« Last post by Meg on Today at 08:54:08 AM »
Hi 2Vermont. Regarding what you quoted, if it said, "Apostolicity of doctrine is a proof of Apostolicity of mission", I'd agree with you.
But it doesn't say that: it says "Apostolicity of mission is proof of Apostolicity of doctrine". Hence, if we find the Apostolic Church, which has the Apostolic Mission and the Power of Jurisdiction, we will also find the Apostolic Doctrine. That's what the CE is saying.
Do you agree that having an unbroken succession, in St. Peter' chair, or another episcopal see, from now to the Apostles, gives evidence of Apostolic succession? Per the explanations I quoted, that is how the Apostolic Church is distinguished and identified.
Brunsmann Preuss: "In order to be able to distinguish with certainty the true Church of Christ from all false claimants, it is sufficient to establish the Apostolic Succession with regard to the primacy of Peter. For, since the primacy is the crown of the Apostolate, the Church which possesses the primacy must needs be Apostolic … Hence that Church, and that Church only, which can trace its rulers to the first primate, namely, St. Peter, is in fact and by right Apostolic in every sense."
It would make practical sense to say that where we find apostolicity of mission, we also find apostolicity of doctrine, but that's not the practical reality of what is happening in the Church today. The present Crisis is a mystery, as Archbishop Lefebvre rightly pointed out. It doesn't make sense that the Church, which should possess the Four Marks, could now have doctrine which conflicts with doctrine before the Vll council.
Archbishop Lefebvre said that the Church is occupied by s Modernist sect. Pope St. Pius X warned in his encyclicals about the dangers of Modernism in the Church. The saintly Pope was aware that Modernism had infiltrated the Church. I only wish that he had called a council to address the problem, before it was too late. But maybe God had other plans.