*I always know what I am typing. You have yet to identify a single error in any of my posts. Please take the occasion of your generalised insult to show specifically where I have posted something factually incorrect. As for my predictions vis a vis the schism, I have yet to be proved wrong.
The shift we are about to see will be dramatic. The Pope has already shown with the FSSP, the ICR and the Institute of Good Shepherd that Vatican II is not the course from which we guide our ships. It is Vatican II "in light of Tradition." The true meaning of this has not been defined.
*So, the Pope lied?
I have read lots of the more recent writings from Bishop Fellay, and nowhere do I see him denying that Vatican II is a legitimate Council. What he does deny is that it was dogmatic. He also denies that the documents themselves are clearly in line with tradition. I said "clearly."
* I already pinged you with the relevant info re Fellay's rejection of Vat Two. I will post it again. PLease copy and paste this into a file so I won't have to keep repeating it. A writer for the Wanderer ought be better informed as to the actual ideology of the schism he succors.
In January, Cardinal Castrillon had incorrectly written that with some conditions I would accept Vatican II. Since I wanted him to know exactly what I think about the Council, I handed him Catholicism and Modernity, a booklet in French by Fr. Jean-Marc Rulleau in which he studies the Council and shows how the spirit of the Council is radically opposed to Catholicism. It is, we may say, a total demolition of the Council.
The Holy Ghost protected the Church from promulgating de fide documents that contained heresy. That is the protection of the Holy Ghost.
*Tautology. Every Ecumenical Council, by its nature, is infallible
The Institute of Good Shepherd has been assigned by the Holy See that task of doing theology on Vatican II "in light of Tradition."
Let's talk about the other 20 Councils, shall we? What do any of you know about them?
*Moi? Really, I don't know very much. I certainly do not know as much as the soi disant traditionalists or the schismatics.
Like real Christian Catholic Traditionalists, I was Blessed with a healthy mistrust of my own competence. I was Blessed with a robust idea of obedience and loyalty to such things as the Pope, the Council, and the Mass. Like real Traditionalists, I defer to those who have actual training and experience in Theology and who hold positions of Teaching Authority in the Living Magisterium. IOW, Michael Davies aint my Pope. Jesus made Peter the head of the Church. Not davies, not lefevbrfe, not you. And an excomunicated bishop has NO authority and real Traditionalists do NOT folow excomunicated Bishops or make excuses for them.
The authentic Tradition I am aware of is rarely seen in Free Republic. What exists as "Tradition" in here is simply the protestant private judgement of the Neo-Pharisee.
Borna said: IOW, Michael Davies aint my Pope.
BCM said: No one ever claimed him to be. That is called a "straw man argument" Mr. tautology. By the way, the definition I gave regarding any ecumenical Council is completely and accurately theologically accurate, your obfuscation aside, Mr. Logic.
Let's see what our current Pope and others did have to say about Mr. Michael Davies, whose name you ridicule repeatedly, along with "Venerable" as our current Pope recently called him, Archbishop Lefebvre:
I have been profoundly touched by the news of the death of Michael Davies. I had the good fortune to meet him several times and I found him as a man of deep faith and ready to embrace suffering. Ever since the Council he put all his energy into the service of the Faith and left us important publications especially about the Sacred Liturgy. Even though he suffered from the Church in many ways in his time, he always truly remained a man of the Church. He knew that the Lord founded His Church on the rock of St Peter and that the Faith can find its fullness and maturity only in union with the successor of St Peter. Therefore we can be confident that the Lord opened wide for him the gates of heaven. We commend his soul to the Lord’s mercy.
Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger
(Translated from the original German)
9 November 2004
Dear Mr Chadwick,
I wish to acknowledge receipt of your letter of 29 October 2004 informing me of the Solemn Requiem for the repose of the soul of Mr Michael Davies to be celebrated according to the typical edition of the Roman Missal of 1962 at Saint James’ Church ,Spanish Place, London on Saturday 20 November. I regret that my duties here in Rome prevent my attendance at that Mass. Nor is it possible for me at this time to send a representative.
Nonetheless I am pleased to associate myself and the officials of the Pontifical Commission ‘Ecclesia Dei’ with the members of the Latin Mass Society, Una Voce International and all of those present for this solemn liturgical celebration in suffrage for the soul of His servant Michael whose attachment to the classical Roman liturgy is well known. May he know the reward of his labours. May Our Merciful Lord grant him eternal rest and consolation to his family and all those who mourn his passing. Lux aeterna luceat ei, Domine, cum sanctis tuis in aeternum quia pius es. Requiescat in pace!
With my blessing I remain
Sincerely yours in Christ,
Dario Cardinal Castrillón Hoyos
17 November 2004
Dear Mr Chadwick,
I thank you for your letter of 29 October and wish to offer my condolences to you and to all members of the Latin Mass Society on the death of Mr Michael Davis. He visited me two years ago and I appreciated very much his commitment to our Catholic faith.
In spiritual union with you and others who will be at the Solemn Requiem for him on 20 November, I pray that the Lord Jesus to whom Michael was so sincerely devoted may give him eternal rest.
Sincerely Yours in Christ,
Francis Cardinal Arinze
13 November 2004
Go back to discussing the issues and quit making it personal - or both of you quit talking to or about each other personally altogether.