Paraphrasing, that could be a maxim for Catholics struggling with V2:The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions.
That one is confusing but mathematically speaking, if something subsists in something it is part of something or whole thing. Empty set subsists in everything and everything subsists in itself. It does not say that there is Church of Christ outside Catholic Church.My own view is that all the problems of Vatican II are distilled in a single word: Subsistit
It would be great if “subsistit” was a mathematical term but unfortunately it is not. It is a philosophical term with connotations of “underlies” .mathematically speaking,
I see. Does “underlies” not include itself? In other words, can we say something underlies in itself?It would be great if “subsistit” was a mathematical term but unfortunately it is not. It is a philosophical term with connotations of “underlies” .
Your OP asked a question and I answered it. And, I don’t have to read an article when I already know the answer. Nobody should read OnePeterFive because they are toxic to faith.I was presenting an article, not asking. I don’t think you read it.
They actually defended Vatican II pretty well there. At the same time, this was discussion about article. If you mean to engage in discussion without reading some view it’s strange at best. We also ought to judge opinions by opinions. Martin Luther said great things about Virgin Mary and we don’t condemn those things… but that does not change fact he is heretic. You can’t dismiss something just because certain people said it. This is about actual arguments and points being made not about who makes them.Your OP asked a question and I answered it. And, I don’t have to read an article when I already know the answer. Nobody should read OnePeterFive because they are toxic to faith.
No, read the title. “Are Catholics Bound to Assent to Vatican II?”At the same time, this was discussion about article.
Yeah exactly- it’s the title, not the post. It’s akin to reading half of the post to answer. You can’t seriously engage in conversation like that. Notice that you can’t even quote the title in your posts meaning it isn’t supposed to be what you actually respond to.No, read the title. “Are Catholics Bound to Assent to Vatican II?”
There was no commentary in the OP other than that question. I don’t need to read OnePeterFive and I don’t read LifeSiteNews and I don’t need to listen to Taylor Marshall or the Remnant or the Fatima Center or you name it to answer this question.Yeah exactly- it’s the title, not the post. It’s akin to reading half of the post to answer.
No one is forcing you to do that, but in discussion about certain article this is probably not helpful approach. Anyhow if you mean to judge opinions by their authors and not by content…I don’t need to read OnePeterFive and I don’t read LifeSiteNews and I don’t need to listen to Taylor Marshall or the Remnant or the Fatima Center or you name it to answer this question.
I am a traditionalist just as Bishop Robert Barron
Vatican II document Nostra Aetate was written by Priest who was later laicized, lived in openly homosexual relationships and supported LGBT. Do we disregard that Vatican II document because of that?
No, not because of that. I don’t think it’s logical to judge content by the author. Protestants helped to create current Mass and I don’t reject it either- it doesn’t actually matter who helped create it.Do you dismiss Nostra Aetate because of this priest’s behavior?
I don’t judge OnePeterFive because of their personal behavior either. I judge them as they are toxic to the faith just as the other groups are that I have mentioned.No, not because of that. I don’t think it’s logical to judge content by the author.
Thing is that you judge their post by fact they wrote it. Priest who wrote Nostra Aetate became toxic to faith also… parallel here is that you have problem with author and judge their content by that.I don’t judge OnePeterFive because of their personal behavior either. I judge them as they are toxic to the faith just as the other groups are that I have mentioned.
No it was the title of an article. I do the same thing with news articles for the most part. If you had read the article you would have seen a balanced perspective, one I think makes a lot of sense.Your OP asked a question and I answered it. And, I don’t have to read an article when I already know the answer. Nobody should read OnePeterFive because they are toxic to faith.
No, it’s not about any of them individually. I am talking about the content/purpose/ slant of OnePeterFive that is toxic. Noestra Aetate isn’t toxic to the faith. The priest’s personal witness became toxic.Thing is that you judge their post by fact they wrote it.
Next time you should put some commentary in your post instead of just posting an article.No it was the title of an article.
So to answer the question of the title of the article. Yes, we need to assent to Vatican II.When the link displays the title of the article I don’t feel the need to.