Comments

  1. Michael Dowd

    Just a couple of comments before Archbishop Vigano replies to Fr. Weinandy.
    —It seems to me this was more a personal attack on the Archbishop than a rebuttal of an argument basically saying Vigano lies, is self promoting, slick, and problematic,
    — Weinandy attributes straw men argument to Vigano which he then “defeats”
    —Weinandy claims that Vatican II taught definitive doctrine which by Vatican II own admission said it was not definitive but only pastoral.
    —Weinandy claims Vigano is wrong in claiming Paul VI sanctioned aberrations following Vatican II by his silence. Instead Weinandy claims it was because Paul VI was weak and didn’t think the Bishops would follow his direction. Essentially, what this means is that Weinandy is essentially agreeing with Vigano as being silent and being weak amount to the same thing.

    Anyway, Vigano is winning IMO. Weinandy struck out.

     

Please comment