Original Discarded Schemata for Vatican II

[TrueLight]

In defense of a validly called council by a valid Pope, I think we have to agree that what the Holy Ghost ordained for the church was the outcome of the council. I don’t profess to necessarily understand why but I do not discount the possibility that we do not see the full ramifications of the council at this point in time. Perhaps the revival of the love and respect of the traditional liturgy and practices could only have happened as a result of the council or a backlash against the abuse in its aftermath? Perhaps this movement will somehow be the catalyst for more conversions in the future?

A parallel would be the process involved in selecting a new Pope in conclave. We are not privy to the process which has (anecdotally) in the past been heated, cantankerous, and perhaps even dishonest in an isolated circumstance. But whomever walks out of the conclave is Pope regardless of how the Holy Ghost allowed the process to take place.

Very well said.

So it’s possible that God may allow certain things to happen – even negative things, because he sees the future and sees how one action will have a spiraling effect 300 years down the line. Macrovision vs. microvision.

If that is the case, then what is the point of speaking against anything?

 

[OraLabora]

How can you tell if the Holy Spirit approved a modern agenda (and how) or if it was the work of men?

I guess you have to place your faith in the Promise that Jesus made when He handed the Keys to Peter. Then one needs to discern if it’s an issue of doctrine, prudential judgment or pastoral concern.

Honestly these sorts of doctrinal wars do little to augment faith and charity. When they pop up and I get dragged in too far I try to remind myself of the Greatest Commandment, and ask myself if the argument will be beneficial in bringing me closer to God and I observance of that commandment. The answer is usually no but the result is usually that my own lack of humility allows me to be dragged in.

That said, I do think that the lack of respect and faith in the Barque of Peter displayed by the Lefebvristes and others like minded do betray a lack of faith in His promise to His Church.

The answer for me I think, when I get dragged in is to step back, pray, and try to work on my own inner conversion instead of worrying about doctrinal purity. I fail at least as often as I succeed though…

We need to rember that doctrinal arguments rarely make us better Christians. Faith, charity and deep inner conversion are what makes us better Christians.

 

[TrueLight]

We need to rember that doctrinal arguments rarely make us better Christians. Faith, charity and deep inner conversion are what makes us better Christians.

True. :sad_yes:

 

[giuseppeTO]

If that is the case, then what is the point of speaking against anything?

We still must do what Christ expects of us in each of our states of lives, as priests, religious, Bishops, parents, siblings, etc and certainly address error appropriately.

 

[Dollinger]

I guess you have to place your faith in the Promise that Jesus made when He handed the Keys to Peter. Then one needs to discern if it’s an issue of doctrine, prudential judgment or pastoral concern.

Honestly these sorts of doctrinal wars do little to augment faith and charity. When they pop up and I get dragged in too far I try to remind myself of the Greatest Commandment, and ask myself if the argument will be beneficial in bringing me closer to God and I observance of that commandment. The answer is usually no but the result is usually that my own lack of humility allows me to be dragged in.

That said, I do think that the lack of respect and faith in the Barque of Peter displayed by the Lefebvristes and others like minded do betray a lack of faith in His promise to His Church.

The answer for me I think, when I get dragged in is to step back, pray, and try to work on my own inner conversion instead of worrying about doctrinal purity. I fail at least as often as I succeed though…

We need to rember that doctrinal arguments rarely make us better Christians. Faith, charity and deep inner conversion are what makes us better Christians.

The Holy Fathers made doctrinal arguments at Oecumenical councils, they didnt accept things blindly saying “Only God knows, let’s pray and forget what we saw”.

 

[OraLabora]

The Holy Fathers made doctrinal arguments at Oecumenical councils, they didnt accept things blindly saying “Only God knows, let’s pray and forget what we saw”.

I’m very clearly speaking as a layperson on a faith walk. I make no pretenses at being a theologian. What I am is someone seeking God, peace, joy, and inner transformation. I am certainly no holy father. I believe we as laymen have enough information to be able to carry out His will even after Vatican II.

I hang around a bunch of Benedictine monks. They rarely if ever discuss doctrine. They do however teach us how to be holy men through our thoughts and deeds, through prayer and through humility. And through obedience. Not through constant challenging those who do have the mandate and qualifications to discuss doctrine, but with deep faith in Christ’s promise.

As was said, if that promise (the authority conferred on Peter and his successors) is false, as the anti-Vatican II crowd state implicitly in rejecting the Council, then indeed the atheists have been right all along.

Of course I believe in the promise, which is why I accept Vatican II. But not, however, it’s mis-application, which is another matter altogether.

God has a much grander purpose than all our bickering. We have to trust Him.

 

[Dollinger]

As was said, if that promise (the authority conferred on Peter and his successors) is false, as the anti-Vatican II crowd state implicitly in rejecting the Council, then indeed the atheists have been right all along.
.

Not if the promise to st Peter is not what you think it is, and not if the true Church is not the Vatican.

 

[jam070406]

I’m very clearly speaking as a layperson on a faith walk. I make no pretenses at being a theologian. What I am is someone seeking God, peace, joy, and inner transformation. I am certainly no holy father. I believe we as laymen have enough information to be able to carry out His will even after Vatican II.

I hang around a bunch of Benedictine monks. They rarely if ever discuss doctrine. They do however teach us how to be holy men through our thoughts and deeds, through prayer and through humility. And through obedience. Not through constant challenging those who do have the mandate and qualifications to discuss doctrine, but with deep faith in Christ’s promise.

As was said, if that promise (the authority conferred on Peter and his successors) is false, as the anti-Vatican II crowd state implicitly in rejecting the Council, then indeed the atheists have been right all along.

Of course I believe in the promise, which is why I accept Vatican II. But not, however, it’s mis-application, which is another matter altogether.

God has a much grander purpose than all our bickering. We have to trust Him.

It’s all good. The authorities in Rome have said that those doctrines on Ecumenism & religious liberty that Traditionalists find troublesome are not binding doctrines. The Holy Spirit indeed protects the Church.
I’m still not sure who you are referring to when you say those that reject the council though. And I don’t know why you jump to the conclusion that atheists would be right. This seems dramatic. What about the Orthodox?

 

[Cavaradossi]

It’s all good. The authorities in Rome have said that those doctrines on Ecumenism & religious liberty that Traditionalists find troublesome are not binding doctrines. The Holy Spirit indeed protects the Church.
I’m still not sure who you are referring to when you say those that reject the council though. And I don’t know why you jump to the conclusion that atheists would be right. This seems dramatic. What about the Orthodox?

Or at least some belief system with at least one god. I’d sooner believe in Zeus than believe that there is no God.

 

[wasserfall]

TrueLight:

How can you tell if the Holy Spirit approved a modern agenda (and how) or if it was the work of men?

It’s not a modern agenda but God’s agenda, and God is outside of time. If the agenda is not God’s agenda then it is the work of men and that makes our Church and our religion fraudulent, along with about half of society which happens to be built on the values taught by our religion.

Tim, this is not a supportable argument.

The Church does not teach that the outcome of an ecumenical council is the work of the Holy Spirit. It is entirely possible for an ecumenical council to teach error. What a council cannot do, however, is teach error authoritatively, that is, in a binding manner.

Speaking of the will of God, it is important to remember that we speak of both the sovereign will of God (i.e. that which God wishes) and the permissive will of God (i.e. that which God permits).

The results of the Second Vatican Council, like any council, are necessarily consistent with the permissive will of God. Even if the council makes mistakes and teaches error in a non-dogmatic, non-binding manner, it is permitted by God, and God can of course turn the error into a greater good, even though the error, in itself, is undesirable.

I think you make the mistake above of assuming that the outcome (or at least the documents) of the Second Vatican Council are the result of the sovereign will of God – as if the Holy Spirit directly inspired their writing, as the Holy Scripture is so inspired. If so, that is an error.

It is perfectly possible for sinful men to act contrary to the sovereign will of God, by the improper use of their free will, even if those men are writing schemata and drafting conciliar documents. What they cannot do is attempt to define error as dogma.

But as has been said many times by various persons with authority, such as our currently reigning Pope, the Second Vatican Council defined no new dogma whatsoever, and thus its documents are not protected by the Holy Spirit from error.

 

[Califman831]

We have to pray and keep true to the faith.