 |
| Cardinal Brandmüller |
(Rorate Caeli) - Cardinal Brandmüller: "There is a huge difference between a great constitution," like the Vatican II constitutions on the church, the liturgy and divine revelation, "and simple declarations," like the Vatican II declarations on Christian education and the mass media. "Strangely enough, the two most controversial documents" for the SSPX -- those on religious freedom [Dignitatis humanae] and on relations with non-Christians [Nostra aetate] -- "do not have a binding doctrinal content, so one can dialogue about them," the cardinal said. "So I don't understand why our friends in the Society of St. Pius X concentrate almost exclusively on these two texts. And I'm sorry that they do so, because these are the two that are most easy to accept if we consider their canonical nature" as non-binding, he said...THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: This is probably old news for most of my readers, but it echoes what I've been saying on this blog for years now. (Nice to know I'm in good company.) The Second Vatican Council is an inferior council all together, and that's not my assessment, but the assessment of two popes (Paul VI and Bendedict XVI). It is a PASTORAL council, not a doctrinal council. In that the fathers of the council, for whatever reason, deliberately chose NOT to attach a note of infallibility to any document or statement from the council. This is extremely significant, because it means that while their full pastoral authority was in use, their chrism of infallibility was not. This makes the whole council inferior to previous Church councils, such as Vatican I and Trent, in which the note of infallibility was used.
read full story here
What does this mean to you and me as average Catholics? It means simply this. We should look at Vatican II as a template for new Catechism books, and not much more than that. It means when we read Vatican II documents, and catechisms associated with it, we should do so in the full context of Vatican I and Trent. This is because Vatican II has no meaning outside of Vatican I and Trent. It is a pastoral council, explaining what the previous councils mean. Outside of this context, Vatican II has no meaning at all.
The reason why the pope is open to debate with the SSPX on the pastoral issues of religious freedom and relations with non-Christians is precisely because they are PASTORAL issues! They are not dogmatic issues at all. So that means they are open for debate among those qualified to debate such things, and as far as the pope is concerned, the leaders of the SSPX are most certainly qualified to discus it and debate it. It would also appear that disagreement over these PASTORAL issues is not sufficient cause to warrant separation from the Church or a lack of authentic canonical status within the Church.
2 comments:
Tuesday, May 29, 2012
SSPX COULD MAKE THINGS EASIER FOR POPE BENEDICT XVI
The solution to the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) canonical status issue is easy and the SSPX can help Pope Benedict XVI.They can make his decision easy with a clear announcement on Catholic doctrine.
Bishop Bernard Fellay is quoted as saying that they do not reject the Council per se and could accept 95% of Vatican Council II.He would want the other five percent to be interpreted also according to Tradition.
So an announcement is called for:
The SSPX can state that they accept the Council as a historical reality-it happened. They would agree with the Council when it is interpreted according to Tradition. They also agree with Ad Gentes 7(AG 7), specially, which says all people, all non Catholics included, need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation. This includes Jews, Muslims, Orthodox Christians and Protestants. AG 7 is not contradicted by Lumen Gentium 16 since we do not know anyone on earth saved in invincible ignorance or a good conscience. So AG 7 does not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Every one needs to convert into the Church and there are no known exceptions of the baptism of desire, seeds of the Word etc.We accept in principle the possibility of non Catholics being saved in invincible ignorance etc and in a manner known only to God. These cases are unknown to us.
Since the dogma and AG 7 affirm the need for all people to enter the Church, all political and social legislation must be centred on Jesus as he is understood by the Catholic Church, the one true Church (UR 3).AG 7 places a moral obligation on Catholics to affirm only the Catholic Church in inter-religious dialogue and ecumenism. In inter religious dialogue it must be remembered that the Church is the ordinary means of salvation (Redemptoris Missio 55).Catholics are the new people of God (NA 4), the Chosen People of God. They have the Jewish Messiah, the new and eternal Covenant and the Sacrifice of the Mass.
continued
continued
Once this is all clear and announced in public SSPX critics will observe that the SSPX is endorsing Vatican Council II (AG 7 etc). They are also affirming it in accord with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. In accord with Tradition, they are also affirming traditional ecclesiology and the traditional understanding of Judaism, other religions and ecumenism. So they cannot be faulted. They can cite references from the Council while the liberals cannot support their new ecclesiology with texts from the Council since LG 16 is not an exception to AG 7. There are no exceptions e.g. collegiality or Nostra Aetate do not reject AG 7.
Meanwhile the SSPX continues to reject the liberal interpretation of Vatican Council II which has no supporting text from the Council and assumes those saved in invincible ignorance etc are known to us on earth.
SSPX could in turn ask Cardinal Kurt Koch and Cardinal Luiz Ladaria S.J and the rest of the Vatican Curia, to affirm Vatican Council II (AG 7) in accord with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus with no known exceptions.
Cardinal Kurt Koch in his May 16 statement at the Angelicum University, reported by Catholic News Service and Rorate Caeli has indicated that Jews do not have to convert in the present time. This is proof that he does not accept Vatican Council II.-Lionel Andrades
Post a Comment