True and false obedience

[Layman]

If the bishops are teaching together on a doctrine on faith or morals that is to be definitively held, that has been enunciated before by the Universal Magisterium, Solemnly defined, or has never been taught as definitive, there is no possibility of error.

Well, that’s it then. What did the Council teach that was different or new with regard to faith and morals compared to previously?

 

[yosupman]

Well, that’s it then. What did the Council teach that was different or new with regard to faith and morals compared to previously?

Oh boy, are you serious with that question? Ask Ultima Ratio. He’ll tell ya. Ecumenism, Religious Liberty, ect. ect. ect.

But it’s all a big “straw man” because none of the doctrines had been previously enunciated as definitive by the oridinary universal magisterium, or defined.

 

[Layman]

Oh boy, are you serious with that question? Ask Ultima Ratio. He’ll tell ya. Ecumenism, Religious Liberty, ect. ect. ect.

But it’s all a big “straw man” because none of the doctrines had been previously enunciated as definitive by the oridinary universal magisterium, or defined.

I’m just trying to draw out what supporters of Vat. II think has changed in our beliefs as a result of it. It’s been used to justify an iconoclasm.