Need help in understanding this,Can someone help? (no.this is NOT Rhetorical)
#11
St Ambrose, just have to tip my hat to the "I ain't bovvered" line. It's almost as good as "What a ____ liberty!"  :laughing:
Reply
#12


Here are the words of Pope Paul VI, given in a general audience one year after the close of Vatican II:
Pope Paul VI Wrote:“There are those who ask what authority, what theological qualification, the Council intended to give to its teachings, knowing that it avoided issuing solemn dogmatic definitions backed by the Church’s infallible teaching authority. The answer is known by those who remember the conciliar declaration of March 6, 1964, repeated on November 16, 1964. In view of the pastoral nature of the Council, it avoided proclaiming in an extraordinary manner any dogmas carrying the mark of infallibility.” (General Audience, December 1, 1966, published in the L’Osservatore Romano 1/21/1966)

Reply
#13
Jesus Christ is present among us through the Church, which is his body, to what He is the head. This Church is the living/actual hierarchical jurisdictional Church, what was established by Jesus Christ having the binding and loosing power. A teaching is dogmatical, if it relates to eternal, unchangeable facts, like the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin or so on. Non dogmatical teachings relate to changing and changeable things, like the liturgy, the attitude toward the non Catholics and non Christians and so on.

If the Church decision were binding only in dogmatical matters (related to the unchangeable fact) than the losing power would have no sense at all. The decisions of the Church (the documents signed by the pope and the bishops at Vatican II) are binding until the pope revokes it.

Naturally our knowledge is limited, we don't know with absolute certainty what is good or evil or what is truth or error. We need the interpretation of the living Church, the Magisterium. Not every statement what either the modernISTs or the traditionalISTs claim as teaching of the Council is the teaching of the Council. First one had to study in entirety the full documents of the Church at the official source (vatican.va), and in case of doubt one had to ask the appropriate congregation for clarification, and be silent until it is released.

Those who reject the Council approved by the pope reject the presence of Jesus Christ in the Church. According to the traditional Ecclesiology the Church can make bad decision using the binding and loosing power, but God stands with His Church. He never promised that his Church will not shake only that the gates of heaven will not prevail over her.
Reply
#14
It is binding in so much as it is required by a Pope's authority.  It has no authority of its own, since it explicitly stated that it was NOT binding on the Church.  As long as the Pope orders its implementation,  then it is binding due to the Papal authority.  However, a Pope can't command you to sin.

I'll give you a concrete example.  According to Vat. II, the Mass is to be "constructed" by the regional authority, which is the local bishop, who usually delegates it to a lesbian Diocesan Liturgical Director.  And this is with Vatican approval.  This is Vat. II.  Legally it is binding.  If it is sinful, then morally it is not binding.

Furthermore, this is all moot.  The Council WAS implemented.  That is where the massive wreckage has come from.  At this point the only real question is when will we roll it back and put the documents of Vat. II on the Index of Forbidden Books.

"Pastorally Binding" is a useful phrase actually.  Belief in the Resurrection of Our Glorious Lord Jesus is binding.  Period.  However, a Pope can very easily announce he is scrapping the whole "territorial authority" schema for the Liturgy tomorrow.  And there would be nothing wrong with that as it is not binding on the Church, nor is it somehow infallible.
Reply
#15
Quote: Those who reject the Council approved by the pope reject the presence of Jesus Christ in the Church. According to the traditional Ecclesiology the Church can make bad decision using the binding and loosing power, but God stands with His Church.

Actually we don't reject the presence of Jesus Christ.  We actually read the documents and paid attention when the Council declared it was not binding.  Furthermore, we hold to what the Church has always taught, in many cases infallibly declared.  For example, opposing joint worship with heretics.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)