Author Topic: Religious Assent and Vatican II  (Read 688 times)

awkwardcustomer

Religious Assent and Vatican II
« on: January 20, 2018, 04:18:41 PM »
I've been arguing on another forum that if the Conciliar 'popes' are Popes, Catholics are required at the very least to give their Religious Assent to Vatican II.

This seems like an interesting topic for discussion. There have been so many arguments over the infallibility or not of the Council.  And yet Paul VI in his General Audience of Jan 12, 1966, ascribed to Vatican II the authority of the "supreme ordinary Magisterium".

If Paul VI was Pope, it means that Catholics are obliged to accept Vatican II with "docility and sincerity".

Do Catholics have the right to withold Religious Assent from the teachings of a Pope, even a succession of Popes? Isn't this what R&R Trads are doing?

I'd be grateful for any links on the subject.
 

awkwardcustomer

Re: Religious Assent and Vatican II
« Reply #1 on: January 20, 2018, 04:28:55 PM »
Quote
In view of the pastoral nature of the Council, it avoided any extraordinary statements of dogmas endowed with the note of infallibility, but it still provided its teaching with the authority of the Ordinary Magisterium which must be accepted with docility according to the mind of the Council concerning the nature and aims of each document”

Paul VI, General Audience, Jan 12, 1966
 

Vinny Zee

Re: Religious Assent and Vatican II
« Reply #2 on: January 20, 2018, 05:00:45 PM »
I've been arguing on another forum that if the Conciliar 'popes' are Popes, Catholics are required at the very least to give their Religious Assent to Vatican II.

This seems like an interesting topic for discussion. There have been so many arguments over the infallibility or not of the Council.  And yet Paul VI in his General Audience of Jan 12, 1966, ascribed to Vatican II the authority of the "supreme ordinary Magisterium".

If Paul VI was Pope, it means that Catholics are obliged to accept Vatican II with "docility and sincerity".

Do Catholics have the right to withold Religious Assent from the teachings of a Pope, even a succession of Popes? Isn't this what R&R Trads are doing?

I'd be grateful for any links on the subject.

 

TKGS

Re: Religious Assent and Vatican II
« Reply #3 on: January 20, 2018, 05:04:48 PM »
I've been arguing on another forum that if the Conciliar 'popes' are Popes, Catholics are required at the very least to give their Religious Assent to Vatican II.

This is absolutely correct.  There should be no debate. 

The problem is that in order to give religious assent to Vatican 2, one must necessarily reject doctrines taught before Vatican 2.  Either the Church was wrong then or the Church is wrong now.  Either case demonstrates that the Catholic Church is a false religion, that is, if the Conciliar 'popes' are popes of the Catholic Church.

In his January 2018 seminary newsletter, Bishop Sanborn writes:
Quote
  • Vatican II promulgated condemned and heretical doctrines:  (1) Religious liberty, solemnly condemned by Pope Pius XI; (2) the new eccelsiology, which does not absolutely identify the Church of Christ and the Roman Catholic Church; (3) that non-Catholic religions are means of salvation, which is heresy; (4) that the college of bishop has supreme authority over the whole Church.
  • The post-conciliar magisterium contains these errors in more explicit terms.
  • The New Mass has been stripped of Catholic doctrines, and portrays a false notion of the Mass, the priesthood, and the Holy Eucharist.
  • The 1983 Code of Canon Law sanctions sinful practices, such as give Holy Communion to non-Catholics.
  • The sinful practice of giving Holy Communion to adulterers, sanctioned officially by Bergoglio.

These are merely some of the reasons why the new religion must be termed a substantial alteration of the Catholic Faith.  The severe decline in the faith of the clergy and people, the decline of religious vocations, the lack of unity of faith through the failure to impose Catholic doctrine, and the severe decline in the morals of the clergy are further signs of a substantial change.

Thus one cannot give religious assent to Vatican II and the doctrines before Vatican II at the same time. 

But if one need not give religious assent to a true ecumenical council of the Catholic Church, then what is the purpose of an ecumenical council?  Refusing religious assent to an ecumenical council is called "Protestantism", and, frankly, those who argue such are Protestants.
 
The following users thanked this post: Mysterium Fidei

awkwardcustomer

Re: Religious Assent and Vatican II
« Reply #4 on: January 22, 2018, 05:12:14 AM »
Does this mean that the SSPX is in schism?

They insist that the Conciliar 'popes' are true Popes and yet refuse to give Religious Assent to their teachings. How can the R&R Trad claim to be subject to the Roman Pontiff - a necessity for salvation - when they clearly are not in any way subject to the Conciliarists who they insist are Popes.

Their position is ludicrous is it not and entirely uncatholic. How did so many Trads find themselves in this position?

What a superb trick of the devil it is to fool Traditional Catholics into behaving like Protestants, Schismatics and other enemies of the Church towards the Papacy, all the while believing they are upholding Tradition.
« Last Edit: January 22, 2018, 05:14:12 AM by awkwardcustomer »
 
The following users thanked this post: 2Vermont, annamack

Rubecorks

Re: Religious Assent and Vatican II
« Reply #5 on: January 22, 2018, 05:39:31 AM »
Does this mean that the SSPX is in schism?

They insist that the Conciliar 'popes' are true Popes and yet refuse to give Religious Assent to their teachings. How can the R&R Trad claim to be subject to the Roman Pontiff - a necessity for salvation - when they clearly are not in any way subject to the Conciliarists who they insist are Popes.

Their position is ludicrous is it not and entirely uncatholic. How did so many Trads find themselves in this position?

What a superb trick of the devil it is to fool Traditional Catholics into behaving like Protestants, Schismatics and other enemies of the Church towards the Papacy, all the while believing they are upholding Tradition.

Archbishop Lefebvre was coming along towards the sedevacantist position. He expressed in 1986, publicly in the Angelus, that he may have to come to consider JP2 not a true pope. When he died five years later, the faction that didn't think like him gained ascendancy in the SSPX, and now they think they must perpetually carry on in the state in which Archbishop died. It's important to use that 1986 publication to show spixxies that Abp. Lefebvre believed in the Catholic principles behind sedevacantism - 1) that a pope can cease to be pope by becoming a heretic, 2) that we can discern that for ourselves and act upon it. That's the cold water we need to throw in their faces to help wake them up. Arbishop Lefebvre was on the doorstep of the true position, and he was not hostile to the sedevacantists like the present SSPX is.

 
The following users thanked this post: Mithrandylan, Francis

2Vermont

Re: Religious Assent and Vatican II
« Reply #6 on: January 22, 2018, 06:25:10 AM »
Does this mean that the SSPX is in schism?

They insist that the Conciliar 'popes' are true Popes and yet refuse to give Religious Assent to their teachings. How can the R&R Trad claim to be subject to the Roman Pontiff - a necessity for salvation - when they clearly are not in any way subject to the Conciliarists who they insist are Popes.

Their position is ludicrous is it not and entirely uncatholic. How did so many Trads find themselves in this position?

What a superb trick of the devil it is to fool Traditional Catholics into behaving like Protestants, Schismatics and other enemies of the Church towards the Papacy, all the while believing they are upholding Tradition.

Yes, objectively, they are schismatic.  Thankfully, these men are not true popes so they are not schismatic. 
"Anything, but sedevacantism"

(If you are open to sedevacantism and not a rabid anti-sede, then this is not about you)
 

awkwardcustomer

Re: Religious Assent and Vatican II
« Reply #7 on: January 22, 2018, 08:38:49 AM »
Yes, I should have said 'objective schism', or 'technically schismatic',  or in 'material schism'. Nevertheless there is nothing Catholic about their attitude towards their popes.

Bishop Sanborn has described how the R&R position was "concocted in Econe". He knew because he was there at the time. I also wonder if converts from Anglicanism - Michael Davies, Bishop Williamson for example - who are particularly ardent in their refutations of Sedevacantism, haven't managed to shake off their Protestant views of Papal authority.   

The Vatican II revolution entirely depends on Catholics believing that the reforms come from the Church, which basically means the Pope.  The SSPX plays into this deception and lends support to the enemies of the Papacy by insisting that Catholics can ignore, despise, ridicule the Vicar of Christ.

Cold water to the face might help, if you can catch them while they duck and dive to avoid the question.
 
The following users thanked this post: annamack

Mithrandylan

  • Administrator
  • TTF Apprentice
  • *****
  • Posts: 445
  • Thanked: 276 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Divínum auxílium ✝ máneat semper nobíscum
Re: Religious Assent and Vatican II
« Reply #8 on: January 22, 2018, 09:46:17 AM »
Does this mean that the SSPX is in schism?

They insist that the Conciliar 'popes' are true Popes and yet refuse to give Religious Assent to their teachings. How can the R&R Trad claim to be subject to the Roman Pontiff - a necessity for salvation - when they clearly are not in any way subject to the Conciliarists who they insist are Popes.

As you've noticed this is a problematic position.  It's not schismatic, though, because the men in question aren't popes.

Quote
Their position is ludicrous is it not and entirely uncatholic. How did so many Trads find themselves in this position?

It might seem ludicrous, but I wouldn't go that far.  I think we can be content to just say it's wrong.  If it were ludicrous, it wouldn't gain the sort of traction it has among serious Catholics, laity and clergy, who wish to remain good Catholics.  Who the pope is (and whether or not he's the pope) is an important matter, and people don't change their minds about this sort of thing lightly.

Quote
What a superb trick of the devil it is to fool Traditional Catholics into behaving like Protestants, Schismatics and other enemies of the Church towards the Papacy, all the while believing they are upholding Tradition.

Diabolical orientation indeed.
I wear it for a memorable honor,
For I am Welsh, you know, good countryman.
 
The following users thanked this post: ubipetrus

TKGS

Re: Religious Assent and Vatican II
« Reply #9 on: January 22, 2018, 05:33:57 PM »
Is that "objective" schism or "material" schism?   ;)

They are clearly in schism with the Conciliar sect.  From the moment I learned about the SSPX and their position I never understood how they could considered not in schism.
 
The following users thanked this post: annamack