Translate

Thursday, June 25, 2020

I WOULD HAVE TO SAY THAT I AGREE WITH THE CONTROVERSIAL PRELATE IN THIS REGARD

Press title for full long article. My comments below.


Bishop Schneider: We shouldn’t reject Vatican II, but save what is ‘truly good’


My comments:
I think what the good bishop is writing makes perfect sense. Vatican II was a pastoral council carried out in the culture of the time, both religious and secular, that we can do anything and do it successfully. The space program of the USA in the early 60’s culminating with a man on the moon in 1969 was a part of this winning spirit of the times.

The triumphalism of those promoting Vatican II thought it would lead to a similar grand experience as the US space program, a new spring for the Church, not in heaven but on earth.

Much of Vatican II’s pastoral decrees are like a time capsule of the period of optimism. These are far from doctrinal let alone infallible, in terms of how to revise the Mass, sacraments, divine office as well as ecumenism, interfaith relations, religious liberty and dialogue with the world. 

Yet these things are presented in such a pre-Vatican II authoritarian way to make us think these are Infallible doctrines not just pastoral theology and in some cases pastoral theology run amuck.

But worse yet, is the “spirit of Vatican II” argument which exalts the commentary and opinion on Vatican II from bishops down to theologians and ordinary lay folk into a kind of infallible dogma. 

Let me be clear. We have a Tradition of authority in the magisterium of the Church and it is related to the pope and bishops in union with him. The Sensuum fideli has been used and misused to make democratic decisions concerning doctrine and pastoral responses. Another error. Of course, progressives take the opinions and commentary of the “faithful” not from the faithful, but the infidels. That’s not sensuum fideli, but rather sensuum infideli and the complete opposite of what faithful Catholics would promote and the official understanding of sensuum fideli,, which also is a theology, not a doctrine or dogma.

But when it comes to the implementation of a Council, the pope and the bishops are in charge. But that doesn’t mean that things can’t be reevaluated when good intentions go bad and the springtime of the Church which was expected becomes a long, dark winter. 

Critical thinking needs to take place concerning the documents of Vatican II and the good fruit that has come forth but also the deleterious results too numerous to list here. 

Pope Benedict in his brilliance, much missed, had the solution in his Christmas elocution to the cardinals and Curia of the church—renewal in continuity with what preceded Vatican II!

And Pope Benedict also said to the SSPX which he was trying to fully reintegrate into the Church that the older form of the Mass and sacraments and Divine Office and devotions were allowed under his continuity hermeneutic.

As well, the documents on ecumenism, interfaith dialogue, dialogue with the world and religious liberty were simply pastoral objectives and not matters of Catholic Faith and could be rejected for good reason.  

22 comments:

TJM said...

As a layman, I can say with a straight face that Vatican II has not enriched my faith and has been a negative experience with bitter memories of the enforced liturgical “renewal. “ It seemed more of a “clergy liberation movement.” Abandonment of religious habits, communal living and prayer, priests no longer were learning Latin, etc.

John Nolan said...

Back in the day the word 'controversial' was used in connection with Hans Küng, Karl Rahner at al. Nowadays it is synonymous with 'orthodox'.

Linguistic shifts (especially very recent ones) reflect a shift in attitude and belief.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

I think the controversial aspect of he and other orthodox prelates is their public challenge to the pope. Certainly heterodox Kung would fall into that category too.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

“Of him” before the English gestapo rail against me or is it I?

Anonymous said...

Gestapo? Hardly. Some people know the difference between nominative and objective and want to share that knowledge generously. That doesn't make us Nazi agents...

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Nazi nerds?

Anonymous said...

I recently read a biography of Evelyn Waugh. Waugh died in 1966. In 1965, the year Vat 2 ended he wrote:

In happier, earlier times, Kung et al would have been burnt at the stake.

Anonymous said...

👍👍👍

Anonymous said...

I can remember a holy, elderly, Irish Catholic priest saying in the early 1970s that it could take 200 to 300 years for the Church to recover from the forces unleashed by Vatican II and by the Church opening itself up too much to be influenced by modernity.

Anonymous said...

No, not Nazis, not Gestapo, just generous, caring people who, having been given a gift, wish to share that gift with those like you who are SO IN NEED of it.

John Nolan said...

Irony alert!

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

so, do gooders of the secular self-righteous type, like a secular version of the church lady?

TJM said...

Anonymous at 8:21,

Is that you "Father" Kavanaugh? You need help!

Anonymous said...

Gee! Someone tries to do something generous and needed here and he gets slammed.

If you people represent Catholicism, there any wonder people are leaving your church in droves?

Mark Thomas said...

Bishop Schneider has adopted a Cafeteria Catholic approach to Vatican II.

His analysis of Vatican II is at odds with that which the Magisterium has taught in regard to the Council.

The Church has held that Vatican II is orthodox. The Council's documents are in line with Holy Tradition.

Conversely, Bishop Schneider has declared that the Council contains errors.

He has reserved the right to determine what parts of Vatican II are to his liking...and parts not to his liking.

That is at odds with the Magisterium.

In Bishop Schneider's world of Cafeteria Catholicism, he has reserved the right to declare that Vatican II teaching "A" is orthodox...teaching "B" is false...teaching "C" is orthodox...teaching "D" is false.

Sorry, Bishop Schneider. That is not way of Holy Mother Church.

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Victor said...

So much can be said on this topic, especially on how the Church of Vatican 2 is the Church that after almost 2000 years of struggle finally surrendered to its enemies, be they other religions or the godless World (with its Modernists). The most important work on the subject is still Romano Amerio's Iota Unum, a book discouraged from being read for decades, and suppressed by the "spirit of Vatican 2" people. The book is very detailed on how subtly as well as overtly the doctrines of the Church were changed to accommodate Modern Man instead of converting him.
I take long walks in the city for exercise, and every year I encounter another Catholic church that has been boarded up and sold to developers in what was 50 years ago a very Catholic city. At first I just shook my head while passing by, but now I have tears because the Church continues to ignore what she has done through Vatican II in accepting the world-views of her enemies. I think there is one person very responsible for this, Josef Jungmann who had nothing but spite for the old Latin Mass and came up with his theory of Pastoral Theology that was used as a pretext for calling the Council. Hiding out in a women's monastery in Austria during WWII allowed him plenty of time to concoct his so-called "research" that became so influential during the Council, giving Modernists their ammunition.

Mark Thomas said...

The Bishop Schneider excerpt about Vatican II was published originally in The Remnant. But LifeSiteNews carried the Remnant's story in question.

Father McDonald's link to Bishop Schneider's analysis of Vatican II goes to LifeSiteNews.

At LifeSiteNews' web page, I read the comments about Bishop Schneider's analysis of Vatican II. One LifeSiteNews reader after another trashed Bishop Schneider's muddle thoughts about Vatican II.

Readers noted that Bishop Schneider has insisted that Vatican II contains false, destructive teachings. However, he also has insisted that we must act respectfully as Vatican II is a "legitimate," although poisonous Council that must not be rejected.

Again, the muddle thinking of Bishop Schneider has been trashed by one LifeSiteNews, as well as The Remnant reader after another.

Here are some comments from LifeSiteNews' readers:

-- "Why doesn't Schneider join Vigano to fight against this corruption? Schneider talks a lot and writes books, that no one reads. Sick of him!"

-- "Bishop Schneider is another false conservative. When a cake is 1 % poison but no one agrees on which is the poisonous part. You toss the whole thing in the bin.'

Several comments in The Remnant's commentary box also trashed Bishop Schneider's analysis of Vatican II.

Bishop Schneider's analysis of Vatican II is a dead-letter.

Pax.

Mark Thomas

johnnyc said...

@Anonynous 10:33am....people aren't leaving the Church because of a falsely perceived lack of charity. Of course, they might say that but why they are really leaving is a rejection of the teachings of Jesus Christ. This has been happening since the beginning and it will happen again. Many souls will be in danger for rejecting the Church that Jesus founded.


Then many of his disciples who were listening said, “This saying is hard; who can accept it?”

As a result of this, many of his disciples returned to their former way of life and no longer accompanied him.


It was a flawed Peter, a saint and the first Pope, who represented Catholicism by accepting a 'hard teaching' and believing in our Lord and Saviour.

johnnyc said...

Well 50 years on from V2 the Church is not in too good a shape. We all have heard that is because of the liberals and their 'spirit of V2' deception and not the actual documents. But that false 'spirit' is still alive and well in the Vatican and liberal clergy in general so maybe looking at Vatican II again might be in order. Of course, it will have to be done by a future Pope.

rcg said...

If we don't reject it, but save what is good, means we are treating Vatican II like an organ donor that has passed on.

TJM said...

Mark Thomas,

Only on ignorant fool with very little knowledge of the Catholic Faith would attack a deeply faithful and courageous man like Bishop Schneider

Anonymous said...

Is there any realistic way Bishop Schneider could be elected the next pope, without being made a cardinal first? I pray there is.