Pius IX did not have to speak ex cathedra on religious liberty since he was simply reiterating long-established doctrine. Nevertheless, he certainly made clear that his condemnation of religious liberty was infallible. Wouldn't you agree?
Vatican II developed the teaching of the Church on religious liberty. Apparently, you didn’t read all of Fr. Most’s confutation of Abp. Lefebvre’s interpretation of Quanta Cura.
The premise of Fr. Most’s essay is faulty. The existence of error in Vatican II does not render the promises of Christ void. The Church does not genuinely teach Vatican II errors since the Church is perfect and therefore never contradict herself. Besides, Pope John XXIII declared in his opening address at Vatican II that the council would define no new doctrine. Therefore, the subsequent attempts to define new doctrine could not have enjoyed the protection of the Holy Spirit.
Dignitatis Humanae was directed at the state using physical coercion.
Quanta Cura clearly allows for civil authorities to restrain religious liberty. Please reread post 111 of this thread.
“Pius IX did not have to speak ex cathedra on religious liberty since he was simply reiterating long-established doctrine.”
That’s not what Trent says. Trent is arguing just the opposite, that the true Catholic Faith must be undertaken freely.
“The existence of error in Vatican II does not render the promises of Christ void.”
Again, Vatican II does no such thing. You may believe it renders the promises of Christ void, but that is because you have it wrong on salvation.
As Trent said, Extra Fidae, Nulla Salus. “Outside of the Faith, no salvation.”
“Quanta Cura clearly allows for civil authorities to restrain religious liberty. Please reread post 111 of this thread.”
Insofar as said restraints do not deprive one of religious liberty.
The premise of Fr. Most’s essay is faulty
>>How so?