Bishop Sanborn responds to the "rupture theology" article
#10
(06-02-2009, 10:27 AM)Borromeo Wrote: No. He is implying that many traditional Catholics think all was well and rosy before Vatican II, as is often found in traditional catholic circles, forums, blogs, at the parishes, etc.    It is an absurd position to hold yet many MANY traditional Catholics cling to it firmly.  Bishop Sanborn is certainly one who clings to it and therefore resides on Fantasy Island.   

Really, I don't think that's the case.  You find Bp Williamson saying things were a disaster before V2, and also Fr. Cekada and Bishop Dolan talking about how things were.  Bishop Dolan made this comment:

"Bp. Dolan" Wrote:What is different is that the people who come to Mass here WANT to be here. In the old days, it wasn’t usually this way in a parish. So you have this tremendous foundation of good will and piety and devotion.

While I admire Dr. McInerny as a professor of philosophy, his general attitude is that of a willfully blind Neo-Catholic.  His book "What went wrong with Vatican II?" came to the basic conclusion that nothing went wrong with Vatican II and we're in the "New Springtime" of the Church.  From his comments, it seems to me that he doesn't see that things are worse than before.  Sure, things weren't good in the time leading up to Vatican 2, but now they are objectively far worse.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: Bishop Sanborn responds to the "rupture theology" article - by Historian - 06-02-2009, 10:45 AM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)