Tuesday, July 10, 2007

Religious Indifferentist Interpretations of Vatican II Denounced by CDF

New Document Released from the Congregation for the Doctrine on the Faith

Dealing with the Question of whether or not the New Document Released from the Congregation for the Doctrine on the Faith">Catholic Church is One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic. Dispelling the heresies that all "churches" in particular protestant gatherings are equivalent to the Catholic Church.

(as read on Catholic World News).

These are a few of my favorite things:

First Question: Did the Second Vatican Council change the Catholic doctrine on the Church?

Response: The Second Vatican Council neither changed nor intended to change this doctrine, rather it developed, deepened and more fully explained it.

How many hundreds of times have we heard, "...but Vatican II changed all that"? Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

Fifth Question: Why do the texts of the Council and those of the Magisterium since the Council not use the title of "Church" with regard to those Christian Communities born out of the Reformation of the sixteenth century?

Response: According to Catholic doctrine, these Communities do not enjoy apostolic succession in the sacrament of Orders, and are, therefore, deprived of a constitutive element of the Church. These ecclesial Communities which, specifically because of the absence of the sacramental priesthood, have not preserved the genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic Mystery19 cannot, according to Catholic doctrine, be called "Churches" in the proper sense20.


Edward said...

I know, don't ya' love it?
Of course the biggest problem here is the misunderstanding of VII in itself: the first and most unique Council in the entire history of the Church. A "pastoral" Council.

It contains no pronunciation of dogma or doctrine whatsoever.

Doctrine cannot "change" in the first place.

Concerning doctrine, dogma or any teaching of the Church, VII may be utterly ignored in its entirety.
Because only a dogmatic, teaching Council is capable of expanding or clarifying already established dogma or doctrine. And as VII clearly stated from the get go that it is NOT a dogmatic Council, anything it has to 'pronounce' upon any subject is utterly worthless in so far as the Church teaching is concerned. For it carries no definitive or authoritative 'weight', if you will, to do so as it was clearly intended NOT to be a teaching, definitive Council.
THAT'S the working of the Holy Ghost.
But for years now most of us have been duped.

NCTradCatholic said...

Righto. It was an attempt to present the Church in a way that "modern man" would more easily comprehend and appreciate, and to stimulate renewed vigor among the faithful and religious. Apparently John XXIII also hoped for reconciliation with the Eastern Orthodox as well. All worthy goals, but certainly not rising to the authoritative level of dogmatic councils.