- Feb 5, 2002
- 166,314
- 56,039
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
The archbishop consistently overstates the ambiguity contained within Vatican II, and equally consistently overlooks the clarity contained in Vatican II.
I very much appreciate Archbishop Viganò taking the time to respond to my article that appeared in Inside the Vatican on July 27, 2020. However, I found his response, posted on August 10th at Inside the Vatican, disappointing, for he was evasive, and did not address the points I made, but rather made a further case for his own position. He hardly mentioned what I termed the Spirit’s “severe grace,” that followed upon Vatican II, and he entirely passed over what I termed the Spirit’s “beneficent grace” that was the direct result of Vatican II. In this light, I will now make my response to his letter.
First, instead of addressing my Inside the Vatican article, the archbishop brings to the fore a piece I wrote for The Catholic Thing (October 8, 2019). He does so because he thinks he can turn my own argument there against me, that is, to falsify what I wrote in Inside the Vatican, and so use it to promote his own highly ideological agenda. This is a very clever tactic, but one that does not work.
In my Catholic Thing article, I argued that Pope Francis, although the Pontiff of the Catholic Church, has become, for all practical purposes, the leader of those elements within the Church that are verging on schism, such as the bishops of Germany. Archbishop Viganò attempts to interpret my description of this double role as my dividing Pope Francis (the Pontiff) from Jorge Mario Bergoglio, the “exuberant” Argentinian. The archbishop then argues, in his letter to me, that the same can be said of the Second Vatican Council, that is, that the Council, while an authentic ecumenical council, ended up promoting an agenda that was schismatic and even heretical—the culprits being Pope John XXIII and those bishops and cardinals in league with him. Thus, as Pope Francis is both the Pope of the Church, and yet the leader of a potentially schismatic church, so the Council is both an authentic Council, and yet one that has, through its documents, provoked a schismatic church, one that, in its teaching on faith and morals, is contrary to previous Councils and magisterial teaching. In so doing, Vatican II has lost its magisterial legitimacy.
Continued below.
https://www.catholicworldreport.com...o-archbishop-viganos-letter-about-vatican-ii/
I very much appreciate Archbishop Viganò taking the time to respond to my article that appeared in Inside the Vatican on July 27, 2020. However, I found his response, posted on August 10th at Inside the Vatican, disappointing, for he was evasive, and did not address the points I made, but rather made a further case for his own position. He hardly mentioned what I termed the Spirit’s “severe grace,” that followed upon Vatican II, and he entirely passed over what I termed the Spirit’s “beneficent grace” that was the direct result of Vatican II. In this light, I will now make my response to his letter.
First, instead of addressing my Inside the Vatican article, the archbishop brings to the fore a piece I wrote for The Catholic Thing (October 8, 2019). He does so because he thinks he can turn my own argument there against me, that is, to falsify what I wrote in Inside the Vatican, and so use it to promote his own highly ideological agenda. This is a very clever tactic, but one that does not work.
In my Catholic Thing article, I argued that Pope Francis, although the Pontiff of the Catholic Church, has become, for all practical purposes, the leader of those elements within the Church that are verging on schism, such as the bishops of Germany. Archbishop Viganò attempts to interpret my description of this double role as my dividing Pope Francis (the Pontiff) from Jorge Mario Bergoglio, the “exuberant” Argentinian. The archbishop then argues, in his letter to me, that the same can be said of the Second Vatican Council, that is, that the Council, while an authentic ecumenical council, ended up promoting an agenda that was schismatic and even heretical—the culprits being Pope John XXIII and those bishops and cardinals in league with him. Thus, as Pope Francis is both the Pope of the Church, and yet the leader of a potentially schismatic church, so the Council is both an authentic Council, and yet one that has, through its documents, provoked a schismatic church, one that, in its teaching on faith and morals, is contrary to previous Councils and magisterial teaching. In so doing, Vatican II has lost its magisterial legitimacy.
Continued below.
https://www.catholicworldreport.com...o-archbishop-viganos-letter-about-vatican-ii/
