James Likoudis and forgeries

[Hadrianus]

Originally Posted by SanctusPeccator

Is that so? Personally acquainted with some knowledgeably orthodox seminary professors and members of the episcopate that would strongly disagree with this claim. Could you kindly provide specific examples of these supposed factual errors?

I no longer have the book so cannot go through it page by page. But if I recall rightly he said that the Missale Romanum was abrogated. A statement the present Holy Father has said flatly is not the case. There was so much else too, which I knew was just plain wrong.
Incidentally, being a bishop or an orthodox seminary professor is no guarantee of scholarship or awareness of facts. How many of these people have studied the Acta of the Second Vatican Council, or the memoirs of Archbishop Bugnini, or the diary of Cardinal
Antonelli? All works available in English.

I am not accusing Likoudis of falsifying anything, he's just not a very good scholar.

[SanctusPeccator]

Originally Posted by Hadrianus

I no longer have the book so cannot go through it page by page. But if I recall rightly he said that the Missale Romanum was abrogated. A statement the present Holy Father has said flatly is not the case. There was so much else too, which I knew was just plain wrong.

Not correct:

“When Pope Paul issued this general revision, the further use of the older unrevised version of the Missal (the ‘Tridentine Mass’) was derogated, not abrogated” (James Likoudis & Kenneth D. Whitehead's The Pope, the Council, and the Mass: Answers to Questions the Traditionalists Have Asked, p. 64)

Originally Posted by Hadrianus

Incidentally, being a bishop or an orthodox seminary professor is no guarantee of scholarship or awareness of facts. How many of these people have studied the Acta of the Second Vatican Council, or the memoirs of Archbishop Bugnini, or the diary of Cardinal
Antonelli? All works available in English.

I am not accusing Likoudis of falsifying anything, he's just not a very good scholar.

Actually, there comes to mind one particular professor who recently taught at the F.S.S.P.'s Our Lady of Guadalupe Seminary in Denton, Nebraska. Do distinctly recall he mentioned having thoroughly vetted James Likoudis & Kenneth D. Whitehead's The Pope, the Council, and the Mass: Answers to Questions the Traditionalists Have Asked before assigning the book as required reading on his course syllabus. So much for the mistaken claim Likoudis displays inferior scholarship...

[Hadrianus]

Thank you for reconfirming what i was already told by one Roman prelate to wit that the FSSP are not exactly academically up to much. That;s been my personal impression too. They are pious and mean well, but with a few exceptions, intellectuals they are not.But let us remember that that is not their vocation, so I do not fault them for it.

[Trebor135]

Originally Posted by Hadrianus

Thank you for reconfirming what i was already told by one Roman prelate to wit that the FSSP are not exactly academically up to much. That;s been my personal impression too. They are pious and mean well, but with a few exceptions, intellectuals they are not.But let us remember that that is not their vocation, so I do not fault them for it.

One doesn't necessarily have to be an "intellectual" to investigate the accuracy of a book in a competent manner.

What are the most egregious errors you found in the book by Likoudis and Whitehead?

[Trebor135]

Originally Posted by dplabon1

Bienvenidos a ABA. - Oropesa del Mar. Marina d'Or .

Somos una empresa especializada en el alquiler, compra y venta de apartamentos en Marina d'Or, Oropesa del Mar ,Castellón. Alquilamos exclusivamente apartamentos dentro del complejo Marina d'Or. En los diferentes apartados que le presentamos podrán encontrar lo mejor de nuestra ciudad de vacaciones.

Speaking very little Español, I'm still able to gather that you're talking about vacation apartments by the sea coast.

It also appears that you're spamming the good law-abiding citizens of CAF with unwanted advertising.

No thanks.

Now back to our regularly-scheduled programming...

[SanctusPeccator]

Originally Posted by Hadrianus

Thank you for reconfirming what i was already told by one Roman prelate to wit that the FSSP are not exactly academically up to much. That;s been my personal impression too. They are pious and mean well, but with a few exceptions, intellectuals they are not. But let us remember that that is not their vocation, so I do not fault them for it.

Highly unlikely as the professor in question is multilingual with multiple advanced degrees from prestigious pontifical universities (S.T.L. from the Angelicum & S.S.L. from the Pontifical Biblical Institute if memory serves). This interesting sidebar still does not support your dubious claim James Likoudis displays inferior scholarship.

[marlo]

Please check this out as well,

http://catholicnick.blogspot.com/201...do-did-st.html

Originally Posted by SanctusPeccator

Nor should you feel yourself obligated to defend Hamilton's proper application for argumentation; merely highlighting the lack of appropriate clarification in some of his claims. Appreciate the link to Perry C. Robinson's website, Trebor135.

[Trebor135]

Originally Posted by marlo

Please check this out as well,

http://catholicnick.blogspot.com/201...do-did-st.html

I've seen that link before. Unfortunately, Perry and Nick never picked up where they left off so as to work through the issue to its end. Hence, I don't consider that post to be conclusive.

[Hadrianus]

Originally Posted by Trebor135

One doesn't necessarily have to be an "intellectual" to investigate the accuracy of a book in a competent manner.

What are the most egregious errors you found in the book by Likoudis and Whitehead?

Of course, one does not have to be an intellectual, but one does have to make some serious study of the material before one can recommend any work, especially one of a polemical nature. It is a commonplace that many Catholics, from all perspectives are so addicted to polemic that they rarely examine the evidence in an objective manner and look at what sholars have written. I was personally aquatinted with the late cardinal Stcickler, who took a very different view from that of LIkoudis and Whitehead, though I doubt he'd ever have heard of them.
I would recommend the site New Liturgical Movement, for an excellent list of scholarly studies of the mass and the liturgical reform. For the Council it is much trickier. The CCC is reliable of course, but for an actual study of the texts, their development and the views of the various relators one must go to the Acta as all existing works are too polemical from one side or the other to be wholly reliable.

[Trebor135]

Originally Posted by Hadrianus

Of course, one does not have to be an intellectual, but one does have to make some serious study of the material before one can recommend any work, especially one of a polemical nature.

True.

It is a commonplace that many Catholics, from all perspectives are so addicted to polemic that they rarely examine the evidence in an objective manner and look at what sholars have written.

Hmm. Please provide some other examples you have encountered where Catholics have taken some apologetic work and run with it, the text's reliability be damned.

[Hadrianus]

This will be brief because every time I sign in to CA and write something it then cancels it and I have to start all over again, which is just what happened now.. Many examples could be cited, but now I'll deal with just one. Baronius in his famous Annales writes that the decrees of Constantinople and of Leo II who condemned Honorius II were probably forgeries. Baronius was in good faith, as in his day he was not privy to subsequent documents. But even in recent times Catholic polemicists have used this old canard.

I am in no way criticizing good and serious Catholic scholars; merely the self appointed apologists who often grab at anything which they think proves their initial assumptions. People of all religions do this.