Thoughts on Vatican II and a question for you
#81
(07-27-2009, 02:55 PM)Zakhur Wrote:
(07-27-2009, 01:24 PM)StrictCatholicGirl Wrote: Look. I’m not disparaging everything about 1950s Catholicism. I grew up in the 50s. I thank God that I was born then. I thank God for my Catholic upbringing, for the wonderful priests and Sisters who taught me my Faith. They did a good job – but that’s not to say there wasn't room for improvement. I am NOT saying we’re in better shape now. But it’s dishonest to paint an idyllic picture of the past, as many trads are wont to do. I think it’s dishonest to view through rosy glasses ANY time in the Church’s history – whether it’s dreaming about medieval schools of mystics or the apostolic days of early Christianity. Every age had its share of shame and glory, persecution and peace. We don’t move forward unless we admit our mistakes (past and present) and stop repeating them. Tradition for the mere sake of tradition and change for the sake of change is wrong. And the only age in history that will truly be our boast will happen after the Second Coming.

Of course, I understand this means nothing to those who believe today’s hierarchy are not legitimate authority – that the modern Church is a false church and that these are the worst times ever. But that's not the discussion I had in mind when I created this thread.   

- Lisa


Lisa,

I have no illusions about the Church's history.  I have studied it too much to yearn for some kind of "better time" in which there were no problems.  If there are people who describe themselves as traditionalists and hold fast to any of the illusions you describe above, they do not hold on to those illusions because of some vague thing called "traditionalism."  They do so because they are uninformed. 

Who said anything about today's ecclesiastical authority being illegitimate?  That's not the point, and those who say so are simply wrong.  The sedevacantist position is dead wrong.

It's also incorrect to assume that today's crisis is not the greatest yet faced by the Church in her history.  It could be, and very well seems to be.  There are signs that show this if you can read them.  Do you not realize the catastrophe that the modern liturgical reform represents?  If you have not read what Cardinal Ratzinger has said about it, then you really need to find the quotes.  Find out what Deitrich von Hildebrand has said about our times.   It is nothing to brush off.  This is not illusion.  These two men represent two of the most incisive mindsof the 20th century.  The modern era represents a horrendous revolt against Christ.  There can be no compromize with it.  Read Warran Carroll on this.  The Church hierarchy has attempted a compromise, and it has been disastrous.

"Archbishop Lefebvre" Wrote:"It appears to us much more certain that the faith taught by the Church over twenty centuries cannot contain error than that there is absolute certainty that the Pope really is the pope. Heresy, schism, ipso facto excommunication, and the invalidity of the election are all potential reasons why a Pope was never really the pope or should cease to be the pope. In such a case, clearly a very exceptional one, the Church would find herself in a situation similar to that which she experiences after the decease of a Sovereign Pontiff. For, in a word, a very serious problem presents itself to the conscience and the faith of all Catholics since the beginning of the papacy of Paul VI. How is that a Pope, the true successor of Peter, assured of the assistance of the Holy Spirit, could preside over the destruction of the Church, the most profound and extensive in her history, in such a short space of time, something which no heresiarch has ever succeeded in doing? To this question there will one day have to be a reply." - Declaration by Mgr Lefebvre to Figaro, reproduced in Monde et Vie no 264, for 27 August 1976. This was shortly after he was suspended a divinis (in July 1976) for ordaining priests contrary to the order of Paul VI.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: Thoughts on Vatican II and a question for you - by lamentabili sane - 07-27-2009, 02:59 PM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)