.

.

Tuesday, December 6, 2011

Opus Pharisaei

Msgr. Fernando Ocáriz, the Vicar General of Opus "Dei" (Opus Pharisaei, in truth) is one of Pope Benedict's representatives in the theological discussions that took place between the SSPX and Rome from 2009-2011. The day after we commented on Bp. Fellay's recent 'interview' and pointed to the discrepancy in Rome's allowance for discussion of Vatican II teachings while anathematizing discussion of 'The Holocaust,' a work of artifice from Msgr. Fernando Ocáriz was published in the Pope's journal, L'Osservatore Romano HERE.

This document contains a formula which amounts to relativistic tyranny:

The [Second Vatican] Council’s [innovative] doctrinal teachings require of the faithful a degree of assent called “religious submission of will and intellect”. Precisely because it is “religious” assent, such assent is not based purely on rational motives. This kind of adherence does not take the form of an act of faith. Rather, it is an act of obedience that is not merely disciplinary, but is well-rooted in our confidence in the divine assistance given to the Magisterium, and therefore “within the logic of faith and under the impulse of obedience to the faith" ...
... A number of innovations of a doctrinal nature are to be found in the documents of the Second Vatican Council ... These innovations in matters concerning faith or morals, not proposed with a definitive act, still require religious submission of intellect and will ...
I take this as an answer to Proud Pharisee David Rosen's self-interested insistence that Nostra Aetate and Lumen Gentium be considered "fundamental doctrines of the Church," and that it be impossible to question them "without challenging the authority of the church."

Those who know the religion of Judaism know what's going on here. The rabbis "don't listen to heavenly voices." They say, "the Torah is not in heaven." Their god says, "my sons have defeated me." Their god is mutable; nothing more than a totem the possession of which gives them absolute, tyrannical authority which they use to innovate and enforce doctrines as needed, or to destroy and blot out problematic doctrines.

Expect much more of this kind of relativisation of perennial Church teaching enforced by absolute authority (at the service of the rabbis) as long as religious relations with the rabbis continue. And play close attention to how that authority is selectively enforced.

Also see:

Benedict's "Hermeneutic of Continuity" and the Rabbinic "Genius"


7 comments:

W.LindsayWheeler said...

This is a catastrophe of huge proproportions. Vatican II was NEVER, NEVER considered a "doctrinal council". Am I right?

My gosh, they are now making these "inovations" that have countermanded traditional Catholic teaching--into doctrine.

This is terrible beyond all measure. The Vatican is owned by its enemy. Propaganda surely works. The Vatican is one duped, decieved fool.

Malleus Haereticorum said...

Rabbi Rosen is full of gefilte fish.

His statement that "Nostra Aetate" and "Lumen Gentium" must be considered magisterial is whistling past the graveyard. Vatican II was a pastoral, not a dogmatic, council -- nothing it "teaches", particularly if it contradicts established Church teaching, is binding on the faithful.

Catholic-Jewish relations in for a "rough ride"? If only!

Diego said...

Each day I am more convinced that the defection of the Pharisees from the Mosaic Covenant is a biblical type of the defection of the neo-Pharisees from the New Covenant—that the defection of Old Israel is a biblical type of the defection of the New Israel (the Church).

It is horrifying to consider—and more horrifying to conclude—that little anti-Christs have been "subsisting in" the Chair of Peter—that the Novus Ordo is the "operation of error to believe lies" (2 Thessalonians 2:10) sent by God to His New Chosen People (the Church) who no longer "love the truth."

May God have mercy on all who love the truth.

Dan said...

I'm not really sure what Msgr Ocariz is referring to. Vatican 2 was never intended as a doctrinal Council, only a pastoral one and, as such, did not make any dogmatic Definitions. Ergo, there is no doctrine there to assent to.

If the Msgr is asking us to accept all the horse manure that has been flung at us since the Council then he is whistling past the graveyard.

Anonymous said...

Dear Maurice:

Could you explain a little more about the following affirmation in the post "Hermeneutic of Continuity ande the Rabbinic Genius"?

" Pope Benedict induces a double-mind in his followers when he laments a "dictatorship of relativism" and simultaneously recommends that Christians learn from rabbinic exegesis. Benedict is a vicar of Hillel, not Jesus, when he deceives himself and others into believing that innovations which overturn core principles are actually in accordance with them."

The link at the Rabbinic text do not exist.

I´ll be waiting for your answer.

Maurice Pinay said...

Thank you for mentioning the bad link. The rabbinic sermon referenced in my column, "Benedict's 'Hermeneutic of Continuity' and the Rabbinic 'Genius" can now be downloaded at this link:

http://www.tilb.org/Rabbi%20Sermons/ErevRH5771.pdf

I fixed the link in my blog posting.

I believe it's clear from this rabbinic sermon that that their "genius" is their skill at deceiving themselves and others into believing radical innovation is consistent with tradition.

I think it's clear that Pope Benedict has suggested repeatedly that Christians should learn from rabbinic exegesis. To show that these are not empty words, he put them into action by inviting a rabbi to teach at a synod on Scripture among many other things.

I think it s clear that Pope Benedict and many Church prelates deceive themselves and others into believing that radical innovation is consistent with tradition, as the rabbis do, who they say they share a common tradition with.

I think it's clear that since they can't admit this and still be seriously considered a Catholic authority they must contrive mechanisms to bridge the divide between traditional Church teaching and their innovations. This is what "The hermeneutic of continuity" is about.

Anonymous said...

"innovations of a doctrinal nature"?
Seems to be mortal sin against the 3rd commandment.
Have these functionaries at the Curia lost any shame?
Even our Lord and Savior proved His "divine assistance" by miracles.
So did our Lady in Fatima.