Pope calling for clarifications of Vatican II
#41
:clap:
(05-24-2012, 04:53 PM)jonbhorton Wrote: I would certainly like it if the ridiculous nature of explaining all the reasons the sky is blue, and how it would be blue to a blind man too, if he weren't blind, was reduced to "the Church says the sky is blue... and here's why".
This is the sort of thing I hate about reading Vatican 2 documents:
"Considering the colorblind, who might, if indeed they are colorblind, and not only the type which blends blues into greens, according to the genetic predispositions allowed according to the will of God; and indeed the color wheel reduces a concept to language and perception of color, which is, as it is, merely a fraction of light, which is true Light, do make known the understanding that the blind, and colorblind, though unable to see blue, see truth in their own way".

Well, what about the guy who just says blue is dog and green is red, despite knowing damn well the sky is blue?

gimme a break, just say the dang sky is blue and the folks with canes and dogs need to get with the program while the "the sky is colored dog" folks get to enjoy the reality of relativism's dark side.
Reply
#42
The 'clarifying' of the documents of Vatican II can be started by publically burning them all in St Peter's square, declaring the council and all its documents null and void.  And restoring things and Canon Law to pre-Vatican II norms.
Reply
#43
Now this, is a fun thread.  :grin:
Reply
#44
(05-24-2012, 04:49 PM)Richard C Wrote: I sincerely hope it comes in the form of a new syllabus of errors issued by the Holy Father himself.

But that's just one of the problems. Nothing is erroneous today . . . except traditional Catholics. When was the last time a heresy or error was authoritatively condemned? The conciliar church doesn't condemn anything anymore because it's too busy 'opening the doors of the Church to the world.'
Reply
#45
(05-26-2012, 12:41 AM)INPEFESS Wrote:
(05-24-2012, 04:49 PM)Richard C Wrote: I sincerely hope it comes in the form of a new syllabus of errors issued by the Holy Father himself.

But that's just one of the problems. Nothing is erroneous today . . . except traditional Catholics. 

That is just not true. The Pope is moving Heaven and earth to get the SSPX regularized.  There have been Vatican statements that the Society is not in doctrinal error.  It has finally become acceptable to be openly critical of Vatican II.  While things still need a lot of work to fix, there is no justification for saying that traditional Catholics are treated as erroneous by the Pope. 

Yes, there are negative comments about us from liberals and in popular media, but the Pope himself does not fare well with these sorts.
Reply
#46
Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum (# 13), June 29, 1896:
“You are not to be looked upon as holding the true Catholic faith if you do not teach
that the faith of Rome is to be held.”
Reply
#47
(05-26-2012, 01:16 AM)JayneK Wrote:
(05-26-2012, 12:41 AM)INPEFESS Wrote:
(05-24-2012, 04:49 PM)Richard C Wrote: I sincerely hope it comes in the form of a new syllabus of errors issued by the Holy Father himself.

But that's just one of the problems. Nothing is erroneous today . . . except traditional Catholics. 

That is just not true. The Pope is moving Heaven and earth to get the SSPX regularized.  There have been Vatican statements that the Society is not in doctrinal error.   It has finally become acceptable to be openly critical of Vatican II.  While things still need a lot of work to fix, there is no justification for saying that traditional Catholics are treated as erroneous by the Pope. 

Yes, there are negative comments about us from liberals and in popular media, but the Pope himself does not fare well with these sorts.

I never said the pope is treating them as erroneous. I'm talking about the attitude toward's traditional Catholics over the past 50 years. While Abp. Zollitsch denied the redemption without consequence Abp. Lefebvre was treated like a schismatic. 
Reply
#48
(05-26-2012, 03:58 AM)INPEFESS Wrote:
(05-26-2012, 01:16 AM)JayneK Wrote:
(05-26-2012, 12:41 AM)INPEFESS Wrote:
(05-24-2012, 04:49 PM)Richard C Wrote: I sincerely hope it comes in the form of a new syllabus of errors issued by the Holy Father himself.

But that's just one of the problems. Nothing is erroneous today . . . except traditional Catholics. 

That is just not true. The Pope is moving Heaven and earth to get the SSPX regularized.  There have been Vatican statements that the Society is not in doctrinal error.   It has finally become acceptable to be openly critical of Vatican II.  While things still need a lot of work to fix, there is no justification for saying that traditional Catholics are treated as erroneous by the Pope. 

Yes, there are negative comments about us from liberals and in popular media, but the Pope himself does not fare well with these sorts.

I never said the pope is treating them as erroneous. I'm talking about the attitude toward's traditional Catholics over the past 50 years. While Abp. Zollitsch denied the redemption without consequence Abp. Lefebvre was treated like a schismatic. 

Traditional Catholics were treated shamefully in the past, but you were writing as if this were still happening today. The attitude toward traditional Catholics has changed dramatically in the last 5 years.  We are seeing liberals and heretics facing consequences (although not as much as needed).  We are seeing traditional Catholicism acknowledged.  Things are different in recent years than they were20 or 30 or 40 years ago and it is misleading to speak as if the last 50 years were all the same.

Reply
#49
(05-26-2012, 03:45 PM)JayneK Wrote: Traditional Catholics were treated shamefully in the past, but you were writing as if this were still happening today. The attitude toward traditional Catholics has changed dramatically in the last 5 years.  We are seeing liberals and heretics facing consequences (although not as much as needed).  We are seeing traditional Catholicism acknowledged.  Things are different in recent years than they were20 or 30 or 40 years ago and it is misleading to speak as if the last 50 years were all the same.

Novus Ordo Catholics still consider traditional Catholic's schismatic to this day. We are disobedient to them.

I don't see traditional Catholicism acknowledged. I see it being included and placed side by side the reforms of the revolution. That is not traditional Catholicism.

Reply
#50
(05-26-2012, 11:10 PM)INPEFESS Wrote:
(05-26-2012, 03:45 PM)JayneK Wrote: Traditional Catholics were treated shamefully in the past, but you were writing as if this were still happening today. The attitude toward traditional Catholics has changed dramatically in the last 5 years.  We are seeing liberals and heretics facing consequences (although not as much as needed).  We are seeing traditional Catholicism acknowledged.  Things are different in recent years than they were20 or 30 or 40 years ago and it is misleading to speak as if the last 50 years were all the same.

Novus Ordo Catholics still consider traditional Catholic's schismatic to this day. We are disobedient to them.

I don't see traditional Catholicism acknowledged. I see it being included and placed side by side the reforms of the revolution. That is not traditional Catholicism.

Some people who call themselves traditional Catholics are schismatic.  However those of us traditional Catholics who are not schismatic are not called schismatic in any official statements.  There are probably some ignorant people who think we are, but this does not represent Vatican policy.

Pope Benedict uses a long term strategy.  The first step to having tradition in its rightful place is to get it recognized as Catholic.  This puts it into the position to obliterate the illegitimate reforms.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)