Author Topic: Vatican II in Continuity With Trent? (Read 907 times)

stevusmagnus · « **on:** April 10, 2011, 10:58:50 PM »

I have heard the claim that VCII and Trent are directly contradictory, which would go against the claim of BXVI that there is a continuity and not contradiction between the two.

If you believe there are contradictions between the two please let me know what these are. Please use quotes/ links/ citations if you could.

Thanks!

Jehanne · « **Reply #1 on:** April 11, 2011, 07:17:38 AM »

Pope Paul III, Council of Trent, Sess. 6, Chap. 3, ex cathedra: "But although Christ died for all, yet not all receive the benefit of His death, but those only to whom the merit of His Passion is communicated."

The text of Trent can be found here:

http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent.html

MyrnaM · « **Reply #2 on:** April 11, 2011, 10:06:20 AM »

Good one, and it only take one denied teaching to put them outside the Church, we need not even look further. Unless Stevus desires a list.

Stubborn · « **Reply #3 on:** April 11, 2011, 11:09:39 AM »

I think he will need a list - I already posted about "for all" but Stevus says that it does not mean what it says.........

Quote from: Stubborn

De Defectibus Decree of the Council of Trent
DEFECTS WHICH MAY OCCUR IN CELEBRATING MASS

CHAPTER II
DEFECTIVE FORMULA

V. 1. DEFECTS may arise in respect of the formula, if anything is wanting to complete the actual words of consecration. The words of consecration, which are the formative principle of this Sacrament, are as follows: Hoc est enim Corpus meum; and: Hic est enim calix Sanguinis mei, novi et aeterni testamenti; mysterium fidei, qui pro vobis et pro multis effundetur in remissionem peccatorum. If any omission or alteration is made in the formula of concecration of the Body and Blood, involving a change of meaning, the consecration is invalid. An addition made without altering the meaning does not invalidate the consecration, but the Celebrant commits a mortal sin.