Really Confused about Vatican II
#41
(10-07-2019, 03:48 PM)Bonaventure Wrote:
(10-07-2019, 02:01 PM)mpk1987 Wrote: Were the Christians of the time of the Arian crisis blithely following their priests and bishops into error?  Some did, yes, but some resisted and helped "dissidents" like St. Athanasius.  It is not a pious tradition to follow one's perfidious shepherds into hell.  We are not to be unthinking, unquestioning drones.

Ok. However, if you're going to use the Arian crisis as an analogy of our modern crisis, where the Church was essentially split in two, and recalling that the initial subject of this thread was VCII, then it would appear that what we have is a pre-Conciliar and a post-Conciliar Church.  And again, using your Arian crisis analogy, one would need to pick from those, no?  

So, choosing the post-Conciliar Church, our only option appears to be the acceptance of ClownMass, Bergoglio et al., and the parade of horribles that follows.  Sorry, not all that enticing.

Choosing the pre-Conciliar Church, our options would appear to be one of the following: SSPX; SSPV; or the 'Sedes' (wherein the Chair of St. Peter has been vacant for more than the past 60 years, there are no (maybe one?) valid bishops remaining and the Apostolic succession is or will soon be ended, so everyone stay at home on Sunday's, pray the Rosary and wait for Armageddon).  Again, sorry, but none of these options are all that enticing either.

Conclusion: The Arian crisis is not an apt analogy to the crisis we face today.

The Arian crisis lasted for nearly 60 years.  There was no formal schism either.  It is an apt analogy.  Where was the Church?  Was she with the huge majority of bishops who denied the divinity of Christ?  Was "the only option" their heretical Masses, public statements, etc.?  I'm not aware of any major movement by the "dissidents" to discredit the existence of the Church and her prelates, and wait until Armageddon.  You're setting up a false dichotomy.  They simply weathered the storm, just as we have to do today.

I'm also waiting on a saintly bishop to slap a heretical one in the face.
[-] The following 3 users Like mpk1987's post:
  • antiquarian, jovan66102, MagisterMusicae
Reply
#42
(10-07-2019, 06:09 PM)mpk1987 Wrote:
(10-07-2019, 03:48 PM)Bonaventure Wrote:
(10-07-2019, 02:01 PM)mpk1987 Wrote: Were the Christians of the time of the Arian crisis blithely following their priests and bishops into error?  Some did, yes, but some resisted and helped "dissidents" like St. Athanasius.  It is not a pious tradition to follow one's perfidious shepherds into hell.  We are not to be unthinking, unquestioning drones.

Ok. However, if you're going to use the Arian crisis as an analogy of our modern crisis, where the Church was essentially split in two, and recalling that the initial subject of this thread was VCII, then it would appear that what we have is a pre-Conciliar and a post-Conciliar Church.  And again, using your Arian crisis analogy, one would need to pick from those, no?  

So, choosing the post-Conciliar Church, our only option appears to be the acceptance of ClownMass, Bergoglio et al., and the parade of horribles that follows.  Sorry, not all that enticing.

Choosing the pre-Conciliar Church, our options would appear to be one of the following: SSPX; SSPV; or the 'Sedes' (wherein the Chair of St. Peter has been vacant for more than the past 60 years, there are no (maybe one?) valid bishops remaining and the Apostolic succession is or will soon be ended, so everyone stay at home on Sunday's, pray the Rosary and wait for Armageddon).  Again, sorry, but none of these options are all that enticing either.

Conclusion: The Arian crisis is not an apt analogy to the crisis we face today.

The Arian crisis lasted for nearly 60 years.  There was no formal schism either.  It is an apt analogy.  Where was the Church?  Was she with the huge majority of bishops who denied the divinity of Christ?  Was "the only option" their heretical Masses, public statements, etc.?  I'm not aware of any major movement by the "dissidents" to discredit the existence of the Church and her prelates, and wait until Armageddon.  You're setting up a false dichotomy.  They simply weathered the storm, just as we have to do today.

I'm also waiting on a saintly bishop to slap a heretical one in the face.

Add to it, consider all of the various heretical and ambiguous synods during the Arian Crisis.

It was one of those ambiguous Creeds coming out from one of those Synods that Pope Liberius signed onto.

It's not a perfect analogy, of course, none are, but I agree, it is apt.
[-] The following 2 users Like MagisterMusicae's post:
  • jovan66102, mpk1987
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)