.
The process is not difficult to observe or to understand, but liberals at the head of the Society of St Pius X, seeking reconciliation with the Conciliarists in Rome, have done their best to confuse the question of the Conciliar church and the Catholic Church. For instance the Catholic Church is visible, they will say, and the Conciliar church is the visible church, so the Conciliar church is the Catholic Church --- an argument dismissed years ago by Archbishop Lefebvre as “childish” (many churches are visible that are not Catholic). Equally childish is the argument that there is only one Church, so the Conciliar church and the Catholic Church must be one and the same (there are thousands of false churches).
The
visibility of the Church has long been a topic of theological speculation.
I wish H.E. would provide a footnote where this
dismissal from ABL can be found. I'd like to see just how he spoke about it, in context and all.
It seems to me that Accordistas and Fellayites really hang on to this 'visible' canard like a lifeline. +F and his cronies drop this axiom in their laps and they accept it without examination, as if it's
prima facie gospel. When all it is, is theological speculation. It's not doctrine, nor can it be. How much
rotten apple can we have in plain view before it becomes obvious that something about what we see as ostensibly the Church, isn't the Church at all? Everyone has his own answer to that.
Syllogism Time!
Literally, the sentence, "
Equally childish is the argument that there is only one Church, so the Conciliar church and the Catholic Church must be one and the same (there are thousands of false churches)," is not attributed here to ABL directly. We could reasonably surmise, therefore, that this is a logical conclusion that +W has made, based on his lifetime of experience:
Major proposition:
ABL correctly identified as "childish" the notion that proclaims, "the Catholic Church is visible, and the Conciliar church is the visible church, so the Conciliar church
is the Catholic Church," because, many churches are visible that are not Catholic.
Minor proposition:
But now, some would believe that "there is only one Church, so the Conciliar church and the Catholic Church must be one and the same," even while there are thousands of false churches.
Conclusion:
The latter is likewise correctly identified as
childish by the same principle as the former, because using right reason, we can see that it follows the same
childish thinking process that the former does, even if ABL had not specifically pronounced judgment on the latter.
Notice too, that the Major, Minor and Conclusion are syllogisms of their own.
Notice too, each of these internal syllogisms can be subdivided into additional syllogisms.
Notice too, that even while the Fellayites are all gushingly swooningly approving of Vat.II as "acceptable," they fail to apply its false teachings when they have the chance, such as here, where they ought to be saying that The Catholic Church subsists in the visible Church." (Cf.
LG 8)
.