Vatican II not infallible??

Paul S said:

The problem many people have with Vatican II is that it appears to change many things the Church previously taught. If you carefully study the documents, and view them in light of previous Councils, they are consistent with previous teaching, although with a more positive spin.

With previous Councils, it was completely clear what they taught - just look for the anathema. There also wasn't any worry about offending anyone - if a teaching was heresy, it was called heresy. Protestant denominations were heretical, not "ecclesial communities with part of the truth". While some Protestant beliefs are indeed true, that sort of statement combined with liberal bishops leads to indifferentism and a bad kind of ecumenism.

With Vatican II, it seems you have to go through a lot of mental and verbal gymnastics to make its teachings fit, and that's opened the door for the "spirit of Vatican II" and all the craziness over the past 40 years.

Click to expand...

NDIrish said:

D'Ann, when you research these kinds of issues, make sure you are reading reputable sources. There are lots of "traditional Catholic" sources out there that perverts history and Church teachings.

Now, that being said, I do consider myself a traditional Catholic and think this is worthy research...just be careful, that's all. Asking questions on this forum is sure to get answers from various viewpoints, which can only help in keeping you grounded.

Click to expand...

plainswolf said:

You know the old term "Give em an inch and they'll take a mile" well this seems to be the case in the aftermath of Vatican II. Since the wording, the documents of it are not seem as precise and clear as they could be, then any renegade theologian can interpret it anyway the wind blows him. It should, as the Church teaches, be interpreted in light of previous Church teachings...

J.M.J.
Mark

Click to expand...

By that reasoning, Jesus should have simply obeyed the Pharisess and shouldn't have rebuked them. After all they were the "popes" of their ages. Like wise, Paul should have just obeyed Peter and shouldn't have rebuked him when he was not acting according to the teachings.

St. Catherin told the Pope that he would go to hell if he did not return the Papacy to Rome. Should St. Catherin simply obey the Pope because he said so in spite of he going against The Church?

I agree debiwebi, we must obey..but we must obey The Church, not deviations of churchmen and/or popes.

Yes, the Pope and churchmen can and do act in ways contrary to the Church, this is well documented across the history of The Chruch and easily seen today. Neither the Pope nor Churchmen are diivne, they are also bound by conspuscience like us and as such can also fall to sin.

Click to expand...

Asimis said:

Opinion? No, this is not opinion. These are well defined dogmas that are as clear as crystal water.

Outside the Church there is no salvation:

-The members of the Church are those who have validly received the Sacrament of Baptism and who are not separated from the unity of the confession of the Faith, and from the unity of the lawful communion of the Church. (Sent. certa.)

-Membership of the Church is necessary for all men for salvation. (De fide.)

There are also some quotes by Saints and Popes, there are more but lets see:

"There is but one universal Church of the faithful, outside of which no one at all is saved." Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, 1215 A.D.

"We declare,say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff."Pope Boniface VIII, the Papal Bull " Unam Sanctum", 1302 A.D.

"The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatic's, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with Her. and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgiving, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian solder. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, not even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church." Pope Eugene IV, the Papal Bull " Cantate Domino", 1441 A.D

" It is in the Catholic Church alone which retains true worship. This is the fountain of truth , this is the abode of the faith, this is the Temple of God; into which if anyone shall not enter, or from which anyone shall go out , he is a stranger to the hope of life and eternal salvation." Lactantius Died 310 A.D. The Divine Institutes

Baptism is Necesary for Salvation:

-Baptism by water (Baptismus fluminis) is, since the promulgation of the Gospel, necessary for all men without exception, for salvation. (De fide.)

" He that believeth and is Baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be condemned."Mark 16:16

" Jesus answered: Amen, amen, I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter the Kingdom of God." John 3:5

Problems with the Novus Ordo:

Communion in the hand:

"The Body of Christ must not be touched by anyone, other than a Consecrated Priest. No other person has the right to touch it, except in case of extreme necessity.” (Read “Inestimabile Donum”).St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274 AD)

"The fact that only the Priest gives Holy Communion with his consecrated hands is an apostolic tradition." The Council of Trent (1545-1565 AD)

"To touch the sacred species and to distribute them with their own hands is a privilege of the ordained." (Dominicae Cenae, 11).Pope John Paul II

Communion in the hand betrays the dogma of the Real Presence. Also the fact that people no longer kneel to receive commuion.

No mention of Mary and The Saints:

This one should be obvious to anyone.

I could also go on about how the new churches that are being built are also violating several dogmas that have been defined by previous councils. That is no statues, relics, images, etc.

There are many more but these are good enought.

Click to expand...

plainswolf said:

Hi D'Ann

I couldn't tell ya.. I was merely posting what this page had advertised from this book. I have never heard of it till today and was wondering if anyone else has? The Pope I'm sure is most aware of his predecessors encyclicals dealing with free-masonry, which membership in even to this day is ground for excommunication for any Catholic..

J.M.J.
Mark

Click to expand...

debiwebi said:

You know you are talking about and of someone that has in this thread said that they are very new to Catholicism.... I also find it funny that you take one part of my statement but then leave out the part in which I then say that we should be consulting our Priest, and that we should be reading and doing research on our own too...

IOWs, when in doubt, obey the Church... The reason for this is because the Church will prevail.... The Holy Spirit will make sure that it protects tha documents that come out of the Church... You seem to disagree with this.... I find this extremely distressing.

You are now questioning my Faith, and how I achieved it. What is more you are questioning the accuracy of it which I find insulting....

The Church is the TRUE CHURCH, given to us by the Lord and protected by him thorugh the Holy Spirit, with this belief I have unwavering Faith.... I do not agree with the abuses that have taken place of VII but, at the same time, I believe that whether ambiguous or not, there is a need and a reason for it. I believe that the Documents themselves are guarded by the Holy Spirit.... Whether or not I can see the purpose that they have now or not, that is not my call, that is the Lord's....

In my belief that the Lord guides the Church, I must also believe that in everything that is done through her there is reasoning that it is allowed to exist... That for the Lord, He has his reasons. That these reasons will be shown.... That until such time I am to do exactly what we have done, remember who we are, Catholics....

Everything that you posted in the second quote in this post, is not part of the original DOCUMENT itself.... Again I will ask you, show me where in the original document that it DIRECTLY, defies our Traditions, Sacred Scriptura, Dogmas, or Doctrines....

Click to expand...

karenmarie said:

WOW!! arghhh!! *ripping hair out of head*...ok i finally get it! i left protestantism thinking i was getting rid of all the fanatics in my life....only to come the Catholic church to find just as many fanatics. Stop living by the letter of the law. Stop being so legalistic. sigh!!! Fanatics make me crazy!! i cant read this junk anymore!!

Click to expand...

Communion in the hand betrays the dogma of the Real Presence.

Click to expand...

Asimis said:

I provided you with the sources that you demanded for me to back up my "assertions" and now you have gone into a personal rant on how I am questioning your faith and what not. Like I said before we are to obey The Church not the deviations of popes and Churchmen.

Click to expand...

debiwebi said:

Show me where in this Document it implies this? Because I have been through this whole document and it does not imply this anywhere......This is not the real quote....

Here is the real quote:
To touch the sacred species and to distribute them with their own hands is a privilege of the ordained, one which indicates an active participation in the ministry of the Eucharist. It is obvious that the Church can grant this faculty to those who are neither priests nor deacons, as is the case with acolytes in the exercise of their ministry, especially if they are destined for future ordination, or with other lay people who are chosen for this to meet a just need, but always after an adequate preparation.




http://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/JP2DOMIN.HTM

Your quote is a list quote not the actual quote attributed to JPII.... The one from Thomas Aquinas is also the same way...

They are list quotes that are used to present the viewpoints that the site believes is being expressed, not necessarily what is being expressed, and most certainly they are not direct quotes of the supposed authors of the quotes....

Click to expand...

Michelina said:

The Church teaches that we are bound to obey the Pope and treat what he 'decrees' with religious assent, whether or not we agree with them, understand them or like them.

Click to expand...

NDIrish said:

Michelina, would this still hold if a Pope decreed something such as homosexual sex being acceptable?

Click to expand...

Asimis said:

The quote has the same effect debiwebi

It also confirms what Aquinas said about lay people touching the sacred species, that is that it can only be done in case of extreme necesity and like the very quote by John Paul II says, "but always after an adequate preparation." . There is nothing aproving the abuse that is seen at NO Mass.

You now acuse people of distorting quotes and the like, this is nothing of the sort. The facts are all there in the open and so are the teachings and dogmas.

Click to expand...

debiwebi said:

I will say this again show me in the Document of VII itself where it defies any of these things Directly....This still has not been done...

You have shown me a great many quotes of people that have said things but not the document itself and where it is in contradiction....

What you are opposed to is the abuses that have taken place and that is fine because so am I, because the document itself is not the fault, it is those that have done the abuses that are fault.... In this there is a huge difference...

Click to expand...