Rosary Praying Catholics removed from Brussels Cathedral by Police during "Reformation Celebration"

[commenter]

Once again, if Unitatis Redintegratio is read according to tradition, as difficult as this is, we must believe that it is possible to reconcile it with the previous teachings. This isn’t just some little discipline like which hand the altar boy holds the thurible in. This is a major aspect of our Faith which has been discussed in depth over the millenia by saints, doctors, and popes and which an entire magisterium has been built up around. Unitatis Redintegratio cannot reverse this magisterium or contradict it. It just can’t.

A better way to put this is that previous teachings must now be read in light of Unitatis Redintegratio, not the other way around. Keep in mind the bishops at Vatican II had all those earlier teachings available to them and no doubt consulted them. Unitatis Redintegration is the application and interpretation of those prior teachings, for the 1960s.

The best interpretation and application of Unitatis Redintegratio, and earlier teachings, for the present time would be the subsequent teachings of the popes since then.

Tradition is made up of things like ecumenical councils and authoritative papal statements; including V II and the current pope.

 

[OraLabora]

Martin Luther Knew Catholicism quite well and was very likely “correctly instructed by Catholic sources”.

Yes I’m aware of that, I was referring to current Protestants. The Church says they cannot be accused of the sin of heresy.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Across the past year, it happened in Catholic cathedrals all around the world, including many cathedrals and other churches in the United States.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

You are correct.

This is precisely stated by the Holy See in From Conflict to Communion.

1. While the Council of Trent largely defined Catholic relations with Lutherans for several centuries, its legacy must now be viewed through the lens of the actions of the Second Vatican Council (1962–1965). This Council made it possible for the Catholic Church to enter the ecumenical movement and leave behind the charged polemic atmosphere of the post-Reformation era. The Dogmatic Constitution on the Church (Lumen Gentium), the Decree on Ecumenism (Unitatis Redintegratio), the Declaration on Religious Freedom (Dignitatis Humanae), and the Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation (Dei Verbum) are foundational documents for Catholic ecumenism. Vatican II, while affirming that the Church of Christ subsists in the Catholic Church, also acknowledged, “many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside of its visible structure. These elements, as gifts belonging to the Church of Christ, are forces impelling toward catholic unity” (LG 8). There was a positive appreciation of what Catholics share with other Christian churches such as the creeds, baptism, and the Scriptures. A theology of ecclesial communion affirmed that Catholics are in a real, if imperfect, communion with all who confess Jesus Christ and are baptized (UR 2).

 

[Vadne]

Does not make it right.

 

[Wandile]

For what? Protecting the faith against scandal??

 

[Wandile]

The church historically through councils, scripture , pope’s, fathers and saints has always denounced praying with heretical groups

 

[NuclearReceptor]

What does an ecumenical service imply? If a Protestant attended such a service at a Catholic cathedral (brought up in faith ignorant of Catholic doctrines and Sacraments), does it not send a message that we’re all Christians so it doesn’t matter really?

 

[pnewton]

That is still just a practice. And it made a lot of sense when heretical groups were by their nature splinter groups from the Catholic Church. That is why the temporal context matters.

By the way, that is also why we have apostolic succession. If some rule could exist to explain everything, a book would suffice. It is also why we actually have Church Councils, like Vatican II, which I quoted earlier, guiding the Church forward. Yes, we also have to understand the past to “interpret” Vatican II, but the denial here as to what Vatican II taught on ecumenism makes the most liberal “spirit of Vatican II” interpretation look down right l Pharisaic.

 

[Wandile]

They maintained this stance well into centuries when heretical groups were well established denominations that differed from their founders.

And no that is not why apostolic succession exists. It exists to ensure the church as an body of believers can have the sacraments administered by the clergy in all generations and have to be faith protected and defended in all generations by those who hold the place of the apostles

And lastly Vatican II, though ecumenical was very different from the 20 other councils that preceded it in that it was as the first to be only disciplinary. It did not exercise the infallibility of the church except for reaffirming propositions already infallibly defined in its dogmatic constitutions by other councils and pope’s.

The new practices it introduced are not infallible and must be interpreted in light of tradition.

 

[pnewton]

And no that is not why apostolic succession exists. It exists to ensure the church as an body of believers can have the sacraments administered by the clergy in all generations and have to be faith protected and defended in all generations by those who hold the place of the apostles

That would make the Eastern Orthodox correct, and the papacy is nothing. As a Catholic, I also value the authority that is passed on.

 

[Wandile]

That would make the Eastern Orthodox correct, and the papacy is nothing. As a Catholic, I also value the authority that is passed on.

No it would not make them correct and eliminate the papacy but this does expose your lack of understanding of what apostolic succession is.

The papacy exists for the purpose of unity. But the Pope is not the only bishop in the church nor the only one with apostolic succession. The other bishops are not vicars of the pope but bishops equally in the ordination and succession. However their unity is found in Rome which is the source of sacerdotal unity.

Apostolic succession exists primarily for the church to be able to administer sacraments to each gernation by having a valid clergy. Hence some communities not in communion with Rome have apostolic succession. However by virtue of their schism, they administer these sacraments illicitly.

 

[josh987654321]

If they had simply wished to pray to Our Lady, they could have done so quietly and not disruptively.

I agree and I would not have done that, but I certainly would have joined these good men in quietly praying the Rosary to make reparation for such profanation.

The corruption of the best is the worst.

“For the sake of His sorrowful passion, have mercy on us and on the whole world.”

 

[josh987654321]

Then to the Bishop,we owe high honor and profound respect;he is the hand,the heart,the mouthpiece of the Pope,and of Jesus Christ;he is a prince of the Church,seated on the steps of the pontifical throne and sharing in the spiritual royalty of the Sovereign Pontiff.

from St Peter Julian Eymard, the Duties of a Christian

Which is true, and why this hits where it really hurts and why the corruption of the best is the absolute worst.

“For the sake of His sorrowful passion, have mercy on us and on the whole world.”

 

[NuclearReceptor]

Vatican II wasn’t infallible…?

Can someone comment or expound upon this?

I thought VII was just as legitimate as VI? (The whole protection by the Holy Spirit and whatnot…)

 

[josh987654321]

Vatican II wasn’t infallible…?

Many people have issue with Vatican II, but like every other Council, I’m pretty sure it’s just as binding. In a way, I too am recognizing Martin Luther’s 500th anniversary, as an example of what not to do in times of corruption.

Thank you Martin Luther for showing me what not to do when the Catholic Church suffers from corruption.

God Bless You

 

[Wandile]

Vatican II wasn’t infallible…?

Can someone comment or expound upon this?

I thought VII was just as legitimate as VI? (The whole protection by the Holy Spirit and whatnot…)

“In view of the pastoral nature of the Council, it avoided any extraordinary statements of dogmas endowed with the note of infallibility, but it still provided its teaching with the authority of the Ordinary Magisterium which must be accepted with docility according to the mind of the Council concerning the nature and aims of each document” (Pope Blessed Paul VI, General Audience of 12 January 1966).

“Since the Council was aiming primarily at a pastoral orientation and hence refrained from making dogmatically binding statements or disassociating itself, as previous Church assemblies have done, from errors and false doctrines by means of clear anathemas, many questions took on an opalescent ambivalence which provided a certain amount of justification for those who speak of the spirit of the Council.” (Athanasius and the Church of Our Times, 1974)
- Bishop Rudolf Graber

”The Second Vatican Council has not been treated as a part of the entire living Tradition of the Church, but as an end of Tradition, a new start from zero. The truth is that this particular council defined no dogma at all, and deliberately chose to remain on a modest level, as a merely pastoral council; and yet so many treat it as though it had made itself into a sort of super-dogma which takes away the importance of all the rest”
-Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI) El Mercurio, July 17, 198

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I would have been happy to pray silently or even just quietly, and openly and on my knees. My prayer would have been asking for everyone on both sides to reach a greater understanding with each other, forgive past wrongs, and reconcile into one Church again, as we were before.

As much as I object to the young men going a bit far in being loud and disruptive with their prayer, I also found it creepy that the media would assume that a group of young men praying the Rosary automatically had to be SSPX. Lots of people pray the Rosary these days, including out loud and in groups.

 

[egretps]

I remember years ago, when my favorite drive time show, Catholic Answers was pulled by my local Bishop, the Most Reverand Robert Lynch, from his ‘radio’ station’s line up. This show helped strengthen my faith and I couldn’t believe such a treasure was removed. (I haven’t listened to the station much in 17 years since.) When I tried to find out what sort of protest I could do, written or verbal, I was reminded that I had no say. I wasn’t too happy about it, but we live in the age of the internet, and I had access to a church library at the time. So I had to really work to make up for my CA education. Luckily my dh was okay with my spending money on CA books. Timing was perfect for me, I had my first child and was able to stay home with EWTN on the TV for most of the day.

So I understand the ‘spirit’ of these young men and their protest, but they may have gone about it in a way that harms rather than helps. When I have read about approved Marian apparitions, obedience to the Bishop is uber important.

We should pray for the Church in Germany, especially those young men.

We should pray for the priests worldwide.

 

[pnewton]

Vatican II wasn’t infallible…?

It is a technical distinction. It defined no new dogma. Note the rest of the quote though and how it still taught that which must be accepted. Also note the hypocrisy of countering statements from Vatican II with statements from Popes and saints that lack even the authority of teaching which must be accepted. Anytime someone starts responding to Church teaching from Vatican II by attacking it, they always use that with less authority.

Besides, the council did produce two dogmatic documents the reformulated and taught previous dogma. Note the quotes above did not say it taught nothing infallibly. It only says, “extraordinary statements of dogmas endowed with the note of infallibility” were avoided. Infallibility was not invoked to define new dogma.