Bishop Sanborn responds to the "rupture theology" article
(06-04-2009, 10:56 PM)Borromeo Wrote: LS

The link I gave to INPEFESS makes your point as well.  I suggest reading it. 

Give it up LS, you aint gonna win this one or any fight regarding Vatican II documents.  They have been thoroughly "vetted" by better theologians than you, me, newschoolman, Quis...How about this?  Instead of obsessing with what is WRONG with the Catholic Church why not try possessing what is RIGHT about it?  Live the Faith LS, don't argue it. 

The V2 documents have not been "vetted" by theologians as one can clearly see from the fact that both JP2 and B16 have asked theologians to discern how they can be reconciled properly with tradition.  They were architected by Modernists and rushed through the Council after they hijacked it.  If they were thoroughly vetted before, the Popes wouldn't be asking for theological discernment after the fact.  Which is one thing that makes V2 different than say Trent - 50 years after Trent people weren't trying to reconcile that council with the Council of Nicea.

In any case, this is the "theological debate" subforum, so this type of discussion is appropriate here.  People learn things from debate if they keep an open mind.  If nothing else, researching to defend their position causes them to read so they learn more.  At the end of the day, while we may not convince each other, we hopefully learn something and sharpen our skills that we can mutually turn and point at Protestants, etc., who debate trying to destroy the Faith - everyone here, believe it or not, is trying to defend the Faith in their own way.

If it bothers you, or if you have nothing to contribute in the form of serious discussion, please enjoy the other subfora and avoid this one.

Messages In This Thread
Re: Bishop Sanborn responds to the "rupture theology" article - by Historian - 06-05-2009, 04:20 AM

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)