[ultima ratio]

I have challenged you before on this. There is not one BINDING teaching that is new that came out of Vatican II. Not one. Not even the one on religious freedom which contradicts all magisterial teachings on the subject prior to Vatican II. Nothing was binding for all Catholics. Nor has SSPX ever been accused of heresy, which would be the case if Vatican II were a dogmatic council that issued clear dogmatic statements. But both conciliar popes declared it was a pastoral council only. And most of the council's statements are awash in liberalspeak--that is to say, in ambiguity and obfuscation. This is why, when the traditionalists at Campos "reunited" with Rome recently, there was nothing to renounce, no doctrine they had to forswear, nothing. It was a simple matter--because they had never left in the first place, doctrinally speaking. This is because we live in crazy times: it is Rome which pushes the envelope these days, not traditionalists.

[Catholicguy]

<> I just cited "Satis Cognitum," in a response to Tantumergo. There is something in there just for you and your ilk.<>

"There is nothing more grevious than the sacriledge of schism...there can be no necessity for destroying the unity of the Church" (St Augustine, Contra Epistolam Parmeniani", lib,ii,capii, n.25.

<> But, I guess, for you, Lefebvre was above even Augustine. BTW, was St Augustine a modernist?<>