Author Topic: Bergolio says that there are many American Catholics who won’t accept Vatican II (Read 45580 times)

Ladislaus · « **Reply #245 on:** June 21, 2022, 07:00:49 AM »

Quote from: DecemRationis on June 21, 2022, 06:51:41 AM

That it is not "tenable" is your opinion. As I said, and Msgr. Fenton's article demonstrates, it is still an open question. Or would one be a "heretic" according to Lad to hold it?

No, in St. Robert Bellarmine's opinion. I didn't say one was not permitted to hold it, just that it's not tenable due to Tridentine ecclesiology of the Church being a visible society.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #246 on:** June 21, 2022, 07:01:58 AM »

Quote from: DecemRationis on June 21, 2022, 06:51:41 AM

Stubborn, you might like to read page 209, where the view of Cajetan and others that "all baptized persons" are "parts or members of the true Church," and "that the baptismal character constituted even a public apostate or heretic a genuine member of the Church," is mentioned. He does say that Cajetan's opinion did not survive the Counter-Reformation period. Page 213.

I've pointed this out to Stubborn before.

DecemRationis · « **Reply #247 on:** June 21, 2022, 07:09:00 AM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on June 21, 2022, 07:00:49 AM

No, in St. Robert Bellarmine's opinion. I didn't say one was not permitted to hold it, just that it's not tenable due to Tridentine ecclesiology of the Church being a visible society.

Right. It's your opinion that St. Robert's opinion is the correct one.

This gets us somewhat closer to the topic under discussion, since it was also St. Robert's opinion (although some argue that) that a pope who is a manifest heretic is not a pop (although some dispute that). But has that been settled? If not . . . well, that's huge. And very pertinent to the issue, of course.

I know Fr. Kramer wrote a book about it in response to Sisco & Salza, which I have. I think he holds that the upshot of Vatican I indicates the matter has been settled. I'll go back and look. But, again, would that not be Fr. Kramer's opinion?

Ladislaus · « **Reply #248 on:** June 21, 2022, 07:14:17 AM »

Quote from: DecemRationis on June 21, 2022, 07:09:00 AM

Right. It's your opinion that St. Robert's opinion is the correct one.

Yes, his opinion has plenty of weight and is rooted directly in Tridentine ecclesiology, where, in opposition to the Protestants, the Church is understood to be a visible society. And it's also the opinion of the vast majority of theologians directly leading up to Vatican II. That the contrary opinion is "unsubdued" simply means that it hasn't been officially condemned by the Church, not that it's a tenable opinion.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #249 on:** June 21, 2022, 07:17:24 AM »

Quote from: DecemRationis on June 21, 2022, 07:09:00 AM

This gets us somewhat closer to the topic under discussion, since it was also St. Robert's opinion (although some argue that) that a pope who is a manifest heretic is not a pop (although some dispute that). But has that been settled? If not . . . well, that's huge. And very pertinent to the issue, of course.

Regardless, the (minority) opinion that occult heretics are NOT members of the Church doesn't really help the side that claim a heretic can remain the pope.

Only the abandoned Cajetan opinion tenaciously held by Father Wathen and therefore Stubborn that the baptismal character alone is required might help that position.

CathInfo.com

Author Topic: Bergolio says that there are many American Catholics who won’t accept Vatican II (Read 45580 times)

Ladislaus

Re: Bergolio says that there are many American Catholics who won’t accept Vatican II

Ladislaus

Re: Bergolio says that there are many American Catholics who won’t accept Vatican II

DecemRationis

Re: Bergolio says that there are many American Catholics who won’t accept Vatican II

Ladislaus

Re: Bergolio says that there are many American Catholics who won’t accept Vatican II

Ladislaus

Re: Bergolio says that there are many American Catholics who won’t accept Vatican II