Should Traditional Catholics Fear Donum Veritatis? Part A (Short Answer)

JMJ

Murrax brought up an interesting question in a comment here.

... do you have any advice when talking to conservative Catholics who use the document "Donum Veritatis" to say that the liturgical reform is valid and licit because it has been accepted by post-Vatican 2 popes and bishops. The relevant passage is this: "But it would be contrary to the truth, if, proceeding from some particular cases, one were to conclude that the Church's Magisterium can be habitually mistaken in its prudential judgments, or that it does not enjoy divine assistance in the integral exercise of its mission."

Tradical's Short Answer

If Murrax's opponent believes that the acceptance by post-V2 popes and bishops makes something right,then they should be Arians. During that crisis, the vast majority of bishops were Arian and the pope ... well that's a story for another day.

But in Donum Veritatis they are invoking a degree of infallibility, so in a way the modern /conservative Catholic's argument is the flip side of that of the Sedevacantists.

Whereas the Sedevacantists say that the Catholic Church is Infallible and V2 / Novus Ordo Missae is obviously flawed, therefore it wasn't the Catholic Church that promulgated it.

On the obverse, modern Catholics say the Catholic Church is infallible therefore our interpretation is flawed.

Both are wrong.

First, there are different types of protection provided to the Church by the Holy Ghost. So for example, Ott states that:

Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma - Ott

This however, doesn't mean that the popes and bishops can't make mistakes and big ones. For example, take the decimation of the Christeros.

Second, just because something is accepted by popes and bishops doesn't mean it is an infallible truth. It has to be an act of the Magisterium as noted above. A moral unanimity of bishops and pope would have to declare that it is good and licit AND that you have to believe it or else cease being Catholic. Haven't seen this happen yet dude!


Ibid

Third, the type of infallibility ascribed to these acts (council and NOM) is not what most people think it is. I posted an article by Fr. Scott on this topic here (link). As noted, the discipline can't be contrary but it sure can be inadequate.

Inasmuch as in her general discipline, i.e., the common laws imposed on all the faithful, the Church can prescribe nothing that would be contrary to the natural or the Divine law, nor prohibit anything that the natural or Divine law would exact.…It is quite permissible, however, to inquire how far this infallibility extends, and to what extent, in her disciplinary activity, the Church makes use of the privilege of inerrancy granted her by Jesus Christ when she defines matters of faith or morals.

Nota Bene: "... prescribe nothing that would be contrary ..." Something ambiguous is not contrary but could be interpreted as such. Hence the NOM and the excising of the filioque from the Ukrainian Catholic Creed.

P^3

Comments

Comparision of the Tridentine, Cranmer and Novus Ordo Masses

+ JMJ I downloaded the comparison that was linked in the previous article on the mass (here) . ... a very good reference! P^3 From: Whispers of Restoration (available at this link) . CHARTING LITURGICAL CHANGE Comparing the 1962 Ordinary of the Roman Mass to changes made during the Anglican Schism; Compared in turn to changes adopted in the creation of Pope Paul VI’s Mass in 1969 The chart on the reverse is a concise comparison of certain ritual differences between three historical rites for the celebration of the Catholic Mass Vetus Ordo: “Old Order,” the Roman Rite of Mass as contained in the 1962 Missal, often referred to as the “Traditional Latin Mass.”The Ordinary of this Mass is that of Pope St. Pius V (1570) following the Council of Trent (1545-63), hence the occasional moniker “Tridentine Mass.” However, Trent only consolidated and codified the Roman Rite already in use at that time; its essential form dates to Pope St. Gregory the Great (+604), in whose time the R...

SSPX and the Resistance - A Comparison Of Ecclesiology

Shining the light of Church Teaching on the doctrinal positions of the SSPX and the Resistance. Principles are guides used to aid in decision making. It stands to reason that bad principles will lead to bad decisions. The recent interactions between Rome and the SSPX has challenged a number of closely held cultural assumptions of people in both sides of the disagreement. This has resulted in cultural skirmishes in both Rome and the SSPX. Since it is the smaller of the two, the skirmishes have been more evident within the SSPX. The cultural fault-line that Bishop Fellay crossed appears to be linked to two points of Catholic Doctrine: Ecclesiology and Obedience. The cultural difference of view points is strong enough that it has resulted in the expulsion of a number of members. It should also be noted that some other priests expelled since the beginning of the latest interactions (starting in 2000) held the same view points and have joined with the l...

If Pope Francis is bad - what about Pope St. John Paul II et al?

+ JMJ So here we are on the apparent cusp of yet another post conciliar Papal canonization. This time we have Pope's John-Paul I and Paul VI canonizations to 'look forward' to. This follows, obviously, on the heels of Pope St. John Paul II's canonization? So the first question that I usually encounter is: How is it possible, keeping in mind the doctrine on infallibility of canonizations (note doctrine not dogma), that Pope St. John Paul II is a Saint? First, what does it mean??? According to the doctrine of dogmatic facts - it is the universal opinion of Theologians that canonizations are infallible. It means that they enjoy the beatific vision. ... that's it. That is the doctrine and it is at the level of universal opinion of theologians. It is called a 'dogmatic fact'. That they made mistakes is obvious. That the miracles seem to not be very miraculous is also a bit of an issue. Here's something to consider: The rush that surrou...

Spiritual Journey Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre - Extracts

+ JMJ I have posted these two chapters to provide context for the quote of: It is, therefore, a strict duty for every priest wanting to remain Catholic to separate himself from this Conciliar Church for as long as it does not rediscover the Tradition of the Church and of the Catholic Faith. P^3 Courtesy of SSPX.ca Chapter II The Perfections of God We ought to remember during this entire contemplation of God that we must apply all that is said of God to Our Lord Jesus Christ, Who is God. We cannot separate Jesus Christ from God. We cannot separate the Christian religion from Jesus Christ, Who is God, and we must affirm and believe that only the Catholic religion is the Christian religion. These affirmations have, as a result, inescapable conclusions that no ecclesiastic authority can contest: outside of Jesus Christ and the Catholic religion, that is, outsi...

Dogmas of the Catholic Faith (de fide) - Expanded Listing: Answer for Reader

+ JMJ A reader asked the following question in the 2015 version of the article on the Dogmas of the Catholic Faith (link) : 117: "In the state of fallen nature it is morally impossible for man without Supernatural Revelation, to know easily, with absolute certainty and without admixture of error, all religious and moral truths of the natural order." Where can you find this in the documents of the Church? ( Link to comment ) Here's the reference from Ott: The citation that Ott provided was Denzinger 1786 and the source document is Dogmatic Consitution Concerning the Faith from the First Vatican Council (Papal Encyclicals - link) : Chapter 2 On Revelation, Article 3: It is indeed thanks to this divine revelation , that those matters concerning God, which are not of themselves beyond the scope of human reason, can, even in the present state of the human race, be known by everyone, without difficulty, with firm certitude and with no intermingling of error. Here's ...

Tradicat

Search This Blog