Your Email:

Subject:

Message:
Entry: Mopping up the Israel Lobby Link: http://www.takimag.com/site/article/mopping_up_the_israel_lobby#9275 Post contents: Sid, I said I would not respond to you, and I break my promise here, but only to clarify some things. My statements were completely clear and there was not absence in logic in either point. First, I stated that Nostra Aetate did NOT say what you seemed to say that it said [that is, that it rejected the appellation of Deicide, which it does not do]. It uses the words "not all" when referring to the Jewish people of Our Lord's time being culpable. Thus we are NOT talking about exculpation of the totality, as you implied. I did not either endorse or reject that formulation.... I wished only to clarify it. My second point was not related to that statement. It was rather that you do not understand theology, in partiuclar, as refers to Vatican II. Vatican II, pace Paul VI and the cited Nota Praevia, did not seek to define and bind on the level of previous councils. Only insofar as it confirmed previous teaching, or specifically and self-consciously declares doctrine, did it do so. Paul VI, on several occasions (as I cited earlier) makes this clear (as did the Nota Praevia). And he stated, on more than one occasion, that the council avoided issuing such teachings. What we are talking about, then, are pastoral directives but the problem is that, in some cases, they materiall contradict previous teaching of the church. Such directives do not enjoy the privilege of indefectibility, and to respectfully criticize them (as has, indeed, the present supreme pontiff Benedict XVI!) is in no way heretical. Indeed, one could suggest that NOT to adhere to and believe in the traditional teachings of the church would be more apt to cast one into heresy and schism.... You, it seems, enjoy red-herrings, and tossing in little insulting asides...words like "sedevacantist" or (and what a nice one!)"mentevacantist" and then stating that I am "not in full union with Rome"---which, I must say, is a damnable lie on your part. The Church, and in particular, the head of the Congregation Ecclesia Dei (Cardinal Trujillo Castillon) have repeatedly corrected certain liberal bishops who have made that assertion about the Society of St. Pius X. Your comments remind me eerily of the statements of those liberals. Now, once again, let's agree to end this; it is not the topic of this thread. You and I do not agree. Let us leave it that. Sent at: 2008 05 15