Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 68

Author Topic: Bergolio says that there are many American Catholics who won’t accept Vatican II  (Read 46127 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
Re: Bergolio says that there are many American Catholics who won’t accept Vatican II
« Reply #35 on: June 14, 2022, 03:37:17 PM »
Quote
The adoption of the new Ordo Missae [order of the Mass] is certainly not left to the free choice of priests or faithful.
B.S.  There is no law or papal directive (nor has there ever been any) that the new mass must be accepted, attended or said.  +Benedict confirmed that Paul VI lied to us when his 2007 motu docuмent declared that "Quo Primum was never abrogated" and hence the Tridentine rite "was always allowed".  The logical conclusion is that, since Quo Primum only allows the Tridentine rite, that the new mass is illegal and sinful.


Quote
The instruction of 14 June 1971 has provided for, with the authorization of the Ordinary, the celebration of the Mass in the old form only by aged and infirm priests, who offer the divine Sacrifice sine popolo [without people attending].
There is no penalty for ignoring this instruction, nor does this instruction REQUIRE anyone to follow it.  This entire thing is a legal farce which has no legal force.




Quote
The new Ordo was promulgated to take the place of the old, after mature deliberation, following upon the requests of the Second Vatican Council. In no different way did our holy Predecessor Pius V make obligatory the Missal reformed under his authority, following the Council of Trent."
Yes, it is true that the new mass was supposed to take the place of the True Mass, but they did not (nor would God allow them) to do so by force, but only legal trickery, half-truths and lying implications.  Pope St Pius V clearly laid out who had to abide by Quo Primum and who did not.  Paul VI's new mass is not required, and no docuмent from new-rome has ever said it is.


Quote
"With the same supreme authority that comes from Christ Jesus, we call for the same obedience to all the other liturgical, disciplinary and pastoral reforms which have matured in these years in the implementation of the Council decrees. Any initiative which tries to obstruct them cannot claim the prerogative of rendering a service to the Church; in fact it causes the Church serious damage."
Word games.  That's all this is.  They declare that we must "obey" the reforms but when we ask "Where in the reform docuмents are the rules?" they cannot answer.  They wrote purposefully ambiguous docuмents and then want to interpret and re-interpret these docuмents whenever the need arises.  Sorry, that's not how canon law, nor liturgical rules work. 


Oh...and 40 years later, +Benedict contradicted Paul VI on almost every point above.  It's BS to the nth degree.
Logged

Offline LeDeg

Re: Bergolio says that there are many American Catholics who won’t accept Vatican II
« Reply #36 on: June 14, 2022, 03:38:48 PM »
Quote from: SeanJohnson on June 14, 2022, 03:21:09 PM
Go back and read my posts, which pre-empt it.
The quotes I put up of Paul VI are from 1976. 

The tactic of disregarding VII because "it's not infallible" is straight out of a red sea pedestrian playbook.
Logged

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
Re: Bergolio says that there are many American Catholics who won’t accept Vatican II
« Reply #37 on: June 14, 2022, 03:45:00 PM »
Quote
The tactic of disregarding VII because "it's not infallible" is straight out of a red sea pedestrian playbook.
How so?

V2 being non-infallible (and it is) is not contrary to the idea of sedevacantism.  The 2 are not mutually exclusive.  The way I see it, recognizing that V2 is non-infallible is God's way of giving all "sides" of Traddieland (i.e. Sede vs R&R vs indult) a reason to reject modernism.  God knew from all eternity that Trads would be split into these 3 camps (and He allowed it), so He provided a clear-cut answer to all camps, to see through the lies of Modernism and find the Truth.  God does not love Sedes more than R&R or more than indult catholics...He wants ALL to come to the truth and save their souls.  So He provided multiple ways for the Truth to be found, depending on your Trad type.
Logged

Offline SeanJohnson

Re: Bergolio says that there are many American Catholics who won’t accept Vatican II
« Reply #38 on: June 14, 2022, 03:55:22 PM »
Quote from: LeDeg on June 14, 2022, 03:38:48 PM
The quotes I put up of Paul VI are from 1976.

The tactic of disregarding VII because "it's not infallible" is straight out of a red sea pedestrian playbook.

Irrelevant:

Everyone who read The Rhine Flows Into the Tiber 50 years ago has known the revolutionaries stressed how nothing was infallible during the council to get their subversive measures passed, only to later change their tune once said measures were passed, and pretend they were infallible.  (So the 1976 date really only highlights this maneuver).

Vatican II is no more binding than a Sunday sermon.

And it has already been explained that all doctrinal novelties are ipso facto relegated to the non-infallible magisterium.  So Paul VI, Francis, and the rest of the conciliar popes can wail until they’re blue in the face about V2’s alleged infallibility, but if it ain’t got universality (geographical and temporal), it ain’t part of the magisterium, and it’s a brain boggler to read sedes pretending that novelty is magisterial.

Of course I really understand why they do: They sense their entire enterprise is shot if they acknowledge a level of magisterium merely authentic (ie., It destroys the mantra that if he is pope, you must obey, and also destroys the mantra that a pope cannot teach doctrinal error).  What they don’t seem to realize is that by eliminating the authentic magisterium, thereby promoting all official papal teaching to the level of infallibility, they have just eliminated the need for distinguishing between the ordinary and extraordinary magisterium, since then everything would be infallible one way or the other.
Logged

Offline Stubborn

  • Supporter
Re: Bergolio says that there are many American Catholics who won’t accept Vatican II
« Reply #39 on: June 14, 2022, 03:58:23 PM »
Quote from: Pax Vobis on June 14, 2022, 03:37:17 PM
B.S.  There is no law or papal directive (nor has there ever been any) that the new mass must be accepted, attended or said.  +Benedict confirmed that Paul VI lied to us when his 2007 motu docuмent declared that "Quo Primum was never abrogated" and hence the Tridentine rite "was always allowed".  The logical conclusion is that, since Quo Primum only allows the Tridentine rite, that the new mass is illegal and sinful.

There is no penalty for ignoring this instruction, nor does this instruction REQUIRE anyone to follow it.  This entire thing is a legal farce which has no legal force.



Yes, it is true that the new mass was supposed to take the place of the True Mass, but they did not (nor would God allow them) to do so by force, but only legal trickery, half-truths and lying implications.  Pope St Pius V clearly laid out who had to abide by Quo Primum and who did not.  Paul VI's new mass is not required, and no docuмent from new-rome has ever said it is.

Word games.  That's all this is.  They declare that we must "obey" the reforms but when we ask "Where in the reform docuмents are the rules?" they cannot answer.  They wrote purposefully ambiguous docuмents and then want to interpret and re-interpret these docuмents whenever the need arises.  Sorry, that's not how canon law, nor liturgical rules work. 


Oh...and 40 years later, +Benedict contradicted Paul VI on almost every point above.  It's BS to the nth degree.
Well said Pax.

This consistorial allocution of May 24, 1976, is where the true faithful, who for the most part were already 10 years into this mess, were forced to choose between truth / doctrine, and the requirement to obey the highest  authority in the Church. Those who remained faithful rightly chose truth over a blind obedience.

The lethargic faithful, including priests, nuns, seminarians etc. simply did whatever the priest/bishop/pope said to do - and many of those folks were already over joyed with the new religion for 10 years or so.

No doubt the above allocution helped split more from the ranks of the faithful.   

Logged
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 68
« previous next »