WHAT IS THIS VIDEO ABOUT? This is a clip from the 1973 made-for-TV film "Catholics" (later renamed "The Conflict"), shown full-length on US public broadcasting stations. It is a visually and intellectually impressive film. The story line is faithful to Brian Moore's 1972 book by the same name. The film depicts the real-life confrontation between Traditionalists and Modernists in the Roman Catholic Church after the highly controversial and divisive Second Vatican Council. The Modernist occupiers of the Church's official structures arbitrarily order Catholics to join with heretical sects in a so-called "ecumenical" movement that contradicts the authentic teachings and traditions of Catholicism. A group of Irish monks decides to continue with Catholic Tradition and remain faithful to the Tridentine Latin Mass. When the monks' fidelity to the Mass inspires an international following, the Modernists become alarmed and disconcerted, rightly fearing worldwide Catholic resistance to their sinister plot. Martin Sheen is the agent sent by the Modernists to force the monks to accept the new religion and its schismatic new liturgy or face excommunication at the hands of the Modernists. Great dialogue ensues as some of the monks eloquently defend their Faith. The acting by Trevor Howard is absolutely flawless and authentic. It is masterful, heartfelt, and beautiful. Almost equally so is that of Cyril Cusack, who plays the role of Father Manus, a monk. Martin Sheen's role is important, but not nearly as much as Howard's, and not remotely as well-crafted. The DVD version of the film titled "Catholics" is very grainy, with lines running through it, and soundtrack distortions that make it hard to enjoy. The digitally re-mastered version of this film by Digiview, titled "The Conflict" (run time 77 minutes) has the best quality and is available for purchase on Internet. This film, like the book, will interest everyone that likes philosophy or religion, regardless of their faith or lack of one...
There can only be a conflict between Traditionalists and Modernists over Vatican Council II when it is wrongly assumed :-1.Invisible cases are visible in the present times ( 1960-2016).
2.Lumen Gentium 16 ( invincible ignorance) and Lumen Gentium 14 ( baptism of desire) refer to a visible case.3.Vatican Council II contradicts the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus since Lumen Gentium 16 etc are visible exceptions to the dogma.
4.The dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus has exceptions. They are the baptism of desire and blood and being saved in invincible ignorance, all without the baptism of water.
AVOID THESE FOUR POINTS AND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TRADITIONALISTS AND MODERNISTS ENDs, WITH REFERENCE TO VATICAN COUNCIL II.
It's as simple as this.Try it! Interpret Vatican Council II without this error.Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre for example, was not aware of these four points.So Vatican Council II became a rupture with Tradition.
He could not say that Vatican Council II traditionally says all non Catholics need to convert into the Church for salvation and so Vatican Council II supports the old ecclesiology of the Church.
He could not say this. Since he was not aware of the four points above. So he interpreted the Council as a break with Tradition.The SSPX bishops, even after being informed today, still do the same.
When Vatican Council II does not contradict the old ecclesiology how can there be the difference between traditionalists and modernists ? The modernists have their legitimacy only by interpreting Vatican Council II as a break with Tradition.
So this was the mistake made in the film in 1972.It ignored the four points mentioned above.
With these four points in order, a Catholic can attend the Traditional Latin Mass or the Novus Ordo Mass and the ecclesiology would be the same. It would be that of the 16th century missionaries,traditionalists.
It is the present day 'modernists' who should be on the defensive. Since there will be no text which they can cite from Vatican Council II to support their interpretation of the Council as break with Tradition.LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc would all refer to hypothetical case. So they cannot be known exceptions to the old ecclesiology based on Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus.-Lionel Andrades
https://gloria.tv/language/S2mQ8XjTcSwL3q8noxk8XEbJo#1~user%3DESFpeRkBgpvV1kqh61itrpGn9
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment