With +Vigano being excommunicated not only for his opposition to Francis, but for "refusing to accept Vatican II" begs the question: is a Catholic required to assent to Vatican II in toto? People want/need to know. I used to hold the viewpoint of Benedict XVI and others that the council was good - just the post-conciliar period was horrible due to the invoking of the "spirit of Vatican 2" to affirm …More
With +Vigano being excommunicated not only for his opposition to Francis, but for "refusing to accept Vatican II" begs the question: is a Catholic required to assent to Vatican II in toto?
People want/need to know. I used to hold the viewpoint of Benedict XVI and others that the council was good - just the post-conciliar period was horrible due to the invoking of the "spirit of Vatican 2" to affirm all kinds of errors. Now I am leaning to believe that the texts themselves of the council are bad. It's not for nothing that Francis is someone who has been entirely formed in that time and those teachings
pintswithaquinas.com
Was Vatican II Infallible? - Pints with Aquinas
How the Media Distorted Vatican II People love simple narratives. Examples: “Australians are laid… An ecumenical council has the authority to issue …
The Holy Office certainly intended for it to be a dogmatic council, as evidenced by their schema. They thought that they were completing the work that was so rudely interrupted 90+ years earlier. It can certainly be questioned whether John XXIII was of the same mind. Once the schema was rejected (which was immediate), the council should have been called off. There is no doubt that it is the “super …More
The Holy Office certainly intended for it to be a dogmatic council, as evidenced by their schema. They thought that they were completing the work that was so rudely interrupted 90+ years earlier. It can certainly be questioned whether John XXIII was of the same mind. Once the schema was rejected (which was immediate), the council should have been called off. There is no doubt that it is the “super dogma (in Ratzinger’s words)” adhered to by the majority of the hierarchy. As far as the texts go, everything innovative is expressed very ambiguously. Louie Verrecchio wrote a column showing three passages of Dignitatis humanae which directly contradict 3 passages of Pascendi.
Exactly. I've come to see that 2nd Vatican council was indeed hijacked by modernists who pushed a thesis that's yields an erroneous base premise - i.e. that the Church MUST change to adapt to "modern man". This is a blatant contradiction to the whole concept of divine revelation!
Right. The way I understand the “dogma” of the conciliar church is that every Dogma is able to be questioned, and that this assertion is unquestionable, if that makes sense.
It was a Pastoral Council. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve had to explain that to someone. Even Paul VI said so. That’s how they could eke so much trash through…
Yes. The "pastoral" approach is just a cover for leniency to sin & error. Plus all these non-Catholics we are trying to please aren't really interested in joining the Church but being ratified in their wrong beliefs & behaviors.
