Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Crisis in the Church => Topic started by: Augstine Baker on April 26, 2012, 05:08:53 PM
-
http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2012/04/don-nicola-bux-vatican-ii-can-be.html
A further declaration: Those, for whom the Second Vatican Council is overvalued as isolated from the history of the Church and in contradiction to its own intentions, should not appoint themselves as critics, for example, of the First Vatican Council or the Council of Trent. There are those, who maintain, the Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius of the First Vatican Council is replaced and suppressed by the Dogmatic Constitution Dei Verbum of the Second Vatican Council. That is Fantasy-theology. It seems to me on the other hand that every good theology, which themselves follow the value of the docuŠ¼ents, is placed in their teaching and their meaning. At the Second Vatican Council there are docuŠ¼ents of different importance and for that reason also of varying binding power, which allow different levels of discussion. The Pope spoke in 1988, when he was still Cardinal Ratzinger, of the danger to metamorphose the Second Vatican Council into a "Superdogma". Now, he has offered a standard with the "Hermeneutic of Renewal and Continuity", in order to undertake questions of value and not to shut them out. One should not be more papal than the Pope. The Council, all Councils and not only the Second Vatican Council, is meant to be accepted in obedience, but one can criticize each of the various parts, which belongs to the doctrines of the Faith. It is no accident that Benedict XVI has called a "Year of Faith". The Faith is the measure by which we conceive the life of the Church.
-
:sleep:
-
Mr. Nicola Bux should get a Catholic perspective on things.
Vatican II was one of the main things which destroyed the Catholic Church.
Another of those things was the invalid "rite" of ordination, which has made plain old Mr. Nicola Bux into plain old Mr. Nicola Bux.
-
These faux-traditionalist men are not doing what is right.
They are compromisers.
So many faux-traditionalist "priests" are invalidly ordained.
You need a clear denunciation of evil.
And saintly priests to make that denunciation.
Such as the holy priests of the CMRI.
-
Sorry, Sede but CRMI priests are nut cases. As to Validity who knows if they are valid and frankly who cares about these crack pot self appointed popes?
-
The most advantageous conversation regarding Vatican II would be discuss it being officially declared null and void.
-
Sorry, Sede but CRMI priests are nut cases. As to Validity who knows if they are valid and frankly who cares about these crack pot self appointed popes?
How dare you speak like that about holy Catholic priests.
You are garbage.
I hope you get banned from here, you ignorant troll.
-
You dare to imply that they might not be valid.
They most certainly are, under canon law.
Also, it is a sin to allege that orders or sacraments are invalid, without foundation.
You also imply that the CMRI are self- appointed Popes.
THE CMRI DO NOT CLAIM TO BE POPES.
So what you say is utter nonsense.
You are talking complete rubbish.
You despicable, evil little man.
-
Anthony M,
You have sinned with your contempt of the Traditional clergy. You must repent.
I agree with Sede Catholic that you are behaving like a troll. I think you're just here to stir up trouble.
-
Anthony M,
You have sinned with your contempt of the Traditional clergy. You must repent.
I agree with Sede Catholic that you are behaving like a troll. I think you're just here to stir up trouble.
Dear Spiritus,
Yes, that is a very, very, very, good point.
What he has done is a sin.
He does need to repent.
-
Sorry, Sede but CRMI priests are nut cases. As to Validity who knows if they are valid and frankly who cares about these crack pot self appointed popes?
How dare you speak like that about holy Catholic priests.
You are garbage.
I hope you get banned from here, you ignorant troll.
You should not be surprised that people talk in such a way when you do it yourself.
-
I do not talk that way about holy Catholic priests. I believe that they should be traeted with great respect.
So your comment adds little of worth to this discussion.
Pepsuber, it is a shame that you did not publicly defend the clergy in this instance.
Instead of attempting to rebuke me, you could have rebuked this character who showed up here and started insulting the clergy.
That would have been a Catholic response.
-
I do not talk that way about holy Catholic priests. I believe that they should be traeted with great respect.
So your comment adds little of worth to this discussion.
Pepsuber, it is a shame that you did not publicly defend the clergy in this instance.
Instead of attempting to rebuke me, you could have rebuked this character who showed up here and started insulting the clergy.
That would have been a Catholic response.
Read what you wrote about Dom Nicola Bux and ask yourself if it is Catholic. If you truly believe that priests should be treated with great respect then you can start yourself by apologizing for your attacks on Msgr. Bux.
-
I do not talk that way about holy Catholic priests. I believe that they should be traeted with great respect.
So your comment adds little of worth to this discussion.
Pepsuber, it is a shame that you did not publicly defend the clergy in this instance.
Instead of attempting to rebuke me, you could have rebuked this character who showed up here and started insulting the clergy.
That would have been a Catholic response.
Read what you wrote about Dom Nicola Bux and ask yourself if it is Catholic. If you truly believe that priests should be treated with great respect then you can start yourself by apologizing for your attacks on Msgr. Bux.
What I said was fine. I pointed out that Nicola Bux is an invalidly ordained layman.
You absurdly refer to that as "attacks on Msgr. Bux"
An entirely different situation was when AnthonyM referred to real Catholic priests as "nut cases".
Which was a wicked lie. And it was very insulting to Catholic priests.
He aslo implied that they claim to be Popes. Which is totally untrue.
I told the truth about a layman who calls himself a priest. Anthony M lied about real priests.
I wonder why you were silent when he made these untrue statements.
Pepsuber, did you find Anthony M's lies about holy priests offensive?
Please answer that question.