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

Poll

What did Vatican II teach?

The teachings of VII are amazing and 100% sound doctrine!
2 (6.9%)
The teachings of VII should have been worded better, but are still safe.
1 (3.4%)
The teachings of VII contain level 3 censures (defacing beauty of the Church, scandalous, etc.)
0 (0%)
The teachings of VII contain level 2 censures (offensive to pious ears, ambiguous, etc.)
1 (3.4%)
The teachings of VII contain level 1 censures (heresy, erroneous, next to heresy, etc.)
0 (0%)
The teachings of VII contain level censures from all 3 levels
14 (48.3%)
There is no censure that properly expresses what VII taught - it is straight from hell!
9 (31%)
Enough! Stop with the polls you obnoxious turd!
2 (6.9%)

Total Members Voted: 28

« previous next »
Pages: [1]

Author Topic: Poll: What did Vatican II teach?  (Read 3596 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Johannes

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 613
  • Reputation: +92/-284
  • Gender: Male
Poll: What did Vatican II teach?
« on: November 23, 2024, 12:04:45 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0

    • Whether You think the Second Vatican Council was a legitimate council called by a true pope, or a false council called by a false pope, and every conceivable variation between - What do you think of its teachings from a theological perspective?

    If you like, please elaborate on the specific docuмent from VII that informed your choice at the highest level (give the specific censure for it too).

    Some definitions to consider (groups 1 - 3 below, use as a guide to answer)
    https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03532a.htm

    Theological Censures


    (1) Hæretica (heretical), erronea (erroneous), hæresi proxima (next to heresy), errori proxima (next to error), temeraria (rash), etc.

    A proposition is branded heretical when it goes directly and immediately against a revealed or defined dogma, or dogma de fide; erroneous when it contradicts only a certain (certa) theological conclusion or truth clearly deduced from two premises, one an article of faith, the other naturally certain. Even though a statement be not obviously a heresy or an error it may yet come near to either. It is styled next, proximate to heresy when its opposition to a revealed and defined dogma is not certain, or chiefly when the truth it contradicts, though commonly accepted as revealed, has yet never been the object of a definition (proxima fidei). The censure next, or proximate to error, whose meaning may be determined by analogy to the foregoing, is of less frequent use than that of rashness or temerity, which means opposition to sound common opinion (communis), and this either for paltry reasons or no reasons at all. A still finer shade of meaning attaches to such censures as sapiens hæresim, errorem (smacking of heresy or error), suspecta de hæresi, errore (suspected of heresy or error). Propositions thus noted may be correct in themselves, but owing to various circuмstances of time, place, and persons, are prudently taken to present a signification which is either heretical or erroneous. To this group also belong some special stigmata with reference to determined topics, e.g. the preambles of faith (infidelis, aversiva a fide), ethical principles (improbabilis, non tuta), history (antiquata, nova) and Holy Scripture (verbo Dei contraria), etc.


    (2) Ambigua (ambiguous), captiosa (captious), male sonans (evil-sounding), piarum aurium offensiva (offensive to pious ears), etc.

    A proposition is ambiguous when it is worded so as to present two or more senses, one of which is objectionable; captious when acceptable words are made to express objectionable thoughts; evil-sounding when improper words are used to express otherwise acceptable truths; offensive when verbal expression is such as rightly to shock the Catholic sense and delicacy of faith.


    (3) Subsannativa religionis (derisive of religion), decolorativa candoris ecclesiæ (defacing the beauty of the Church), subversiva
    hierarchiæ (subversive of the hierarchy), eversiva regnorum (destructive of governments), scandelosa, perniciosa, periculosa in moribus (scandalous, pernicious, dangerous to morals), blasphema, idolatra, superstisiosa, magica (blasphemous, leading to idolatry, superstition, sorcery), arrogans, acerba (arrogant, harsh), etc.

    This enumeration, though incomplete, sufficiently draws the aim of the third group of censures; they are directed against such propositions as would imperil religion in general, the Church's sanctity, unity of government and hierarchy, civil society, morals in general, or the virtue of religion, Christian meekness, and humility in particular.
    The authority of theological censures depends upon the source from which they come and the intention with which they are issued. Condemnations coming from the seat of infallibility, pope or council, and vested with the usual conditions of an ex cathedra pronouncement are themselves infallible, and consequently require both our external obedience and internal assent. There is no reason for restricting the infallibility of the censures to the sole note heretica as some theologians would do. The difference between the note of heresy and other inferior notes is not one of infallibility, but of different matters covered by infallibility. The note of heresy attached to a proposition makes it contradictory to an article of faith, which is not the case with other notes, even if they are infallible. Condemnations coming from another source which, however, is not infallible are to be received with the external respect and implicit obedience due to disciplinary measures, and moreover, with that degree of internal assent which is justified by circuмstances. In every case the extent of outward compliance, or of interior submission, or both is determined by a proper interpretation of the censures:
    Sometimes, as in the condemned propositions of Pistoia, there is little room for doubt, the precise meaning of the condemnation being explained in the very tenor of it.
    nger attached to them.

    In a general matter, censures are restrictive laws and, as such, to be interpreted strictly. A Catholic is not debarred from the right of ascertaining, for his own guidance or the guidance of others, their legitimate minimum; but the danger, not always unreal, of falling below that minimum should itself be minimized by what Newman calls "a generous loyalty toward ecclesiastical authority" and the pietas fidei.

    Sources
    Sessa, Scrutinium doctrinarum (Rome, 1709); D'Argentré, Collectio iudiciorum (Paris 1728); Viva, Damnatarum thesium theologica trustina (Padua, 1737); Montagne, De censuria seu notis theologicis, ed. Migne (Paris, 1837); Di Bartolio, Les critères théol., Fr. tr. (Paris, 1889), on the Index; Didiot, Logigue surnaturelle subjective (Paris 1891), No. 377; Manning, The Vatican Council in Privilegium Petri (London, 1871); Newman, A letter to the Duke of Norfolk in Certain Difficulties of Anglicans (London, 1892), II; Choupin, Valeur des décisions doctrinales du Saint-Siège (Paris, 1907); Ferraris, Propositiones damnatæ in Prompta Bibliotheca; Quillet, Censures doctrinnales in Dict. de théol. cath; Lagrange, Le décret "Lamentabili" in Rev. Bibl. (Oct., 1907). See also treatises in moral theology, De fide, and in dogmatic theology, De ecclesia, chiefly Scheeben, Wilhelm, and Scannell, Hunter.



    Logged

    Offline TKGS

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5846
    • Reputation: +4694/-490
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Poll: What did Vatican II teach?
    « Reply #1 on: November 23, 2024, 01:44:23 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • System wouldn't let me vote.
    Logged

    Offline Jaynek

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4169
    • Reputation: +2314/-1229
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Poll: What did Vatican II teach?
    « Reply #2 on: November 23, 2024, 01:47:52 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • What a great question! Latin and a bibliography!  Where's the heart Emoji?
    Logged

    Offline Soubirous

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2109
    • Reputation: +1662/-44
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Poll: What did Vatican II teach?
    « Reply #3 on: November 23, 2024, 02:02:52 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Re that one vote for "amazing and 100% sound"... :confused:   :facepalm:   :fryingpan:
    Logged
    Let nothing disturb you, let nothing frighten you, all things pass away: God never changes. Patience obtains all things. He who has God finds he lacks nothing; God alone suffices. - St. Teresa of Jesus

    Offline Gray2023

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 2957
    • Reputation: +1654/-929
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Poll: What did Vatican II teach?
    « Reply #4 on: November 23, 2024, 02:48:28 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
    • This docuмent is the one that really bothers me.  I haven't been able to read it in its entirety because it bothers me so much.

    https://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/docuмents/vat-ii_const_19651207_gaudium-et-spes_en.html

    I am not good with theological responses but my simple thought is this docuмent changed the Church from a God-Centered Religion to a man-centered religion.
    Logged
    1 Corinthians: Chapter 13 "4 Charity is patient, is kind: charity envieth not, dealeth not perversely; is not puffed up; 5 Is not ambitious, seeketh not her own, is not provoked to anger, thinketh no evil;"

    Offline Viva Cristo Rey

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 18378
    • Reputation: +5715/-1975
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Poll: What did Vatican II teach?
    « Reply #5 on: November 23, 2024, 08:01:25 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
    • Vatican II is the novus Ordo.

    It was created to remove Jesus from the world and to dumb down Catholics. it is presently leading souls to hell. 
    Logged
    May God bless you and keep you

    Offline Mysterium Fidei

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 156
    • Reputation: +165/-24
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Poll: What did Vatican II teach?
    « Reply #6 on: November 23, 2024, 09:04:16 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Vatican II decreed and implemented teachings previously condemned by the infallible teaching magisterium of the Catholic Church.

    The Novus Ordo Missae is an evil liturgical discipline as it was composed with the express purpose of making an ecuмenical liturgy acceptable to Protestants and stripped of essential Catholic truths.

    .
    Logged
    Pages: [1]
    « previous next »