Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: cothrige
Unless the "traditionalist" believes that Vatican II changed the eternal Catholic faith - which Vatican II didn't proclaim itself to do and no Pope since then has taken it as doing.

I don't see how that could be the case. If no change has occurred, then what can they be denying?

The changes that they and "Catholic" liberals falsely believe to have been decreed.

20 posted on 06/29/2012 8:05:55 AM PDT by JustSayNoToNannies (A free society's default policy: it's none of government's business.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]


To: JustSayNoToNannies; annalex
The changes that they and "Catholic" liberals falsely believe to have been decreed.

If I am understanding you correctly in what you are saying here I still would not be very clear on what heretical error could be placed at the feet of the SSPX. If that body thinks that the Council promoted something innovative and wrong, but the council didn't really do that, that doesn't quite seem to deserve the response or treatment they are currently getting. The pope could simply say "No, we don't believe that or do that, and what you do and believe is certainly just fine." If the council didn't change the faith then there is really nothing to correct as regards the SSPX, but rather the real danger would be the 99% of Catholic priests and bishops who teach that the council actually did make those changes to the faith and in turn enforce them on parishes throughout the world. The SSPX may be wrong in confusing the actions and opinions of the 99% with dogma, but in a practical sense you cannot blame them. Actions do speak louder than words, and Rome has never, to my knowledge, corrected any of those errors.

BTW, in the above I refer to heresy as the SSPX are regularly held up as deserving to be removed or kept out of the Body of Christ for their positions, and that would seem to require something of that kind for such a response to be appropriate. I may be wrong in that though as I can actually not think of any heretics, regardless of how dangerous, notorious or scandalous, which the Church feels deserve such treatment (outside of groups like the SSPX of course). When Fellay is a threat to the faith but Richard McBrien isn't I can honestly say I must not understand anything at all.

23 posted on 06/29/2012 8:05:24 PM PDT by cothrige
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

To: JustSayNoToNannies

“The changes that they and “Catholic” liberals falsely believe to have been decreed.”

They may not have been decreed, but they are being taught and practiced. SSPX, like William F. Buckley, stands athwart history shouting “stop.”

Without SSPX there would be no indult allowing bishops to permit the Tridentine Mass.

I am not affiliated with SSPX, but I see among their critics the same malice and dishonesty that I see among the partisans of Barack Kardashian.


27 posted on 06/30/2012 12:10:52 AM PDT by dsc (Any attempt to move a government to the left is a crime against humanity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson