Author Topic: The Authority of Vatican 2 (Read 332 times)

bilbobaggins · « **on:** November 22, 2021, 08:51:02 AM »

On a traditional Catholic's forum called Fisheaters, they have an article titled

Traditional Catholicism 101: A Brief Primer
https://www.fisheaters.com/traditionalcatholicism.html

I was hoping some here could comment especially on the sections I have highlighted below that seem to bring into question the authority of Vatican 2.

In 1959, however, less than three months after his rise to the papacy as the successor of Pope Pius XII, Pope John XXIII -- "the Good Pope," as the media dubbed him -- told the world that he wanted to convene an Ecuмenical Council. Unlike all other such Councils which were convened to combat heresy or to clarify dogma, this Council was called because Pope John XXIII wanted "to throw open the windows of the Church so that we can see out and the people can see in."

The salient point of this Council is not, therefore, a discussion of one article or another of the fundamental doctrine of the Church which has repeatedly been taught by the Fathers and by ancient and modern theologians, and which is presumed to be well known and familiar to all.

everything being measured in the forms and proportions of a magisterium which is predominantly pastoral in character.
In other words, this Council wasn't about dogma and doctrine themselves; it was pastoral in nature -- i.e., it was about how dogma and doctrine were to be presented and handed down.

It is a matter of debate among traditional Catholics as to whether any teach -- or even can teach -- outright error. Some traditionalists work very hard to read them as perfectly Catholic, seeing the ambiguities as simply that: ambiguities which must be read in the light of Tradition. Others believe that positive error is contained in them. All agree, though, that no solemn definitions that a Catholic must accept de fide (as an article of the Faith) were promulgated. That this is true is supported by papal statements regarding the Council's intent (such as the opening address linked to above) and in the fact that none of the docuмents are marked by the language used in infallible definitions.

Stubborn · « **Reply #1 on:** November 22, 2021, 10:32:33 AM »

Snip taken from an interview with Fr. Wathen:

"....There has never been a general council until the Second Vatican Council which did not have the purpose of gathering in order to deliberate on doctrinal matters.

The Second Vatican Council was unique in that, from the very onset, pope John XXIII said that this would be a different kind of council. He coined an altogether new expression, he said "this is a Pastoral Council" (Pope Paul VI on Jan 12, 1966 said the same thing).

People need to understand that anything that this council pronounced that is a part of Catholic tradition and belief, is no less true and no less binding. They also need to understand that in calling itself a "Pastoral Council", the Council was telling the Catholic faithful that "our deliberations will not be mainly on the subject of what is Catholic doctrines, our deliberations will be mainly regarding how the Church will approach the people", and the council said that "we are going to begin to approach the people in a different style".

We have to say that rather remarkably, the Second Vatican Council was rather unconcerned about the sanctification of the people, the Second Vatican Council was mainly concerned with it's image, with how the people saw, or see the Church.

The second aspect of this matter is that the Church was going to present a new image to the non-Catholic world. It was going to make a totally different approach to the non-Catholics, the non-believers. No matter whether they were Protestants or Jєωs or Mohammedans, to non-believers the Church was going to present itself, not as an infallible body, but as an equal and the Church was going to present itself as being like them, searching for the truth.
This is a horrendous aspect and very often, since then, ecclesiastics, including the pope, have suggested that we Catholics are searching for the truth.

We're not searching for the truth at all - God has given us the truth, God has imposed the truth on us. And those who do not possess it, are bound under the pain of damnation to find it and to accept it.

We are in a totally different situation from those outside the Church. We have access to the truth, we know where it is, and we're bound by it - and any Catholic who does not know the truth should find someone who does know it and listen to him. And if there's any priest that doesn't know it, that priest should leave the priesthood. He has no business pretending himself as a priest if he does not know his Catholic theology.

The Church, since the Council, has been willing to discard everything that is recognizably Catholic, in order to fulfill this new preoccupation of presenting itself in a different fashion to the Catholic laypeople and to the non-Catholic world and for the sake of having a different image to the non-Catholic world, it has shown itself indifferent to the faith of the people so that the people are beside themselves with confusion. They no longer find anything recognizably Catholic, they don't know what to do in reaction. It is as if they simply no longer recognize their mother.

She has taken on a totally new makeup and garb and way of speaking, they don't recognize her, and in their heart of hearts they know this is a false image, and they are scandalized by it, but all those to whom they look for explanation assure them that they're not to be dismayed, that they're not to take scandal, not to take umbridge. It is the role of the traditionalists to say, don't listen to them, they are liars and deceivers, you have every reason to be scandalized by this new approach.....

....In order to present this totally new image to it's people and to the world, the conciliarists have been willing to discard everything - and that is not a careless statement. There is absolutely nothing they will not concede to fulfill this image, to carry it out. There is absolutely nothing, not a single doctrine will they not compromise, they will discard not only the Mass, they will discard any appearance, any external, and any morality in order not to be inconsistent with this self imposed obligation of being a true ecuмenical. Of being all things to all men, there is nothing that they will not discard, there is no damage they will not do, there is no fixture they will not destroy, there is nothing holy they will not trample, even the Body of Christ, there is nothing, absolutely nothing that they will not do in order to fulfill this self imposed image.

And they have said in order to give weight to their resolve that the Holy Spirit has guided them to it, this is false. The Holy Spirit has guided them to nothing of it, we have every reason to know what spirit it is that has guided them to this...."

bilbobaggins · « **Reply #2 on:** November 23, 2021, 07:54:22 AM »

Quote from: Stubborn on November 22, 2021, 10:32:33 AM

Snip taken from an interview with Fr. Wathen:

"....There has never been a general council until the Second Vatican Council which did not have the purpose of gathering in order to deliberate on doctrinal matters.

The Second Vatican Council was unique in that, from the very onset, pope John XXIII said that this would be a different kind of council. He coined an altogether new expression, he said "this is a Pastoral Council" (Pope Paul VI on Jan 12, 1966 said the same thing).

People need to understand that anything that this council pronounced that is a part of Catholic tradition and belief, is no less true and no less binding. They also need to understand that in calling itself a "Pastoral Council", the Council was telling the Catholic faithful that "our deliberations will not be mainly on the subject of what is Catholic doctrines, our deliberations will be mainly regarding how the Church will approach the people", and the council said that "we are going to begin to approach the people in a different style".

We have to say that rather remarkably, the Second Vatican Council was rather unconcerned about the sanctification of the people, the Second Vatican Council was mainly concerned with it's image, with how the people saw, or see the Church.

The second aspect of this matter is that the Church was going to present a new image to the non-Catholic world. It was going to make a totally different approach to the non-Catholics, the non-believers. No matter whether they were Protestants or Jєωs or Mohammedans, to non-believers the Church was going to present itself, not as an infallible body, but as an equal and the Church was going to present itself as being like them, searching for the truth.
This is a horrendous aspect and very often, since then, ecclesiastics, including the pope, have suggested that we Catholics are searching for the truth.

We're not searching for the truth at all - God has given us the truth, God has imposed the truth on us. And those who do not possess it, are bound under the pain of damnation to find it and to accept it.

We are in a totally different situation from those outside the Church. We have access to the truth, we know where it is, and we're bound by it - and any Catholic who does not know the truth should find someone who does know it and listen to him. And if there's any priest that doesn't know it, that priest should leave the priesthood. He has no business pretending himself as a priest if he does not know his Catholic theology.

The Church, since the Council, has been willing to discard everything that is recognizably Catholic, in order to fulfill this new preoccupation of presenting itself in a different fashion to the Catholic laypeople and to the non-Catholic world and for the sake of having a different image to the non-Catholic world, it has shown itself indifferent to the faith of the people so that the people are beside themselves with confusion. They no longer find anything recognizably Catholic, they don't know what to do in reaction. It is as if they simply no longer recognize their mother.

She has taken on a totally new makeup and garb and way of speaking, they don't recognize her, and in their heart of hearts they know this is a false image, and they are scandalized by it, but all those to whom they look for explanation assure them that they're not to be dismayed, that they're not to take scandal, not to take umbridge. It is the role of the traditionalists to say, don't listen to them, they are liars and deceivers, you have every reason to be scandalized by this new approach.....

....In order to present this totally new image to it's people and to the world, the conciliarists have been willing to discard everything - and that is not a careless statement. There is absolutely nothing they will not concede to fulfill this image, to carry it out. There is absolutely nothing, not a single doctrine will they not compromise, they will discard not only the Mass, they will discard any appearance, any external, and any morality in order not to be inconsistent with this self imposed obligation of being a true ecuмenical. Of being all things to all men, there is nothing that they will not discard, there is no damage they will not do, there is no fixture they will not destroy, there is nothing holy they will not trample, even the Body of Christ, there is nothing, absolutely nothing that they will not do in order to fulfill this self imposed image.

And they have said in order to give weight to their resolve that the Holy Spirit has guided them to it, this is false. The Holy Spirit has guided them to nothing of it, we have every reason to know what spirit it is that has guided them to this...."

This all sounds very, familiar. Thanks.

Author Topic: The Authority of Vatican 2 (Read 332 times)

bilbobaggins

The Authority of Vatican 2

Stubborn

Re: The Authority of Vatican 2

bilbobaggins

Re: The Authority of Vatican 2