L
Logan
Guest
What are your opinions on the late Michael Davies? Was he good for traditional Catholicism or not? I have heard many different opinions on him.
In my opinion he, like most had good and bad points.What are your opinions on the late Michael Davies? Was he good for traditional Catholicism or not? I have heard many different opinions on him.
Well the two issues (Lefebvre and Religious Liberty) are not two minor issues, but two major ones. I believe Davies was wrong on both, so to me he was not even close to one of the great “thinkers” or whatever else you want to say about him. Sorry!!!Many great scholars have been wrong about certain things. However, they are not discarded because of this; rather, their views are evaluated based on everything they wrote, not just on what they got wrong. You cannot discard everything because of a few questionable views. It would be like throwing the baby out with the bath water.
Michael Davies was a great contemporary commentator on Church affairs. I agree with many of his views, although I disagree with some of his stances regarding Vatican II. However, I do not discard all of his theories and thoughts because of this.
Saying an ecumenical council taught error, and defending an Archbishop who was clearly wrong and disobiedient, in my opinion doesnt make you great.A great man. Of course he’s not infallible, but if most people had listened we would not be in this mess.
He never said that the council taught error. That is from his detractors. The usual suspects.Saying an ecumenical council taught error, and defending an Archbishop who was clearly wrong and disobiedient, in my opinion doesnt make you great.
Um yes I read his book on religious liberty and he emphatically said that Vatican II’s teaching cannot be reconciled with previous teaching. I believe he is/was dead wrong about that and his support of Archbishop Lefebvre.He never said that the council taught error. That is from his detractors. The usual suspects.
Have you really listened to him or read something by him?
Well, if he said that I belive he’s wrong too but I doubt that’s exactly what he said.Um yes I read his book on religious liberty and he emphatically said that Vatican II’s teaching cannot be reconciled with previous teaching. I believe he is/was dead wrong about that and his support of Archbishop Lefebvre.
He did. I will try to get you quotes today, but I’m barbecuing and drinking beer, so it might be tough. However, wikepedia claims Davies was critical of Lefebvre(I just looked it up) for consecrating the bishops without Papal permission. I didnt know that. If that is true then I would have a better opinion of Mr. Davies (I pray his soul is in heaven by the way). Let me try to get you quotes from Davies and his book. I have his book somewhere around here.Well, if he said that I belive he’s wrong too but I doubt that’s exactly what he said.
Vatican II’s document didnt contradict any previous teaching. Please do a search on Religious Liberty and Father William Most and he comapres the texts and shows that VII’s teaching is compatible.Mr. Davies is right about Vatican II’s contradiction on religious freedom with that document.
He’s right because Vatican II was a pastoral council and not a dogmatic council. Vatican II issued no new dogma, defended no dogma and did not use infallibility.
Vatican II’s document on religious freedom was not issued with infallibility. It did not have the protection of the Holy Spirit.
Is this the same Michael Davies who wrote 3 books defending Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre (SSPX schismatic), and books with titles like "Liturgical Shipwreck, “Litugical Time Bombs in Vatican II?” Doesn’t sound like we was good to me.What are your opinions on the late Michael Davies? Was he good for traditional Catholicism or not? I have heard many different opinions on him.
Since you have not produced any valid references for your opinion, I guess it is safe to say we can either discount it or call it erroneous.He did. I will try to get you quotes today, but I’m barbecuing and drinking beer, so it might be tough. However, wikepedia claims Davies was critical of Lefebvre(I just looked it up) for consecrating the bishops without Papal permission. I didnt know that. If that is true then I would have a better opinion of Mr. Davies (I pray his soul is in heaven by the way). Let me try to get you quotes from Davies and his book. I have his book somewhere around here.
I know a few people who disagree. Well, I don’t actually know them.… Doesn’t sound like we was good to me.
Wait a second. First of all, Vatican II was not an infallible council; it was authoritative, but not infallible (must we go through this againSaying an ecumenical council taught error, and defending an Archbishop who was clearly wrong and disobiedient, in my opinion doesnt make you great.