U
UKcatholicGuy
Guest
can someone tell me how to refute an extreme traditionalist who says the sacraments after Vatican II are no longer valid? He’s kinda got me worried . . .
- Status
C
Catholic_Tom
Guest
You’re talking to the wrong guy. He is probably part of a Schismatic group that use to be part of the church but rejected what Vatican II taught and got ex-communicated.
It’s kind of like a politician in office who gets kicked out for scandal, then turns around and tries to discredit the office he held.
R
RichSpidizzy
Guest
He’s making the claim, he should have the burden of proof. What are his reasons for claiming the sacraments are no longer valid?
L
Lovez4God
Guest
The sacraments are still valid! God still works through His Holy Spirit in the Church!
He needs to rethink his stance on the effectiveness of God to work in the Catholic Church.
Nevertheless, he has his reasons for being a traditionalist. God help him.
He needs to rethink his stance on the effectiveness of God to work in the Catholic Church.
Nevertheless, he has his reasons for being a traditionalist. God help him.
D
Dr.Colossus
Guest
I’ve never heard any arguments claiming *all *of the Sacraments after Vatican II are invalid. The one I have heard is that the Eucharist is invalid, the reasons for which surround the changing of the words in the Mass from “This is the cup of my Blood…which will be poured out for you and for many” to “This is my Blood…which will be poured out for you and for all so that sins may be forgiven.” This is the famous “Pro Multis vs. Pro Omnibus” (in latin) argument, which says that the change in the words of consecration was great enough to render it invalid.
It is also patently false. The Church has said time and time again that the necessary words for the consecration are “This is my Body” and “This is my Blood”. If a valid minister pronounces these words with the intent to consecrate, the consecration occurs.
- Status