Declaration on the occasion of the 25th anniversary of the episcopal consecratio
(07-03-2013, 02:43 PM)SaintSebastian Wrote: Without getting into the specific points that are controverted (which would each need their own thread),

Agreed. That would be a major distraction from the thread itself

Quote:the problem is we are not dealing with the writings of theologians here so it is not within the SSPX's competency to assign such censures to those doctrines (assuming their ministry was even legitimate).

Fair enough. I would concede that the SSPX has no competence to assign ecclesiastical censures, even if legitimate. I should note, that the SSPX doesn't claim this competenece.

However, for the sake of addressing the points of controversy, it is important to put the discussion on the level of theology terms, not ambiguous lay terms.

The poster to whom I was responding was suggesting that the SSPX claims that Vatican II contain "formal heresy". These arguments were presented to explain that this is a very specialized term, with very specific meaning, and that the SSPX does not hold this position.

Quote:The fact that these doctrines are taught by an Ecumenical Council gives them the theological note of at least "Catholic doctrine," the denial of which receives the cesure of temerity.  Traditionally, theologians have adjusted the theological note that they assign to doctrines when the Magisterium intervenes, even in a non-definitive way.

Perhaps here is where we would disagree. The problem is that we have statements, on these controverted points, that appear to be Magisterial (one from Vatican II, one from a previous Pope or Council) which seem impossible to reconcile.

Two contradictory propositions cannot at the same time be "Catholic doctrine". And in the face of such apparent contradiction the argument for temerity seems hard to sustain. Given that even those in good standing with the Holy See, and of high theological repute are questioning the "Hermeneutic of Continuity", and the clear sense of the texts seems to suggest this hermeneutic is untenable, there is plenty of room for doubt and debate.

Quote:This problem flows from the more fundamental problem of the SSPX (which I may have mentioned earlier in the thread). The fundamental problem with the SSPX is they  have begun (at least more explicitly it seems to me; I'm not an insider so I can't say how long this has been going on) to simply deny that certain acts of the Magisterium are even acts of the Magisterium at all, in order to justify an outight rejection of all acts of this supposed non-Magisterium, rather than taking the traditional approach to Magsisterial acts, including non-defining and even apprently erroneous points.  This is why they feel they can presume to pass definitive judgments and assign such censures themselves I imagine.

Except as I mentioned, the SSPX does not presume to assign censure or pass judgement. The whole series of doctrinal discussions should demonstrate that the Society does not consider itself a judge of the Magisterium.

Rather, the SSPX is looking to the present Magisterium to solve these contradictions, hence the doctrinal discussions.

But the authorities continue the ipse dixit, that Vatican II is an Ecumenical Council, and thus all it's content must be continuous with the past, so when we see apparent contradictions, then we know that they are not contradictions, but really continuous.

That some would deny an act is Magisterial is an understandable when it is the only apparent solution, and those who have the power to teach with the Magisterial authority refuse to offer another solution.

Messages In This Thread
Re: Declaration on the occasion of the 25th anniversary of the episcopal consecratio - by MagisterMusicae - 07-03-2013, 03:34 PM

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)