Author Topic: Monk defending Vatican 2 (Read 627 times)

Conspiracy_Factist · « **on:** June 30, 2014, 11:39:26 PM »

I am corresponding with a novus order monk who is defending Vatican 2..here's what he wrote..I'd be interested to know how you would respond, I am not familiar with the "hermeneutic" part

"If I may make some descriptive markers of where I understand your position to be:
1a) Vatican II is not valid because its teachings, especially in Unitatis Redintegratio, are contrary to prior Church teaching.

1b) Your position on Vatican II can be described as a "hermeneutic of discontinuity and rupture;" i.e. there is such a glaring discrepancy of Church teaching--in theology, ecclesiology, salvation, etc.--before Vatican II in comparison with after.

2) It is only logical then, that the teachings of Vatican II must be wrong, because the Church cannot contradict herself.

(I don't agree with these three points by the way). I don't think this sums up your whole position, but at least describes it in more general terms.

Now some questions (with some commentary):

-- Is Our Lady of La Salette recognized by the Church?
-- Where is the true Catholic Church today in your opinion?
-- Is God's grace only at work in the Catholic Church? If yes, then how do non-Catholics become Catholic? Only by their own efforts? (This would be Pelagianism).
(Even before Vatican II, the doctrine of prevenient grace was taught, viz. the Second Synod of Orange (529 A.D.): "the Second Synod of Orange (can. v) decreed that prevenient grace is absolutely necessary to the infidel not only for faith itself, but also for the very beginning of faith" (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06689x.htm)
In other words, God's prevenient grace is at work in the life of a pagan (and God's grace is at work in the life of a non-Catholic heretic as well). "

Nadir · « **Reply #1 on:** July 01, 2014, 01:00:33 AM »

You don't say just what he believes, rather what he thinks you believe.

For your first question:
http://www.theotokos.org.uk/pages/approved/appariti/lasalett.html

Quote

Mgr de Bruillard, as bishop of Grenoble, approved of devotion to Our Lady of Salette, in the following terms.

"We declare that the apparition of the Blessed Virgin to two shepherds, on September 19, 1846, on a mountain in the Alps in the parish of La Salette, bears in itself all the marks of truth and that the faithful are justified in believing without question in its truth. And so, to mark our lively gratitude to God and the glorious Virgin Mary, we authorise the cult of Our Lady of La Salette."

JPaul · « **Reply #2 on:** July 01, 2014, 07:53:42 AM »

This would appear to be conciliar thinking here, a council says that such grace is necessary for Faith, so he enlists that to conclude that such grace is at work in the pagan and heretic. He does not qualify this concept as to which pagans and which heretics.

Well, it is at work in those men of good will, who have responded to the sufficient grace which is bestowed upon all men, and so are in the way of salvation if they persevere in it. It is not at work in those who have refused the grace offered.

All grace which has effect upon them is moving them towards conversion to Christ, where alone, can be found, truth and salvation.

I would not debate this with him if you do not have the necessary knowledge and understanding to unequivocally refute his propositions.

We can surmise from the construction of this first exchange, that he is laying the groundwork to make your arguments appear to be unfounded and foolish.

He is setting the terms and ground for your exchange, and they will favor him. If he is a conciliarist, he is a Modernist. It is almost impossible to argue fruitfully with a Modernist, as they perceive and speak from, an entirely different reality than Catholics do.

The Penny Catechism · « **Reply #3 on:** July 01, 2014, 08:53:44 AM »

Quote from: J.Paul

This would appear to be conciliar thinking here, a council says that such grace is necessary for Faith, so he enlists that to conclude that such grace is at work in the pagan and heretic. He does not qualify this concept as to which pagans and which heretics.

Well, it is at work in those men of good will, who have responded to the sufficient grace which is bestowed upon all men, and so are in the way of salvation if they persevere in it. It is not at work in those who have refused the grace offered.

All grace which has effect upon them is moving them towards conversion to Christ, where alone, can be found, truth and salvation.

I would not debate this with him if you do not have the necessary knowledge and understanding to unequivocally refute his propositions.

We can surmise from the construction of this first exchange, that he is laying the groundwork to make your arguments appear to be unfounded and foolish.

He is setting the terms and ground for your exchange, and they will favor him. If he is a conciliarist, he is a Modernist. It is almost impossible to argue fruitfully with a Modernist, as they perceive and speak from, an entirely different reality than Catholics do.

congruency/ good points made

Soteriology: Pohle-Preuss

Quote

Thesis II/ Thesis IV: Christ died for all men without exception...The doctrine of the universality of the atonement is not disproved by the fact that many human beings are eternally lost. Proof. The Council of Trent teaches: "But, though He died for all, yet not all receive the benefit of his death, but those only unto whom the merits of His Passion is communicated." The universality of Christ's vicarious atonement is not absolute but conditional. Those only are saved who comply with the conditions necessary for participating in the fruits of the Redemption, viz: baptism, faith, contrition, cooperation with grace, and perseverance. pg. 81

songbird · « **Reply #4 on:** July 01, 2014, 10:37:57 PM »

To be in the Club, you must be a full member. The monk is Marxist/mason. Don't waste your time in conversation, save it for prayer. Pray for the enemy!