Rosarium is not a she.

Vatican II does cover doctrine.

In general, the mentality at the Second Vatican Council was little if at all Catholic. This can be said because of an inexplicable and undeniable man-centeredness and sympathy for the "world" and its deceptive values, all of which ooze from all of the Council's docuмents. More specifically, Vatican II has been accused of substantive and relevant ambiguities, patent contradictions, significant omissions and, what counts even more, of grave errors in doctrine and pastorality.

http://www.sspxasia.com/Docuмents/SiSiNoNo/2003_January/errors_of_vatican_II.htm

Quote from: Rosarium

Locked out.

What does this mean?

It means I was about to lock myself out of this account so it is no longer an active account, however, I cannot change my password for some reason. It keeps saying the password (the one I use to log in) is not the same as the one in the database.

I am going to try again, but I saw this and thought it good to clarify.

Rosarium,

You lack humility yet see yourself as humble.  

You engage in name calling, yet lecture others about their prudence.

You follow Vatican II, yet call yourself a Catholic?  The Vatican II adheree's are considered "Consilliarists".

Rosarium, what do you want us to make of you?  

Maybe I do lack humility, yet, what is the basis for saying I see myself as humble? You accused me falsely. Please do not create an image of my in your head, and then address that. I just post words, and that is all I intend to post. Forget me. I am just a person. I could be a liar, a hypocrite, a grave sinner, or I could not be. That does not matter. I do try to be factually and morally correct in what I write.

People are condemning abstractions, imaginations. If I have errors, point them out and condemn them, but when people try to use social skills without any actual social input, it fails. Attributing attitudes, motives, and the like without any actual reason other than it seems to be plausible just creates mental images which are useless.

I do not want anyone to make anything of me. I am not important. I am must a person. The words I wrote however were something I intended to be heard. I focus on logos, with a very small amount of ethos. I do not use pathos, and I do not really have a self interest in this matter. I am well aware of how people may see me. There are in fact several views about me...one is just a lot more vocal, and since I am addressing that particular view in this thread, I am not surprised that those who have such views are active.

What I would like, if people are interested, is that what I do helps me in some way. If people pointed out errors, gave me better resources, informed me of others who wrote on the topic better than I did, or otherwise lead me to improve, I would be happy. I actually do not get reactions like this, probably because I write on subjects I have studied in depth already, and I generally do not go into great detail

If others found what I wrote useful and beneficial, or asked for citations of what I claim, or read without responding, I would be happy too and I do get reactions such as this.

What I absolutely do not want is people to use what I post as an occasion for things which are harmful to themselves or possibly harmful to me. I get this rarely, but loudly (so to speak).

Rosarium,

We already have a very strong group in the Catholic Church that is standing fast to the Catholic Faith and not passing judgement on the pope.  

It's called the SSPX.  They refuse to pass judgement on the Pope and they refuse to follow his bad edicts.  

As much as I may support or admire the SSPX (in whatever degree I do, but that is not the issue here and more private opinion), they are not in fact the Roman Catholic Church. They are an important part of the Church Militant for a tiny part of human history, and only in a certain rite. The SSPX is not a divine institution, but an emergency response.

Be careful that this response to the crisis does not become something it is not supposed to be. People who receive Sacraments from SSPX priests, support them, or agree with them are not members of the Society. While I usually support the general idea of the society (individuals, I do not know and I won't comment on what I do not know) in its founding and continuing existence as a good faith response to a clear danger to the Faith, it is an emergency response, drawing its basis from Canon Law itself for the actions taken.

I do not "follow" Vatican II. I recognize it as a council which took place. It has no article of faith or moral teaching which I need to accept.

To clarify, since someone seems to be latching onto the word "doctrine", while it does "address" doctrines, it does not actually teach anything in itself.

The words of its docuмents which seem to be intended to weaken doctrine or contradict it do exist, I do not deny that (nobody could), but they are not something we need to accept. There is no doctrinal matter morally binding in Vatican II. I can forget the entire council, yet, not be lacking in doctrine at all.

Vatican II, if it cannot be nullified, does indeed require its ambiguities to be removed, its omissions addressed so they are not forgotten, and the approach it seemed to advocate for the modern age abandoned as a failed effort (or a hijacked effort). It has caused great harm.

But to be a Catholic, one does not need anything from Vatican II in doctrine. If there is, point out what words of Vatican II I am bound to accept which would be required to be rejected to be a faithful Catholic. Any apparent doctrinal error in Vatican II (there are passages which I think are either intended to lead to error, or as so worded to be dangerous, even if not strictly intended to lead to the conclusions they do) would probably be countered by another passage in Vatican II as well.

EDIT: If someone does point out such a passage, I will respond if I have failed in disabling this account, and I see the post, but to get a more sure response from me, one should contact me more directly through my public email address on my site.

Vatican II  silence to  sɛҳuąƖ abuse of innocnet children and seminarians.

While Archbishop Lefebvre and the 4 other bishops of SSPX were excommunicated and persecuted.



 Vatican II Rome protected these perverts in disgise of love, forgiveness and charity.  

If Vatican Ii is so wonderful then why have many left the Church, why are seminaires empty, why priest shortage, why are they closing down mostly churches and schools.?   And yet, they keep promoting and celebrataing vatican II.  It is the new religion.   Many put it above God and our blessed Mother.  Saying that vatican II give them the average church goer more say and power.  Vatican II is self love.    

Rome needs to renounce the devil and vatican II.  


"Is This Operation ѕυιcιdє??  and books by Archbishop Lefebvre are good to read.  

The true Catholic faith is about giving love and obedience to God.(not man)

Rosarium,

You stated that Vatican II seems to weaken doctrine and that no one could deny this.  

I agree.

But, then again, there it is as a council of the church.  Something's gotta give.  You can't have poison and anti-dote side by side unless contradictions are part of doctrine.  To add to this, the docuмents of Vatican II seem to say whatever the reader wants them to say.  

It's not just Vatican II.  It's what followed.  

And none of what followed can be blamed on a handful of overly exuberant, misguided liturgical experts.  

What followed was ordered from the very top of the Vatican.

Now that is has been stated, that is my actual view on Vatican II.

It is important not to fill in gaps and make assumptions. It is alright to lack knowledge when it is not needed. But to make a mental picture of me, using imagination and a few observations is not rational, leads to things which I think are not good (even if the composite imagined version of me is flattering to me).

If I wanted to use my person to be part of what I express, I would share more information about me, and make videos and speak, to allow people to get a better grasp of me. But I just post text and generally refrain from certain ways of communicating.

I do not write about Faith and morals because I am perfect and sinless, but because that is what I seek to be, just like all Catholics are called.

Seeking perfection means confronting every weakness and failure, big and small, in one's life. If people want to accuse me and discredit me, well, so far, nobody has enough actual information to be credible in their attack. Presuming motive, having imagined MOs, and filling in gaps of knowledge results in very weird (and, often calumnious and imprudent) statements about me.

Unless one has Knowledge about my motives and interior state, it is best to not address that, even if one has suspicions.