I have been looking into catholic traditionalism, I’ve been getting confused on many issues. When I read documents that were pre-Vatican II, then read something on the same topic post-Vatican II, I usually get a sense of contradiction. My question is this: How does one read the post-Vatican II Papal Encyclicals and the Vatican II documents in the light of Tradition? Thanks.
The quick and easiest answer that I can give you is that the Vatican II documents give both early Church Fathers and/or early Church history as well as Scripture references. So in some documents there has already been a precedent set with the early Church. In some cases Vatican II did not entirely make new or novel changes. The Council Fathers sought to revive ancient church practices and traditions that go back further than the Council of Trent 1545-1563. Remember the Church has over 2000 years of tradition, history and practices. That in time fell out of practice, deemphasized, had too many abuses and other reasons why they were not carried over to today.
I believe encyclicals also have past references to early Popes and tradition, history, Scripture, etc.
When I read documents that were pre-Vatican II, then read something on the same topic post-Vatican II, I usually get a sense of contradiction.
Logan, could you give some examples of possible contradictions?