[quote=Marilena]A very traditonal Pope. Is it true that he died of heartbreak because modernism was creeping into the church?
*]Dying because there are problems would be ridiculous - most people have to live through them, not escape by dying
*]He was 79 - which is pretty good age by any standard; especially for a man dying in 1914. I’ve heard that the War hastened his death, but have no idea whether this is so.
Also, I heard that some really traditional Catholics say that since Pius X, there have been no legitimate popes, that he was the last one.
He would be the first person to excommunicate them for that.
Also, I’ve heard that it is said amongst some traditionalists that V2 is not valid, corrupt. what are your opinions on this?
It is dangerously close to heresy to say that; not quite heresy, but too close for comfort. Vatican II is a wholly valid Ecumenical Council of the Church -
*]in being called and re-called by Popes
*]in representing the entire Catholic Church
*]in its work, which was religious
*]…I forget the rest …
[/list]Apart from anything else, it restored the lopsidedness which came about from the interruption of Vatican I, by supplementing and completing it, in very different circumstances. ##
As a traditionalist, do you think there have been no legitimate popes since Pius X ? As a modernist, what do you think of traditional Catholicism
This Catholic finds any names but “Christian” & “Catholic” abhorrent. Factions and factionalism are carnal, and have no place whatever in the Church of God.
As to the question: I think that “traditionalism” is far from being traditional, because it seizes upon the last couple of centuries of Western Catholicism, but ignores most of the rest of the Church, both in time and space. It’s too Western, European, Latin, and Roman to be rightly called traditional. A really traditional Catholicism would include the entire Church - which would mean an end to the defensiveness that seems to go with being a “traditionalist”. Even as it is, traditionalism ignores most of what went on in the Church in the last two centuries. It takes a tiny sliver of Catholicism, and tries to insist that that, and only that, is really Catholic. This is the equivalent of trying to claim that St.Thomas Aquinas or St. Augustine embodies the whole tradition of Catholic theology.
The present Pope is as valid as ever Pius X was. He may be different from him; and he is - but that is not in itself any condemnation at all. Difference == deterioration. ##
If this thread is in the wrong place, sorry! Please, move it to the correct location! My apologies!