A
Askmea
Guest
I’ve been debating with a member of the SSPX and he keeps telling me that faithful Catholics are not required to believe it. If that’s not true could you guys give me some church documents to back that up.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
T
Thom18
Guest
We must accept the Council. “Picking and choosing” is not a luxury a Catholic has. What do they disagree with in particular?
C
commenter
Guest
Welcome to CAF. I hope you find it interesting.
A
Askmea
Guest
How can I back that up though with evidence? I’ve already mentioned the Pope Paul VI requiring all Catholics to accept it, but he says it’s just the personal opinions of popes and that it was a misuse of the ordinary magisterium.
T
Thom18
Guest
What more evidence do they want besides the authority of the Magisterium?How can I back that up though with evidence? I’ve already mentioned the Pope Paul VI requiring all Catholics to accept it, but he says it’s just the personal opinions of popes and that it was a misuse of the ordinary magisterium.
A
Askmea
Guest
Well ultimately his argument boils down to since it used the ordinary magisterium of the church that it did not define any dogma so it is not required. Also that the ordinary magisterium can’t define dogma so it truly doesn’t matter.
A
Askmea
Guest
What I’m ultimately trying to find is official church documents requiring the faithful to submit to the ordinary magisterial authority of the Catholic Church.
C
commenter
Guest
It’s likely that person would either not consider as authoritative any documents you cited, or else say the documents support something else, not V2.
What you can do:
What you can do:
- Ask them if the world in general got a lot more secular in the 1960s. They will likely agree it did. This suggests problems after V2 are not all attributed to V2, and there was a need to address worsening conditions. So it may be partly successful.
- Point out that all the major dissenters in the 1960s 1970s got their education, and were already tenured Before the Council. The good old days weren’t so good.
- Ask if they read the actual documents. What specifically do they disagree with. 90 percent of the time people object not to the documents themselves but the implementation.
Last edited:
J
John_Martin
Guest
If you had such a document, would you not need another document to require you to submit to this document that required you to submit to the magisterium? And then a further document to require your submission to the second?What I’m ultimately trying to find is official church documents requiring the faithful to submit to the ordinary magisterial authority of the Catholic Church.
The fact is, you yourself are the official requiring submission to Vatican II - your baptismal and confirmational vows are where you swore obedience to the Church’s apostolic superiors.
If you were to wish to abandon your vows, none could enforce your obedience; the most the Church can do is treat you as a non-Catholic if you were to deny what is revealed as Catholic.
One who speaks for SSPX is delivering opinion to you rather than speaking with papal and magisterial authority. We vowed no obedience to opinions when baptized and confirmed, but only to our official apostolic superiors who have their “sentness” (apostleship) from our Lord, our King. SSPX is seeking to turn us aside to make a different way, just as Peter once tried to block the Lord Jesus from going to his death.
The papacy, the magisterium, is the Lord’s anointed, and we will, as we vowed, stand with his anointed as with our King and Lord.
A
Askmea
Guest
Definetly will do that. He seems to accept most pre-vatican 2 church documents. You got any that can help my side of the debate.
C
CRV
Guest
CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH PROFESSION OF FAITH
Search the above document using the term ‘ordinary’. It mentions ordinary and universal magisterium.
DOCTRINAL COMMENTARY ON THE CONCLUDING FORMULA OF THE PROFESSIO FIDEI (Document in first link above)
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
[ This commentary was issued coincident with the promulgation of " Ad tuendam fidem" by Pope John Paul II, modifying the Oriental and Latin codes of canon law.]
CCC #892
892 Divine assistance is also given to the successors of the apostles, teaching in communion with the successor of Peter, and, in a particular way, to the bishop of Rome, pastor of the whole Church, when, without arriving at an infallible definition and without pronouncing in a “definitive manner,” they propose in the exercise of the ordinary Magisterium a teaching that leads to better understanding of Revelation in matters of faith and morals. To this ordinary teaching the faithful "are to adhere to it with religious assent"422 which, though distinct from the assent of faith, is nonetheless an extension of it.
(422 cf Lumen Gentium #25)
Lumen Gentium #25
Although the individual bishops do not enjoy the prerogative of infallibility, they nevertheless proclaim Christ’s doctrine infallibly whenever, even though dispersed through the world, but still maintaining the bond of communion among themselves and with the successor of Peter, and authentically teaching matters of faith and morals, they are in agreement on one position as definitively to be held.(40*) This is even more clearly verified when, gathered together in an ecumenical council, they are teachers and judges of faith and morals for the universal Church, whose definitions must be adhered to with the submission of faith.(41*) [bold and italic in this paragraph is mine - the second vatican council was an ecumenical council.]
Search the above document using the term ‘ordinary’. It mentions ordinary and universal magisterium.
DOCTRINAL COMMENTARY ON THE CONCLUDING FORMULA OF THE PROFESSIO FIDEI (Document in first link above)
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
[ This commentary was issued coincident with the promulgation of " Ad tuendam fidem" by Pope John Paul II, modifying the Oriental and Latin codes of canon law.]
CCC #892
892 Divine assistance is also given to the successors of the apostles, teaching in communion with the successor of Peter, and, in a particular way, to the bishop of Rome, pastor of the whole Church, when, without arriving at an infallible definition and without pronouncing in a “definitive manner,” they propose in the exercise of the ordinary Magisterium a teaching that leads to better understanding of Revelation in matters of faith and morals. To this ordinary teaching the faithful "are to adhere to it with religious assent"422 which, though distinct from the assent of faith, is nonetheless an extension of it.
(422 cf Lumen Gentium #25)
Lumen Gentium #25
Although the individual bishops do not enjoy the prerogative of infallibility, they nevertheless proclaim Christ’s doctrine infallibly whenever, even though dispersed through the world, but still maintaining the bond of communion among themselves and with the successor of Peter, and authentically teaching matters of faith and morals, they are in agreement on one position as definitively to be held.(40*) This is even more clearly verified when, gathered together in an ecumenical council, they are teachers and judges of faith and morals for the universal Church, whose definitions must be adhered to with the submission of faith.(41*) [bold and italic in this paragraph is mine - the second vatican council was an ecumenical council.]
C
CRV
Guest
continuing on
Summary of Categories of Belief in ‘Professio fidei’ Authored By: Colin B. Donovan, STL Summary of Categories of Belief in Professio fidei [All quotes are from, and all paraphrases based upon, the Doctrinal Commentary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.] - scroll down to III. Authentic Ordinary Magisterium
What Are Extraordinary Magisterium and Ordinary Magisterium? By Rev. John Trigilio, Jr., Rev. Kenneth Brighenti
Decrees of the First Vatican Council - Pope Pius IX SESSION 4 : 18 July 1870
Chapter 3. On the power and character of the primacy of the Roman pontiff -
"So, then, if anyone says that the Roman pontiff has merely an office of supervision and guidance, and not the full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the whole church, and this not only in matters of faith and morals, but also in those which concern the discipline and government of the church dispersed throughout the whole world; or that he has only the principal part, but not the absolute fullness, of this supreme power; or that this power of his is not ordinary and immediate both over all and each of the churches and over all and each of the pastors and faithful: let him be anathema.
Summary of Categories of Belief in ‘Professio fidei’ Authored By: Colin B. Donovan, STL Summary of Categories of Belief in Professio fidei [All quotes are from, and all paraphrases based upon, the Doctrinal Commentary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.] - scroll down to III. Authentic Ordinary Magisterium
What Are Extraordinary Magisterium and Ordinary Magisterium? By Rev. John Trigilio, Jr., Rev. Kenneth Brighenti
Decrees of the First Vatican Council - Pope Pius IX SESSION 4 : 18 July 1870
Chapter 3. On the power and character of the primacy of the Roman pontiff -
"So, then, if anyone says that the Roman pontiff has merely an office of supervision and guidance, and not the full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the whole church, and this not only in matters of faith and morals, but also in those which concern the discipline and government of the church dispersed throughout the whole world; or that he has only the principal part, but not the absolute fullness, of this supreme power; or that this power of his is not ordinary and immediate both over all and each of the churches and over all and each of the pastors and faithful: let him be anathema.
P
phil19034
Guest
I don’t think that’s what priests of the SSPX would say. Their priests believe Vatican II was valid, however, they simply question the interpretation of some of the documents.I’ve been debating with a member of the SSPX and he keeps telling me that faithful Catholics are not required to believe it. If that’s not true could you guys give me some church documents to back that up.
NOTE: There are really two different SSPX groups.
- the regular SSPX
- the “SSPX Resistance” - which is a splinter group who believes the SSPX is too liberal
So be careful
C
commenter
Guest
Two documents by their namesake come to mind: pope St Pius X. His Encyclical on Catholic Action, and portions of his Encyclical on Pascendi, I think around sections 50 to maybe 53.
They refer to the crucial importance of the bishop Ordinary, functioning in direct unity with his pastors and people, as well as with other bishops and the Holy See. Vatican 2 is consistent with this. SSPX in it’s functioning is not consistent with this.
I’m sure there are other Encyclicals from Pius X, Leo XIII, and more recent popes prior to V2 that reaffirm the role of the bishop Ordinary, in union with the pope, pastors and laity; not in a vague symbolic unity (picture on wall) but actual functioning, with obedience, not a vague liaison. Are all those documents non binding too?
They refer to the crucial importance of the bishop Ordinary, functioning in direct unity with his pastors and people, as well as with other bishops and the Holy See. Vatican 2 is consistent with this. SSPX in it’s functioning is not consistent with this.
I’m sure there are other Encyclicals from Pius X, Leo XIII, and more recent popes prior to V2 that reaffirm the role of the bishop Ordinary, in union with the pope, pastors and laity; not in a vague symbolic unity (picture on wall) but actual functioning, with obedience, not a vague liaison. Are all those documents non binding too?
S
StudentMI
Guest
Yes but I believe there are different degrees of authority of some of the documents. The one on religious liberty is hotly debated, I know that. According to Cardinal Brandmuller there is room for discussion on some of the documents. And Fr Brian Harrison, whose theory on Dignatitis Humanae I believe is accurate, holds it’s not an infallible document and is open to discussion.
Last edited:
C
ConcernedConvert
Guest
Here is some info straight from their website. From what I have been told the problems are with the interpretations of the documents. I have to admit as well. There are some definite problems that have arisen that they had concerns about.
http://archives.sspx.org/SSPX_FAQs/q6_vatican_ii.htm
http://archives.sspx.org/SSPX_FAQs/q6_vatican_ii.htm
Last edited:
A
Aulef
Guest
Yes, we are as long as it doesn’t hurt dogmas of the Church. This applies to every type of Magisterium.
M
Maximian
Guest
The position the SSPX takes is that
(A) the Council was by its own definition pastoral not dogmatic
(B) therefore only things stated in the Council documents which the Church already held need to be accepted
This position is adopted by many traditionalists who are not SSPX adherents.
(A) the Council was by its own definition pastoral not dogmatic
(B) therefore only things stated in the Council documents which the Church already held need to be accepted
This position is adopted by many traditionalists who are not SSPX adherents.
C
commenter
Guest
There are people who work full time to keep the uncertainty pot simmering on V2. It’s a career.
Some are on the Left, such as National Catholic Reporter, Call to Action, and others. They use the “Spirit of Vatican 2” to justify their agendas.
Some are on the Right. Like those on the Left, they use “the pot is still simmering!” argument to justify their own independence from pope and bishop.
Religious organizations do everything they can to perpetuate their existence. “Stay in the organization just a little bit longer until this or that document is clarified. Things are still a little bit bubbling now.”
Trust me, neither the Left nor the Right want things to be clear. Ever. Better to change the subject to 2020, and what actions are prudent for Catholic individuals to take now.
Some are on the Left, such as National Catholic Reporter, Call to Action, and others. They use the “Spirit of Vatican 2” to justify their agendas.
Some are on the Right. Like those on the Left, they use “the pot is still simmering!” argument to justify their own independence from pope and bishop.
Religious organizations do everything they can to perpetuate their existence. “Stay in the organization just a little bit longer until this or that document is clarified. Things are still a little bit bubbling now.”
Trust me, neither the Left nor the Right want things to be clear. Ever. Better to change the subject to 2020, and what actions are prudent for Catholic individuals to take now.
Last edited:
K
K.e.williams22
Guest
The council in and of itself was not a bad thing. The results of it are what are messed up, and the people involved. We don’t have to necessarily like it, but as Catholics we must accept it. There were some very… Interesting figures, to put it nicely, involved in this council, and things were done… Interestingly, but yes we have to accept it.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.