Pope BenedictXV1 a LIBERAL

[John_19_59]

If so, then Judaism is just as guilty.

Yes Judaism is a Christ-denying religion. The Church has changed its long-standing tradtional teaching to a novel new one since 1965.

Quote:
So you agree that Popes can be wrong then? Where does that leave John Paul II?

In the same boat as Pius X?.

One is wrong and the other is right. Each must be judged against tradition - and Pius X wins hands down.

I’ll take John Paul II (and Benedict XVI) over those reactionaries any day of the week and twice on Sundays.

At least four pre-Counciliar Popes were reactionaries?

You’re joking right!

Your opinion, fine. You may certainly go and write your own Catechism and publish rebuttals to John Paul’s encyclicals and go hang out with the schismatics and all the others who hate Vatican II while you’re at it.

I’ll just stick with the Church on this one.

Which Church? Which Catechism? (Check out the Catechism of Pius X).

The traditional Church of Mortalium Animos or the Novel Church of Vatican II.

I know which one is guaranteed.

I am NOT a schismatic. I am not a sedevacantist. I attend Novus Ordo mass - although I am often disappointed by the lack of reverance shown there and I long for the certainties of the pre-Council latin rite.

I think the Church has abandoned its mission since 1965 and is suffering a crisis like the Arian Crisis. I hope the Church will correct it later at a proper DOGMATIC council.

 

[John_19_59]

Here come the Sedes marching down the road… Sola Traditio… Sola Traditio…

Ad hominum.

I’m not a sedevacantist.

I am a Catholic faced with a choice between the longstanding traditional Catholic teaching before 1965 and the novel new teaching since 1965.

Something went wrong somewhere.

The example I keep returning to is the teaching at Vatican II about Muslims worshipping the same God as us.

Where do I find this teaching before 1965?

Nowhere!

Do I find the opposite teaching before 1965 - absolutely yes!

So that makes it novel and a contradiction of previous teaching.

I am bound to novelty? Am I bound to contradiction? Am I bound to the teaching of Vatican II?

Absolutely not. The Church does not have the right to teach novelty.

It is a MODERNIST error condemned by many Popes before 1965.

 

[bones_IV]

John_19_59:

Ad hominum.

I’m not a sedevacantist.

I am a Catholic faced with a choice between the longstanding traditional Catholic teaching before 1965 and the novel new teaching since 1965.

Something went wrong somewhere.

The example I keep returning to is the teaching at Vatican II about Muslims worshipping the same God as us.

Where do I find this teaching before 1965?

Nowhere!

Do I find the opposite teaching before 1965 - absolutely yes!

So that makes it novel and a contradiction of previous teaching.

I am bound to novelty? Am I bound to contradiction? Am I bound to the teaching of Vatican II?

Absolutely not. The Church does not have the right to teach novelty.

It is a MODERNIST error condemned by many Popes before 1965.

It seems to me that you would be a right wing protestant. And I guess that a bunch of muslims are going to hell for something that isn’t their fault. You ingored the post I said that salvation isn’t at those who are ignorant of Christ and his church.

 

[John_19_59]

It seems to me that you would be a right wing protestant.

Would Pius X see me as such? Would any Pope before John XXIII see me as such?

I don’t think so!

And I guess that a bunch of muslims are going to hell for something that isn’t their fault.

I never said any such thing. I hope God saves everyone. But its not a good hope as “good hope of salvation of non-Catholics” is a modernist error condemned by pre-counciliar Popes.

You ingored the post I said that salvation isn’t at those who are ignorant of Christ and his church.

Are Muslims ignorant? They are quite explicit in their beliefs.

Everyone is “ignorant” to some degree surely. “Its not my fault” -societies mantra.

Is hell empty? How can God condemn anyone (yes he does condemn - read the NT) if we all have some degree of ignorance.

You know the Church did teach stuff BEFORE 1965!

A fact that seems to be beyond some Catholics.

Vatican II was not a super-council that superceded all previous teaching.

 

[maklavan]

katherine2:

Pope Benedict XVI a liberal?

Read on …

.

– June 29, 1988: Telegram warning traditionalist French Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre he would be in schism if he ordained bishops without papal consent. The archbishop went ahead with the ordinations and died in schism.

A welcomed action to most liberals.

A welcome action for all Catholics. It is time for the Lefebvrist faction to admit their error and submit in obedience to Pope Benedict.