| Mickens on....? |
Fri, 30 January 2009 20:33  |
 M Anon
Messages: 1251
Registered: April 2004 |
Senior Member |
|
|
http://www.americamagazine.org/blog/entry.cfm?blog_id=2& id=27F08DDE-1438-5036-4F8792220B462A90
The headline says "... on SSPX" but it really seems more an overwrought effort to trash the Pope.
Pope Benedict XVI said at his general audience on Wednesday that the four bishops of the Priestly Fraternity of St Pius X (SSPX) -- the so-called Lefebvrists -- will now have to show their "true fidelity and true recognition of the magisterium and authority of the Pope and of Vatican Council II".
What does this mean?...
Despite everything to the contrary (i.e. the fact that the SSPX does not really buy or live Vatican II), they will find a way together to finagle a formula that helps them profess "true fidelity and true recognition" of the Council (in light of the constant Tradition) but allows them to continue living as if Vatican II never existed....
Not a few people called me strident, hysterical and worse back in 2005 when I started saying that the Pope was intent on issuing a universal indult for use of the Tridentine Mass. The motu proprio finally arrived in July 2007 and then most people tried to downplay it, saying it would have no practical effect in our parishes, etc....
It has only been eighteen months (!) and the changes are beginning to take place, especially in seminaries.
All of this should be a cause of great alarm to those of us who still believe that something monumental happened at Vatican II, that there were developments, reforms and -- yes -- points of rupture with the past (despite the Pope's unconvincing arguments to the contrary).
Joseph Ratzinger is completing, as pope, the work he began more than twenty-five years ago as prefect of the CDF. It is no less ambitious than the wholesale reinterpretation of the Second Vatican Council. And no one seems willing or able to stop him." -- Robert Mickens
|
|
|
| Re: Mickens on....? |
Sat, 31 January 2009 06:53  |
japhy
Messages: 480
Registered: October 2008
Location: Princeton, NJ |
Senior Member |
|
|
I'm curious if all the discontinuous "theologies" that supposedly sprung from Vatican II could actually be defended by their originators from the actual documents themselves.
This article is enlightening. The 2007 document clarifying "certain aspects of the doctrine of the Church" and a commentary attached to it.
That commentary had a footnote from the "Acts of the Synod", official records of discussions held during the council. From these official records, you can see how the Council Fathers interpreted the Council as it was ongoing and the how they interpreted the documents as they were writing them!
The article I linked to deciphers the footnote in the commentary on the CDF's 2007 clarification document. (whew!) Long story short, the authentic interpretation of the Vatican II document Unitatis Redintegratio, according to the Council itself, involves the following:
1) that "it is clearly affirmed that the Catholic church alone is the true Church of Christ"
2) that "there is one sole true Church of Christ; that this is the Apostolic Roman Church; that all must seek to know Her and enter Her in order to obtain salvation" ... "is adequately proclaimed"
3) that "the Roman Catholic Church alone is the true Church" is already "set out in the constitution" on the Church (Lumen Gentium)
4) that "the commission whose task it was to evaluate the responses to the Decree Unitatis Redintegratio clearly expressed the identity of the Church of Christ with the Catholic Church and its unicity, and understood this doctrine to be founded in the Dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium"
5) that the "identification of the Church of Christ with the catholic Church is clearly apparent from the entire text"
6) that the "Church governed by the successors of the Apostles with the successor of Peter as its head ... is explicitly described as ‘the sole flock of God’ and ... as ‘the one, sole Church of God’"
THAT is how the Council Fathers interpreted Unitatis Redintegratio: in continuity with the perennial teaching of the Church. This same teaching was simply desired to be put in language that others could more easily understand.
My Blogs: Praying The Mass and The Cross Reference
|
|
|
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
