There is no question that the SSPX hold the Council to be in error. That is plain on their website where they catalogue its supposed errors. See:
sspx.org/SSPX_FAQs/q6_vaticanII.htm
Their point is that the Council did not hold itself to be infalllible, but since it issued two dogmatic constitutions that’s a conclusion that’s hard to avoid. And that brings me back to my earlier point, assuming the Lefebvrites are correct,(for the sake of argument) then an ecumenical council is in error as is the post Vatican II magisterium of the popes. And how could that mess possibly be sorted out and preserve a sense of respect for the Magisterium’s integrity. I would like to see how the SSPX wants to handle such a situation. This needs a response from supporters of the SSPX.
C.
An Ecumenical Council is only infallible when it proclaims or decrees an article of faith or morals. Vatican II was not a council about faith. It was really a council for the benefit of the bishops. It was to help the bishops adopt a pastoral praxis that would respond to the needs of the Church in the modern world.
That being said, it must also be understood that an Ecumenical Council can be about anything that the pope puts on the agenda. This is what Pope John XXIII put on the agenda, the renewal of pastoral life. The Council does not have to carry the weight of extraordinary infallibility, because it is not defining doctrine. However, it does carry the weight of ordinary infallibility whent it bases its teachings on dogmas and doctrines that have been proclaimed infallibly.
Here is the problem. Many of Traditionalists have some difficulty understanding the Church as she understands herself. In other words, they have difficulty understanding what the Church is saying in her own language. I believe that I mentioned before that Fr. Benedict G. and Fr. Wade M. and Fr. Corapi have all said that the average lay person whould pick up and read and go to school. Because with the increasing amount of communication, the laity has access to many eclesial writings, but not always the right training and it is being read very literally, when it is not intended to be read literally.
The other night Fr. Pacwa made apoint of this. He was talking abou this very question, "Could the Council be in error and thus the Magisterium?’ His answer was, “absolutely not.” The Council is protected by the Ordinary Magisterium of the Church, while Archbishop Lefebvre is not, because no individual bishop constitutes the Magisterium. “You must be in communion with the Holy Father.” The moment that a Catholic breaks that communion, he is no longer protected by the grace. The Archbishop disobeyed the mandate regarding ordination. That done, he is no longer a legitimate respresentative of the Church, as are none of the SSPX bishops. even though they are back in the Church.
If one is not a legal representative of the Church, one has no authority declare that a Council and the subsequent popes are in error, since the Council and the popes are in communion with each other. This is what Pope Benedict wants the SSPX bishops to accept when he says that they must accept the teaching authority of the Council. It need not be extraordinarilly infallible to carry the weight of teaching authority. And much of what it said is based on doctrine.
Also, much of what it laid aside was not based on doctrine, but on disciplines of previous popes and councils. Just as much of what this council has said are disciplines that do not bind future popes and councils. As Fr. Pacwa was saying and I agree, because a pope uses words such as “We proclaim; in perpetuity; for all time,” and so forth, they are binding until it is changed by another pope or council, except if it’s a matter of dogma. He explained that the form of the liturgy is not dogma, but tradition. It contains dogma and it is part of Sacred Tradition and should be treated with great reverence. I agree with him on that too.
But we do have to read what the Church writes about herself as she means it. This would reduce debate and speed up reunification. Let us pray for this.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
