Are the documents of Vatican II the only untouchable Teachings?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Maximian
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Maximian

Guest
Today archbishop Viganò has written:

“Vatican II is regarded as untouchable, but this does not apply – according to its supporters – to any other magisterial document or to Sacred Scripture. We have read endless addresses in which the defenders of the Council have written off the Canons of Trent , the Syllabus of Error s of Blessed Pius IX, the encyclical Pascendi of St. Pius X, and Humanae Vitae and Ordinatio Sacerdotalis of Paul VI as “outdated.””

Does anyone agree with him, that this is a widespread view among today’s Catholics?
 
Maximian said:
Vatican II is regarded as untouchable, but this does not apply – according to its supporters – to any other magisterial document or to Sacred Scripture.
Click to expand...
. . . . He is probably spending too much time on the internet. At least, that’s the way it comes across, the parts I managed to read, as Traditionalist talking points with little basis in reality. The same as most internet . . . critics.

His argument is . . . self-refuting on the surface, and there is no need for me to . . . read the entire . . . piece.
 
Last edited:
So you have never met anyone who thinks Vatican II has superseded earlier magisterial teaching?

I ask because I am constantly coming across this idea.
 
1Lord1Faith said:
His argument is quite lame.
Click to expand...
I don’t see that this is an “argument “ as such. It’s an observation of what he believes to be a common attitude, that V2 documents are under a special protection which other magisterial teaching are not.

I have certainly met this view quite often but I m not sure it is prevalent.
 
Maximian said:
So you have never met anyone who thinks Vatican II has superseded earlier magisterial teaching?

I ask because I am constantly coming across this idea.
Click to expand...
He’s making a blanket statement. No qualifiers, just across-the-board “this is what the supporters of Vatican II say.” Blatant exaggeration, at the very least.
 
Vigano seems to be getting good at shooting himself in the foot. He kills any legitimacy in his premise in the first line (emphasis mine):
Maximian said:
“Vatican II is regarded as untouchable, but this does not apply – according to its supporters – to any other magisterial document or to Sacred Scripture.
Click to expand...
No one in their right mind would ever claim sacred scripture is changeable or superseded by a council document. Who is it that he believes makes such an outlandish claim? (I think we all know the answer — no one, and he knows it but he needed some sensationalism to keep the spotlight on himself.)

Prayers for this poor man; I think he’s putting his soul in great jeopardy.
 
Maximian said:
I ask because I am constantly coming across this idea.
Click to expand...
I suspect it’s because the people you meet and talk to all tend to think like yourself on this issue.

If I went to the local traditionalist parishes or the local TLMs, I’m sure I’d meet people who agree with this view. But there are only about 1 to 3 such parishes in the Archdiocese, compared with dozens of OF parishes where nobody ever thinks about this stuff.
 
Tis_Bearself said:
suspect it’s because the people you meet and talk to all tend to think like yourself on this issue.
Click to expand...
You have misunderstood. I am not constantly meeting people who think like Archbishop Vigano. I am constantly meeting people who think like those he is describing. The overwhelming majority of Catholics of my acquaintance are regular attendees of the Ordinary Form.
 
Maximian said:
I am constantly meeting people who think like those he is describing.
Click to expand...
I doubt you do. @Cor_ad_Cor explained it well above. You are just making straw men out of anyone who you think doesn’t agree with you, and attributing beliefs to them which they don’t have. . . .
 
Last edited:
I do agree with him. It seems like I have had countless debates or conversations here on CAF with many people who very easily, can “interpret” scripture or follow through with modern “interpretations of scripture by recent church leaders” in ways that do not align with the historical positions of the church or scripture. Rather than accept the historical position, it seems people constantly need to break new ground, find a loophole, try to justify changes through relative morality etc…
Here are the hot topics often disputed:

Capital Punishment
Ordaining Women
LGBT Beliefs
Pachamama
Infant Baptism
ExtraEcclesiam Nulla Salus
Condemnation of Sin/ evil
Socialism/communism

Amongst many more…
 
I might be wrong, but I think the Archbishop is referring to the heretical idea by some that newer Councils are more important than older Councils.

I’ve encountered many people (clergy included) who have this view.
 
ConcernedConvert said:
Here are the hot topics often disputed:

Capital Punishment
Ordaining Women
LGBT Beliefs
Pachamama
Infant Baptism
ExtraEcclesiam Nulla Salus
Condemnation of Sin/ evil
Socialism/communism
Click to expand...
And the Church’s teachings on these things weren’t changed by Vatican II. So why are we blaming the Council? And why are some hanging on the every word of Archbishop Vigano when such brilliant and holy men as Pope St. John Paul II, Pope Benedict XVI, and Ven. Archbishop Fulton Sheen were such staunch supporters of the Council? I’d hardly call any of them modernists.
 
Maximian said:
So you have never met anyone who thinks Vatican II has superseded earlier magisterial teaching?

I ask because I am constantly coming across this idea.
Click to expand...
Other than possibly Humanae Vitae among the older group of Catholics , hardly anybody at OF parishes even knows what all those things Vigano listed are.

Ordinary Catholics don’t sit around reading old Catholic documents, unless they are converts who were on some kind of truth-seeking mission before they joined the Church. Such documents are only known by scholars, traditionalists, and the handful of Catholics who get really into reading and learning about the faith.

People are mostly just aware of things that happen in their own lifetime and maybe in their parents’ lifetime.
 
Tis_Bearself said:
Ordinary Catholics don’t sit around reading old Catholic documents
Click to expand...
Neither do most radical traditionalists. They just regurgitate the same cherry-picked phrases taken out of context that they picked up from alt-Catholic sites. Like “Extra ecclesiam nulla salus”.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top