Christopher Manion

Footnote 60: Dissidents

Dissident Catholics are a curious bunch. They reject the teaching authority of the Church, they can’t say the Creed honestly, and yet they insist on calling themselves “Catholic” and demand that the Church change its teachings to accommodate them.

Can you figure them out?

basic footnote 1400 3


This article, Footnote 60: Dissidents is a post from The Bellarmine Forum.
http://bellarmineforum.org/2013/12/28/footnote-60-dissidents/
Do not repost the entire article without written permission. Reasonable excerpts may be reposted so long as it is linked to this page.

Nanette Parratto-Wagner liked this post

2 Responses to Footnote 60: Dissidents

  1. Yes, I think I can help with this problem of ‘explaining’ the delirium of liberal Catholics, which this author has characterized as the delusion that the Church can change its teachings at their whim. They believe this because the Church has already done so, at Vatican II. The teaching regarding religious liberty is the reversal of the Church’s teaching over all the centuries since Christ. Previously the Church honored Christ’s own words regarding His mission, that He alone was the Way to the Father. If any reader would care to read further on this particular topic, they would do well to begin with googling ‘Gleize Ocariz’ for a summary of the doctrinal differences between SSPX’s rendition of traditional teaching side by side with the new teaching of the modernist theologians representing the Vatican.

    When the modernists could not win the doctrinal battle, Bishop Fellay summarized their next step thus: ‘You say, you love tradition, yes?” And SSPX says, Yes. Then the modernists say, ‘Well, this is the new tradition now. So get over it.’ You see, they believe that as conditions change, the teaching can be ‘updated.’ They have said so and acted so since the Council, and it is not any kind of distortion of the text in favor of a wayward ‘spirit.’ Vatican II calls in the text for religious liberty, the modernist church continues to do so, and that call is clearly a deviation from the teaching of tradition, which taught always the primacy of Christ, with tolerance of false faiths, but never ‘liberty.’ Tolerance. As big a step from ‘liberty’ as real love is from ‘free love.’

    So why would not liberal Catholics ask for a similar, related change regarding the priesthood, divorce, and homosexuality? The precedent has been established at Vatican II, and now, like all the false ‘faiths’ who have caved in to popular pressure, most think that in the end the Church will yield on these issues, or die–and certainly given some–most– of Pope Francis’ comments, it is not difficult to understand their optimism. In fact, it is far more difficult to explain the blindness of those who fail to see the precedent set by the Council and continue to insist that the direction of the Church since that debacle is a misinterpretation of the intention of those who took it over and struck this blow against our Church. To them, all one can say is, ‘Wake up!’

We want your opinion, too!