Posted on 05/02/2005 12:03:36 PM PDT by murphE
I already did. Read it again. The condition of the world does not depend upon the condition of the Church. By saying that, you heap responsibility for the world's problems on God since you're essentially declaring that, as head of the Catholic Church, the Holy Spirit needs to be doing a better job in guiding the Magisterium. That's blasphemy.
If you believed that the Holy Spirit had guided the Magisterium effectively, you would accept Vatican II and the novus ordo. You don't, therefore, you cast guilt upon the Holy Spirit.
"In saying this, we know that we are doing nothing less than publicly reproving the Vicar of Christ".
There's your show-stopper.
Another accusation. What do you mean by this?
Your, point?
To inspire and guide. I can go to the doctor and he can provide a structured diet to help me live better. If I leave the doctor's office, ignore his advice, and start eating fast food morning, noon, and night, that doesn't make the doctor or his diet invalid or fraudulent. It convicts me of not implementing it as intended. In the same way, Vatican II and the novus ordo were, as a matter of faith, infallibly inspired by the Holy Spirit. The liturgical abuses which occured IN SPITE OF Vatican II do not convict the Holy Spirit of insufficient inspiration.
I did and said no such thing, essentially or otherwise. Perhaps it is just your interpretation of what I said that does this, given your demonstrated tendency to judge peoples intentions rashly.
That's what I thought.
When you have a point let me know.
What's your intention?
I've made several points. I can't help it if you refuse to see them.
You think? The Novus Ordo was inspired by the Holy Spirit. Where do you get this stuff?
Here's an interesting quote from Fr. Echert, an Expert on the EWTN forum that might clear things up for you.
Since cause and effect cannot be seen with the naked eye, and there remains, therefore, conjecture on the matter of cause, I believe it legitimate for Catholics to be able to debate the nature of the cause(s), which have produced the effects in the Church of the present time--many of which are documented. If all aspects of a council are precluded from any such discussion, on the assumption that all aspects of all councils are somehow sacrosanct and divinely inspired, then we do a disservice to the pursuit of truth and a remedy, in my opinion. There are ambiguities and omissions in, and false translations of, documents of the recent council which have been used and misused by certain elements within the Church, with devastating results. Similarly, things never envisioned or commented upon by the council have been carried out, in the name of the council—the radical changes to the Sacred Liturgy, for instance. This has now gone on for four decades; one wonders if this will continue for centuries. It will, if we label those who raise the question as unfaithful, or those who object as dissenters. - Fr. Echert
"If you believed that the Holy Spirit had guided the Magisterium effectively, you would accept Vatican II and the novus ordo. You don't, therefore, you cast guilt upon the Holy Spirit."
I have rarely seen so much BS posted on a single thread before!
Is it completely beyond your wit to understand that no matter how much grace and guidance God gives to His Church, his ministers are nevertheless completely free to resist and refuse that grace and guidance?
Do you really believe that when Alexander VI was installing his bastards in all the plumb sees with the largest benefices that this was a case of the Holy Spirit "guiding" the Church too???!!!
If you bothered to read the article you will see that most of these criticisms of Vatican II and the Novus Ordo are made by the very man who now sits in the See of Peter! How then can it be disobedience to agree with the Pope's own words?
It is you and your Pollyanna, "everything's rosy in the garden" ilk who are the dissenters and disobedient ones, because it is you who disagree with the Pope who sees the Church infected with filth, relativism, and banal fabricated liturgy!
We've got a new Pope - get with the programme!!!
You've made several accusations, insults, and erroneous assertions, all without any substantiation. That is what I see.
Where's the insult. I'm calling a spade a spade. By definition, if you and your ilk were humble and obedient to the Church, there wouldn't be a category called "traditionalist".
Let's make it a simple "yes or no" question:
Do you accept Vatican II and the novus ordo?
Let me get this straight, You actually think the Holy Spirit calls a council and specifically dictates what is to be done? On what doctrine of the Church do you base this?
This would be the same Holy Spirit that guided the Council of Rome (AD 382), Hippo (AD 393), and Carthage (AD 397 and 419) in establishing the canon of the Bible. If you don't believe the Holy Spirit guided Vatican II, then, by continuation, you don't believe the Holy Spirit guided the councils mentioned above.
Do you require proof of doctrine giving authortity to the Holy Spirit during those councils, too?
I acknowledge Vatican II occur ed, and that the Novus Ordo exist, and I agree with Pope Benedict the XVI who as Cardinal Ratzinger said:
[W]e have been confronted instead with a continuing process of decay that has gone on largely on the basis of appeals to the Council, and thus has discredited the Council in the eyes of many people. The net result therefore seems negative. I am repeating here what I said ten years after the conclusion of the work: it is incontrovertible that this period has definitely been unfavorable for the Catholic Church.
and
“I am convinced that the ecclesial crisis in which we find ourselves today depends in great part on the collapse of the liturgy.”
and who said in his meditations on Good Friday:
“How often is the holy sacrament of his Presence abused, how often must he enter empty and evil hearts! How often do we celebrate only ourselves, without even realizing that he is there!”
and regarding the TLM said:
“A community is calling its very being into question when it suddenly declares that what until now was its holiest and highest possession is strictly forbidden and when it makes the longing for it seem downright indecent.”
And I agree with Pope Paul VI who said of the Council eight years after it:
“the opening to the world has become a veritable invasion of the Church by worldly thinking. We have perhaps been too weak and imprudent.”
And with Pope Pius XII who predicted:
I am worried by the Blessed Virgin’s messages to little Lucy of Fatima. This persistence of Mary about the dangers which menace the Church is a divine warning against the suicide that would be represented by the alteration of the faith, in her liturgy, her theology and her soul…. I hear all around me innovators who wish to dismantle the Sacred Chapel, destroy the universal flame of the Church, reject her ornaments and make her feel remorse for her historical past.
Do you agree with the Holy Father's statements and with the previous popes' statements? Yes or no?
Things that are "completely beyond wit" are matters of faith. If you have faith that the Holy Spirit guides the Magisterium in its implementation of the faith - ABOVE ALL - the holy sacrifice of the Mass - then you would not doubt the power of the Holy Spirit to guide Vatican II by His intent.
"What you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven".
The Holy See cannot act on matters of morals and faith outside the dictates of heaven. Every pope, from Peter ("You are Peter") on down is willed by God to be the vicar of Christ. Whether said pope acts individually in a non-Christian or villainous manner (regarding that which is not of morals and/or faith) you and I are still commanded to obedience and it is still the will of the Holy Spirit that said pope was elected in the first place.
Criticizing Vatican II because it was implemented improperly misses the point entirely. The Pope has not condemned the novus ordo, nor Vatican II, and he NEVER will. The liturgical LIBERTIES taken IN THE NAME OF VATICAN II are regrettable because they violate the intent of the Holy Spirit in Vatican II.
It is you and your Pollyanna, "everything's rosy in the garden" ilk who are the dissenters and disobedient ones, because it is you who disagree with the Pope who sees the Church infected with filth, relativism, and banal fabricated liturgy!
You couldn't be more off-base. You assign the Pope's condemnation of Vatican II and the novus ordo where he has NOT condemned it. Instead, you take the liberty of using his criticism of the liturgical ABUSES that came from the IMPRPOPER IMPLEMENTATION (read: user error) of Vatican II as a condemnation of Vatican II and the novus ordo themselves.
No matter how you cut it, your lack of faith is in the Magisterium, and in turn, the Holy Spirit.
Excuse me, but when did he ever display "a lack of faith?" That is awfully presumptuous of you.
Given their own statements, by your logic you must accuse Fr. Echert, Pope Paul VI, and Pope Benedict XVI of the same thing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.