Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Chris Mah's avatar

I agree the document is very well written. And at parts is quite beautiful. But I still take a very dim view of it for three reasons.

1. It is presumptive to put out a contrary statement of faith when they have refused to accept the current Catholic statement of Faith. Most notably giving Religious submission of mind and will to non definitive Magisterial teachings. The Church is not a body of dueling creeds (as they note on their part on the fillioque.)

2. That in said statement of faith, argue many positions as definitively defined that the Magisterium has not defined or even taught the opposite of in Vatican 2. They are binding what they have no right to bind. Examples might be their bit in non Catholic religions or on Balthazarian theology. I'm not against people disagreeing or putting out statements that they disagree. Just not as a statement of faith in contrast to the Church.

3. In light of these other two points I question who is this Creed for? It's certainly not to get them in good graces with the Pope or the Bishops at large. There is more than enough inflammatory statements inside it. So then it's not in aiding in brifgeing the divide. Nor was it given with time for Rome to properly consider, read through and formulate a response to it before the proposed consecrations. No it seems by its contents and timing to be a rallying cry to the laity to join them into their schismatic actions. For that I find it repulsive.

Peter Lemieux's avatar

Excellent article, relying on facts rather than emotions from a well informed and thoughtful traditional Catholic.

4 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?