quod falsitas veritati opponitur. Sed haereticus est qui falsas vel novas opiniones vel gignit vel sequitur. Ergo opponitur veritati, cui fides innititur. Ergo sub infidelitate continetur.
[39280] IIª-IIae q. 11 a. 1 co.Respondeo dicendum quod nomen haeresis, sicut dictum est, electionem importat. Electio autem, ut supra dictum est, est eorum quae sunt ad finem, praesupposito fine. In credendis autem voluntas assentit alicui vero tanquam proprio bono, ut ex supradictis patet. Unde quod est principale verum habet rationem finis ultimi, quae autem secundaria sunt habent rationem eorum quae sunt ad finem. Quia vero quicumque credit alicuius dicto assentit, principale videtur esse, et quasi finis, in unaquaque credulitate ille cuius dicto assentitur, quasi autem secundaria sunt ea quae quis tenendo vult alicui assentire. Sic igitur qui recte fidem Christianam habet sua voluntate assentit Christo in his quae vere ad eius doctrinam pertinent. A rectitudine igitur fidei Christianae dupliciter aliquis potest deviare. Uno modo, quia ipsi Christo non vult assentire, et hic habet quasi malam voluntatem circa ipsum finem. Et hoc pertinet ad speciem infidelitatis Paganorum et Iudaeorum. Alio modo, per hoc quod intendit quidem Christo assentire, sed deficit in eligendo ea quibus Christo assentiat, quia non eligit ea quae sunt vere a Christo tradita, sed ea quae sibi propria mens suggerit. Et ideo haeresis est infidelitatis species pertinens ad eos qui fidem Christi profitentur, sed eius dogmata corrumpunt. (Summa Theol. II - II . 11 . 1)
Salza "forgets" or just doesnt know?
Some other traditionalists weigh in:
Andrew Magoffin My goodness they're stubborn. I believe if I had self refuted this much, I would just back down!
Sed contra est quod falsitas veritati opponitur. Sed haereticus est qui falsas vel novas opiniones vel gignit vel sequitur. Ergo opponitur veritati, cui fides innititur. Ergo sub infidelitate continetur.
[39280] IIª-IIae q. 11 a. 1 co.Respondeo dicendum quod nomen haeresis, sicut dictum est, electionem importat. Electio autem, ut supra dictum est, est eorum quae sunt ad finem, praesupposito fine. In credendis autem voluntas assentit alicui vero tanquam proprio bono, ut ex supradictis patet. Unde quod est principale verum habet rationem finis ultimi, quae autem secundaria sunt habent rationem eorum quae sunt ad finem. Quia vero quicumque credit alicuius dicto assentit, principale videtur esse, et quasi finis, in unaquaque credulitate ille cuius dicto assentitur, quasi autem secundaria sunt ea quae quis tenendo vult alicui assentire. Sic igitur qui recte fidem Christianam habet sua voluntate assentit Christo in his quae vere ad eius doctrinam pertinent. A rectitudine igitur fidei Christianae dupliciter aliquis potest deviare. Uno modo, quia ipsi Christo non vult assentire, et hic habet quasi malam voluntatem circa ipsum finem. Et hoc pertinet ad speciem infidelitatis Paganorum et Iudaeorum. Alio modo, per hoc quod intendit quidem Christo assentire, sed deficit in eligendo ea quibus Christo assentiat, quia non eligit ea quae sunt vere a Christo tradita, sed ea quae sibi propria mens suggerit. Et ideo haeresis est infidelitatis species pertinens ad eos qui fidem Christi profitentur, sed eius dogmata corrumpunt. (Summa Theol. II - II . 11 . 1)
Salza "forgets" or just doesnt know?
Andrew Magoffin My goodness they're stubborn. I believe if I had self refuted this much, I would just back down!
Jorge Velasco Ouch. PS: Quick but deadly.
Jacob Talaga It's
all about money..Salza and Siscoe are making a bundle. They have to
defend their wrong position. I still think Salza is a Freemason.
Karen Karwowski I find it amazing he persists like this, he sounds like a petulant child.
Dear TCK:
I'm glad Fr. Kramer is continuing to expose Salza and Siscoe's errors on TCK. It is obvious that these two laymen are obstinately opposed to the Church's teachings on heresy and the papacy. Do they really need to be told over and over again that a pope must be Catholic? Or do they agree with their friend Chris Ferrara that a true pope can also be "anti-Catholic" or a "font of error"? They have gone way too far. I have to say that the neo-SSPX have lost their credibility by allowing these amateurs-gone-wild to be their spokesmen.
I'll be eagerly following Fr. Kramer on TCK because what he's teaching is much needed, and appreciated, sound Catholic doctrine. Keep up the good work!
Sincerely,
Marny B. Medeiros
I'm glad Fr. Kramer is continuing to expose Salza and Siscoe's errors on TCK. It is obvious that these two laymen are obstinately opposed to the Church's teachings on heresy and the papacy. Do they really need to be told over and over again that a pope must be Catholic? Or do they agree with their friend Chris Ferrara that a true pope can also be "anti-Catholic" or a "font of error"? They have gone way too far. I have to say that the neo-SSPX have lost their credibility by allowing these amateurs-gone-wild to be their spokesmen.
I'll be eagerly following Fr. Kramer on TCK because what he's teaching is much needed, and appreciated, sound Catholic doctrine. Keep up the good work!
Sincerely,
Marny B. Medeiros
