Critics of Councils

  • Thread starter Thread starter LaRoza
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

LaRoza

Guest
Someone recently said we should not criticise councils (VII was the one in particular, but I assume this means all councils).

I would like to know why this statement was made. If people truly believe the councils of the Church are above criticism (not Church dogmas or teachings of course), then I have some really interesting council related materials to post to ask them about it…
 
LaRoza said:
Someone recently said we should not criticise councils (VII was the one in particular, but I assume this means all councils).

I would like to know why this statement was made. If people truly believe the councils of the Church are above criticism (not Church dogmas or teachings of course), then I have some really interesting council related materials to post to ask them about it…
Click to expand...
Who give any laity the right to criticize a Ecumenical Council??? Only the Pope can give the authority for someone to criticize the council.
 
LaRoza said:
Someone recently said we should not criticise councils (VII was the one in particular, but I assume this means all councils).
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t make the assumption. VII is commonly treated as a “super-council” that is above criticism while all other councils, bulls, etc., are “outdated” or explained away.
 
tobinatorstark said:
Who give any laity the right to criticize a Ecumenical Council??? Only the Pope can give the authority for someone to criticize the council.
Click to expand...
I didn’t ask that. There is no “right” for anything. The question is, is it forbidden as the person seemed to think.
 
LaRoza said:
First Council of the Lateran clearly forbade spam 😉 Reporting
Click to expand...
reporting what? I asked you a question and you totally twisted it around. We are not to criticize the councils. You want proof that you can’t and I want proof that I can.
 
The Ecumenical Councils are free from doctrinal error as they are protected by the Holy Spirit. However, Council documents are written up by men, who may use clumsy language, or decide not to write something down (lack of sccholastic terminology etc), which people may sincerely criticize.
 
I wonder how many people criticize V2 when their objections are actually to abuses done in the name of the undefined “Spirit of V2”.
 
Cluny said:
I wonder how many people criticize V2 when their objections are actually to abuses done in the name of the undefined “Spirit of V2”.
Click to expand...
Most. V2 does have some things in its texts which are somewhat odd though as well.
 
Are you referring to the thread I started, titled “You must not challenge the NO Mass?”

If so, I just have to point out that the thread was started as an honest question after I saw a video of Cardinal Arinze. Did you read that thread?
 
I think the answer lies in what is meant by criticism. Some of what each council addresses is dogma, some is doctrine and some is discipline. Surely we may not agree with the prudence of any doctrine. We are also allowed objection of conscience for doctrine, although the burden is placed on us to reconcile our opinion with the teaching of the Church. Dogma must be accepted with Catholic faith. Yet even at that, the prudence of defining a dogma at a certain time could be questioned.

I think a better question is one of defying an ecumenical council. This should not happen. In fact, when we disagree with something we are afforded a better opportunity for humility and obedience. As far as the rank and file laity is concerned, we need to remember the Church is not a democracy; it is a family. We need to mind our parents.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top