Need help in understanding this,Can someone help? (no.this is NOT Rhetorical)
#1
“It is a necessary task to defend the Second Vatican Council against Msgr.
Lefebvre, as valid, and as binding upon the Church. Certainly there is a
mentality of narrow views that isolate Vatican II and which has provoked this
opposition. There are many accounts of it which give the impression that, from
Vatican II onward, everything has been changed, and that what preceded it has
no value or, at best, has value only in the light of Vatican II.

“The Second Vatican Council has not been treated as a part of the entire living
Tradition of the Church, but as an end of Tradition, a new start from zero.
The truth is that this particular Council defined no dogma at all, and deliberately
chose to remain on a modest level, as a merely pastoral council; and yet many treat
it as though it had made itself into a sort of superdogma which takes away the
importance of all the rest.


I am having trouble understanding this statement.........1) question that comes to mind is "If it is Pastoral is it still 100% binding?"

Please help

http://unavoce.org/resources/cardinal-ra...-of-chile/
Reply
#2
(05-17-2010, 10:42 PM)St.Ambrose Wrote: “It is a necessary task to defend the Second Vatican Council against Msgr.
Lefebvre, as valid, and as binding upon the Church. Certainly there is a
mentality of narrow views that isolate Vatican II and which has provoked this
opposition. There are many accounts of it which give the impression that, from
Vatican II onward, everything has been changed, and that what preceded it has
no value or, at best, has value only in the light of Vatican II.

“The Second Vatican Council has not been treated as a part of the entire living
Tradition of the Church, but as an end of Tradition, a new start from zero.
The truth is that this particular Council defined no dogma at all, and deliberately
chose to remain on a modest level, as a merely pastoral council; and yet many treat
it as though it had made itself into a sort of superdogma which takes away the
importance of all the rest.


I am having trouble understanding this statement.........1) question that comes to mind is "If it is Pastoral is it still 100% binding?"

Please help

http://unavoce.org/resources/cardinal-ra...-of-chile/

100% pastorally binding, yes.
Reply
#3
"Pastorally binding"?  Huh? How's that work?
Reply
#4
(05-18-2010, 03:56 AM)Benno Wrote: "Pastorally binding"?  Huh? How's that work?

You must support your local congregation of pant-suit nuns in their work for health reform or else you're damned?
Reply
#5
Can't you just imagine "pastorally binding" being a new catch-phrase?
Reply
#6
(05-18-2010, 04:29 AM)Benno Wrote: Can't you just imagine "pastorally binding" being a new catch-phrase?

I could sooooooo see it used in a Phineox wright game

Phineox wright
Canon Lawyer
"PASTORALLY BINDING"
Reply
#7
(05-18-2010, 04:29 AM)Benno Wrote: Can't you just imagine "pastorally binding" being a new catch-phrase?

LOL
Reply
#8
(05-18-2010, 04:16 AM)Servus_Maria Wrote:
(05-18-2010, 03:56 AM)Benno Wrote: "Pastorally binding"?  Huh? How's that work?

You must support your local congregation of pant-suit nuns in their work for health reform or else you're damned?

Now, now, it is currently pastorally recommended not to mention damnation or nuns.
Reply
#9
(05-18-2010, 04:40 AM)St.Ambrose Wrote:
(05-18-2010, 04:29 AM)Benno Wrote: Can't you just imagine "pastorally binding" being a new catch-phrase?

I could sooooooo see it used in a Phineox wright game

Phineox wright
Canon Lawyer
"PASTORALLY BINDING"

http://objection.mrdictionary.net/go.php?n=3917864
Reply
#10
(05-18-2010, 03:19 PM)TradCathYouth Wrote:
(05-18-2010, 04:40 AM)St.Ambrose Wrote:
(05-18-2010, 04:29 AM)Benno Wrote: Can't you just imagine "pastorally binding" being a new catch-phrase?

I could sooooooo see it used in a Phineox wright game

Phineox wright
Canon Lawyer
"PASTORALLY BINDING"

http://objection.mrdictionary.net/go.php?n=3917864

Freaking Tight!
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)