Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Hieronymus
There are some very good things in some of the documents.

I'm still waiting for you to list them.

The Principal Errors of Vatican II

26 posted on 07/26/2020 8:40:17 PM PDT by ebb tide (We have a rogue curia in Rome.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]


To: ebb tide

Dei Verbum, while capable of improvement at points, on some points articulates doctrine on revelation in ways that are commendable and helpful, and have not been done at this level of magisterial teaching before. It is very good on Canonical criticism.

While it could be slightly clearer on the apostolic authorship by explicitly naming Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John as the authors of their respective gospels, that it states that the gospels were written by apostles (i.e. Matthew and John) and apostolic men (i.e. Mark and Luke) is very useful. It is true that one could take advantage of the failure to name the disciples to defend a few positions other than the traditional ones: i.e. hold that Peter, Jude, Silas, and Barnabas are collectively responsible for the gospels, but the vagueness does not suffice to allow any theory of authorship that is held by more than one person that I am aware of to be defended with the exception of the traditional one.

As I teach theology, I can pull these examples off the top of my head, and could compose a list of “good things of Vatican II” if I had time. I do not know of such a list to which I can link. I need to get back to my day job and work on a talk to be delivered via Zoom on the New Jerusalem for which I am actually paid.


27 posted on 07/27/2020 7:06:51 AM PDT by Hieronymus (“I shall drink to the Pope, if you please, still, to conscience first, and to the Pope afterwards.Â)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson