P
Pulvis
Guest
Well, Walter Cardinal Kasper made the statement in 2013 that the ambiguities were in the documents intentionally as a compromise between the different camps:I should clarify that the reason I won’t speculate is because I would be judging the interior motives of the council fathers in chosing to include a non-authoritative statement, with an often overlooked footnote that says it’s not binding, in a document as important as a Dogmatic Constituion, that will be read all over the world for centuries. A non-binding statement is not necessarily the mind of the Church, but potentially just the mind of whichever member(s) of our beloved hierarchy made the statement, and can be influenced by circumstances specific to that time and place.
renewamerica.com/columns/abbott/130613