A Catholic Theologian's Take on Vatican II - Matthew Levering (Christian Theology Series)

welcome to this episode of intellectual conservatism today i'm here with dr matthew levering a very i'd say famous catholic theologian and philosopher uh dr levering or matthew could you briefly introduce yourself to the audience sweden will be here sean thank you for having me and i teach here at mond line seminary i'm mainly teaching their stl program and then my position is the james and mary d perry jr chair of theology i mentioned that because they were so generous to endow but and i feel very grateful to them always you know they're wonderful people all right well so dr levering today we are here to talk about vatican 2 which of course is a controversial complicated subject so uh as we dive in i just want to ask you you know before we get into vatican 2 why is it relevant particularly at this moment like why are people talking about vatican ii what what is its relevance for catholics and even for you know the entire world vatican ii i think it will always be important because you know it occurred it occurred at such a fascinating historical moment so to me to me that's the that's the main um interest you know you're again the early early 60s it's it's a part of sort of the whole world was was changing so rapidly you gotta remember that that was the period in which um colonialism comes to an end you know obviously world war ii was very very decisive in a number of ways but colonialism uh came to an end pretty much pretty quick pretty quickly in the next decades after world war ii and so then you that made a huge difference for the for the whole world for um africa for um you know asia everywhere near the near east and so on anyway there was there was also the fact that magnitude occurs um after the holocaust and and i see that as i'm tremendously significant because um the church simply had to had to to renew itself in terms of um the church is thinking about the jewish people that had to happen and thank god it did happen and um so then there was also just the fact um that the early 60s by that time you you had uh um historical biblical criticism had sort of uh reached um you might say uh if you read commentaries from from that period they they basically know what what we know today and part of that reason for that is that the um the dead sea scrolls and the um the whole study of second temple judaism was um had emerged by that time you know the desi skulls have been found and they've been um interpreted and were being interpreted but uh so there was just a tremendous gain and knowledge um of the biblical world and that the catholic church needed to um you know needed also to uh you know resonate in some way with would be his um insights and these developments and in in all these ways so intellectually politically and then vis-a-vis the jewish people all these things were extremely important and so the church by god's providence had the second vetting council and we have so many wonderful um documents from that council so aside from the four constitutions of the council itself what are other resources that are really useful for understanding uh the theology and all the things that happened at the council well um my mentor maggie lamb you know was very concerned about that question you know there wasn't there haven't been any resources at least um and at least in through the early 2000s so he and i co-edited um a couple volumes um one of them was called vatican chief renewal renewal within tradition and it has essays by a number of wonderful scholars um such as cardinal dulles and many other people and then on the other is called the reception of vatican ii talking about the 50 years um after vatican ii now so the first volume is about how vatican ii relates to things before vatican ii and then the second volume is about um you know the last 50 years um you know since the council so anyway so we were trying to add to the literature and then there's there's many other other things things are being written um now uh but but i think i can i can leave it at that for now um so then moving on then what would you say are the strengths and weaknesses of the second vatican council well i as i see it the great strength is um you know if you look at ancient constitutions there is a tremendous desire to proclaim jesus christ and and him as lord so that's got to be the strength of anything catholic and and and i see um you know to my mind there's no weakening of of the catholic church in these documents um the catholic church you know proclaims itself as as the church that jesus founded um the church to which everyone is called and the church that that can instruct the whole world with the light of jesus christ the couch which says it says really it says that man cannot know uh without the light of christ and in fact a man cannot know himself without the church's uh instruction without the aid of the church so um these are very beautiful things to say very true mechanical church talks about the bible and talks about the historicity untruth of the bible and and the um the accuracy of the new testament you know and and the reliability of our the the of the documents of our faith the god of church um talks about you know many other things um i don't want to just ramble on i just think there's a lot of great stuff in this council yeah so then uh it'll be worth talking to you about the controversies and we'll get to those eventually but d so you would you would say that you have a a positive view of the second vatican council uh you're not you would you wouldn't really isolate anything negative out of the council oh you know if we want to talk about negative um there there are certainly there are certainly negative things that that happen um for in the world and and in the and also negative developments in the church um they especially they were beginning before the council um obviously now remember the church has always had negative things happening you got there's no if you look at any era you're going to find plenty of problems you know it says right now people are very focused on on this particular era you know the area right before and and right after the council and their focus on that area of era because these problems that emerge in that period have not been dealt with in any adequate way so um that's what's up and that's what that's what the problems are they're definitely gonna be they're different problems now i don't i don't see the council itself as as um i don't see it as perfect you know the documents aren't perfect they're not like they're not like moses went up and got the documents and and it turned out it was the second vatican council you know i mean come on come on we gotta we gotta be serious here this is these are conciliar documents it's a you know it's a wonderful valid ecumenical council it has to be interpreted like any council and it has been well interpreted by the popes that came after the council they've interpreted it you know i mean there's there's there's problems in any in any kind of of document you have to got to think about like nicea for example at the council of nicaea they they did not proclaim the divinity of the holy spirit you know you know i was it turned out to be it turned out that was kind of a problem you know so you you did have to have another council you know to to um you know and there was a huge amount of strife and troubles you know so the council doesn't do everything it doesn't it doesn't say everything perfectly and then of course there's been um you know some serious problems in the world and in the church and um over the past um 50 years and these problems as i mentioned just haven't haven't yet been resolved you know it's it's part of the difficulties of the time period we live in and every time period though has has real real difficulties all right so now as we approach the second vatican council in our interview um i want to ask you uh what parts of it are infallible or is the whole thing infallible and maybe it would help the audience to understand how exactly does infallibility work especially in the case of uh council right the magisterium the pope so kind of you know what parts of atticans are infallible and how does the catholic church understand infallibility okay wonderful yeah now in terms of infallible i mean look you know the i mean that's infallible is a strong word and it pertains um you know can pertain to the extraordinary magisterium the ordinary magisterium you know but not certainly not everything in the council is infallible that that'd be that'd be crazy but the word i mean you have to ask yourself more like like what in the council is true and and there are um there are elements um you know obviously that uh that when you when you're asking this type of question that you you do need to to kind of look to tradition you know and to look to scripture you know and so on you you make judgments that that way um again though i i i'm not quite sure i mean you can go through the council and kind of think about the theological notes and the the weight of particular considerate statements and and then the weight of the constitution versus the weight of the decrees and or whatever you know and you can have different theological weights and notes and and and and this this type of thing you know you can you can do all that and and i think that that probably does need to be done but but again um for my part uh i'm i'm perfectly willing to um you know receive the council as a and i i just don't i myself think that the council is is true you know in terms of the conciliar texts i think they're they're true and i don't think that they i don't think that they deviate you know from the tradition of our of our faith i don't think they i don't think they violate scripture um which is a one of the monuments or any one monument of tradition i believe the council is true now um they're the areas that have been most contested have often have to do with dignitaries you know that that and then then certain elements although like with sahaja yogis you know the obviously there a lot's going to depend on the implementation you know at least as i see it you know in dignitas their fights about whether that that is in continuity with um the tradition of our faith but once you get the sacrosanct i'm considering them as far as i can tell um the fights are are mainly over the implementation you know um it remembers sacrosanct and psyllium has these wonderful dogmatic parts you're wonderful parts of theological teaching and then also has a lot of parts that are very practical and so it's like um do this do that you know make set up this committee you know set up and i always don't like committees you know i think that's worrisome if you have a committee involved uh you know but a lot of a lot of it's gonna have to do with the implementation of of that document but and that's also the case you know once you once you start looking in terms of catalytic social teaching you get a lot of counter-subjection and got him as fast toward toward the back of it you know so as you go as you read on and got him at space you have to remember that there's the calisthenics using has principles but it also has um applications things that are that pope say and and and so on and i was reading this great passage from joseph ratzinger it's it's on page 31 of dogma and preaching the um you know the ignatius edition of dogman preaching so we're asking on patriot one of this book he says he comes right out and says it he says look um you know at a certain before the council be um we got to be a little careful we can't be ultra mountainous ratzinger's writing in 1973. and so he firmly defends the authority of the papal magisterium but he does say look let's not let's not say that everything that any pope says is um infallible you know and he points to he points to the 19th century and and um i remember there were um you know the popes would say this and that and not everything that the pope's the 19th century said is infallible and that often pertained to social teaching you know so obviously you know a lot there's going to be a good bit in guardian space that is as you say i'm not infallible and certainly can be contested as you as you go back in the back but the principles the principles of the thing are are true um but i think you can you can contest um elements as you as you read on and god even space okay okay dude we're always worried about rambling on well so just to kind of expand on i guess this question right um when the catholic church like says that its teachings are infallible let's say or you know a council forms and the magisterium kind of uh gets together in this extraordinary fashion right um it's not the case that there's like a formula for infallibility let's say where it's like oh when they maybe maybe it's like a if the council says something like this has been divinely revealed to us by the holy spirit or you know the pope makes an ex cathedral pronouncement that's when you can really know that like there's no ambiguity there right but when there's a lot of moving parts it seems as if like over time we realize what part um is infallible what part is true what part stays with us is that like a fair summation of you know knowing which claim or which statement is infallible or you know am i am i thinking too systematically here well i think it might be i i i encourage other people to um research along these lines you know to this is the type of research that um the catholic church has done in the past uh for example um you know think of ludwig art and and all the different theological notes in the newest class in neo's lasting theology which i really liked um you you would everything would come with a theological note and in terms of the weight of authority that um that it the doctrine had teaching had so you would um as you're reading along in anything you know you would be able to um receive um some sense of the of the weight of that of that teaching and therefore how how binding it it would be upon consciences or so on well see you know but i i think that's fine and after after trent it also after the council trent um there was also an emphasis on on this um you you find it in melchior kano as he talks about the different theological loci and different different weight um of you know how do you figure out what the church actually teaches if the church teaches it definitively and and so on and and these these debates um you know from my perspective uh the the problem with it all is is that you can kind of get yourself tied up and and not somewhat as you as you look for like the final list of of the definitive things you must believe and you can get that nuts and then then you might you might get in trouble because you might say you might say well i believe this definitive list and you you make up this definitive list of all the things i'm adding to you that you must believe in you and that have to be believed and then the other things that might not have to be believed and then you come with us and then and then they say and and you do it all based on on um theological weight of constitutions versus this or that or whatever and then then somebody come on and say but who made infallible your your um list of your your way of doing the theological notes you know has has a pope or a council defined you see um the different weights and different theological note of in terms of authority have hopes and counsel to find that uh you you do you understand what i'm trying to say yeah but what i'm trying to say is that um that you you know you would also need the magician to give infallible infallible um authority to your weighting system to your criteria do you understand why you say that you you would need you would need that if you're going to give a final list of all the things inviting to you that you must believe that we all must believe de fiji yeah now you would you would also therefore need a pope um in a very in a formal way you know i think to to give um to say that you're you're the the criteria you've used the waiting system you know that you've used is infallible you know it's and you um until until that happens you know you might still have doubts because someone else might have another waiting system and they they might make a list too they might make another list you see what i'm saying and they might say well wait a second you know like here's my list you know and and it's not as big as your list but i i don't see anything i think that um people would get themselves a little tired and knots on this type of stuff and the basic bottom line as i see it the bottom line is that um if you read the documents of adding two constitutions and documents any other documents what what's going to hit you is a lot of christian truth it's it's true you know the the dogmatic claims made about the church about christ about about the trinity you know about eucharistic sacrifice you know about about christ and revealing mandu to himself about anthropology in light of christ all sorts of things that are present in the council and i've just named a few um about the way we ought to treat the jews you know about mission and the fact that mission is necessary about about salvation and whether anyone can be saved who is not a member a visible member of the catholic church you know all these sick questions are addressed in the council and the council gives truth you know and that truth is rooted in tradition but also um develops you know in certain cases in certain cases there are developments that are found in the council that you know i see the council as true and you know that to me that's the most important thing um you know whether or not it's infallible and whether whether there may be some things elements in the council i think there are some elements in the council for sure that are that are not infallible and that are open to debate you know i've told you about already mentioned you know like parts later parts of you know applications that you might find in gaudium as fast or you know things that are just sort of things like that and so on so okay yeah okay well um yeah so if i can just uh come in real quick so then i notice that you talk about how some parts are true and how some parts might be infallible right and i guess like for the audience they might think oh i thought that meant the same thing to a catholic but i guess like um when we talk about infallibility we're talking about specifically the authority of the church saying that this is true and almost like the the debate stops in a way right like this is part of the deposit of faith if you will well like there might be parts that are true but haven't been like dogmatically you know let's say sanctioned is that a fair characterization yeah i think so and and then also what i'm saying is that that if you if you approach um like the council saying like what is infallible you know what here is infallible you know um it's like the way it's i'm telling you it can be like the way that my um my children eat a casserole you know they there's since they don't like any vegetables or anything green or any onions or anything or any mushrooms or anything that doesn't isn't just perfectly like a noodle or cheese so they will what they do is they come to the casserole they say that some aspects of this casserole are infallible and they believe in noodles and they believe in cheese and then they then they dig out everything you know they go like like a surgeon you know you know it's like a surgeon you know you're kind of you you dig out the final the tiny little kernels of things and and you you're and then you have a big pile over here of kind of green things do you see this isn't any way to this isn't a way to receive counsel you know what i mean this is i'm trying i'm trying to warn against that i'm trying to caution you know that's that's my that's my point here is that you know like yes yes there are things we can say in the council that are infallible you know if you if you really want to read it like that you know um you just start start with god in it start with sacrificing concealing you know and you can you can see the sources um when zach sent him concealing starts talking about jesus christ you can go back to nicaea you know you can um when it starts talking about the eucharistic sacrifice you can go to council trent you know and and so on you see so there are there are plenty of things that are infallible and you can see the sources and then there's also some dogmatic developments that you can that that are made clear you know um for example in lumenjincium there's there's some dogmatic development um regarding bishops and and so on um anyway again my my suggestion is that this isn't really quite the right way to read the council you know um because i think the council is as reliable in a sense that yeah there's some there may be some things that are going to need that are not um not binding you know but in general i just think it's a pretty good council you know i mean i don't think it's that hard to tell the stuff that that is not definitive basically people get worried about dignitas they get worried about some aspects of glaudium aspects and um then they they get really worried about the implementation of sacramento and psyllium and then before you know it they just think why do we bother having a dumb counsel at all that tends to be the thing you know because like if the church is in such um strife if there's such strife and such danger facing the church um today in the year 2020 you know this dumb council didn't do any good at all so it's you know then they get mad that tends to be what they basically say um they basically uh respond then very negatively to counsel but it doesn't usually have anything to do hardly with almost all the counsel it's just maybe a few a few documents now some people some people get mad at the council for sort of opening up cans of worms um for example let me give an example that like in in dave verbum dave verbum um you know really insists upon biblical interpretation you know being done in in light of the fathers in light of the analogy of faith and and so on in light of the magisterium but david also very strongly um you know allows for uh historical critical uh research into the context of and and the um insofar as possible the authors or the and certainly their context you know what they meant to say and what you know what were their contacts that's historical research so dave everyone really allows for that well um people feel mad at they feel angry at their verb for opening up a can of worms um and dave also is is the first council to talk about dogmatic development you know like at the council trent um it was more easy you just said um like the church has always taught that there were seven sacraments you know the council of trenton says stuff but more like that you know just like i said what do you mean the church has always taught that there are seven sacraments now historically um that's not the case now it doesn't mean they're not seven sacraments and always worse than sacraments but the church um look um the whole doctrine of the sacraments developed in the 12th century it there were developments it's not it's not like they were like everything was made new as or invented but but there were um you know there were real developments that occurred in the 12th century and and the um the council founders of trent um did not you know discuss that well but but dave airborne does discuss um as you know dave mentions um doctrinal development well so some people even get mad at that you know they get concerned and does say you're opening up a can of worms that are very dangerous so so people respond to counsel in different ways generally it has to do with a very few very few texts of the council but sometimes people get mad at the whole council for opening up cans of worms getting us into a miserable mess and and i'm basically allowing allowing the church to be very vulnerable to um what you might call a liberal catholicism with a capital ill or you might call it modernism that was also another name or you call liberal protestantism all these things all these phrases um have to do with theology that is not not dogmatic you know in other words that with um theology that denies that christianity is a dogmatic religion that christianity involves truth that is enduring truth you see liberal protestantism um just says hey christianity is solely about caring for the poor building an authentic community and and then um does sort of gesturing toward the ineffable mystery the mystery of the divine but um for liberal protestant for a liberal protestant thinker you know um all the dogmas about jesus christ or about sacraments those can all be changed tomorrow because those are those are just um they may be helpful for some people for their religious experience but other people don't don't need them this is the liberal protestant view you know anyway so there are liberal catholics with a capital l and there are um they were called modernists um in the 19th the late 19th and early 20th century but but obviously they're still um still liberal protestantism within catholicism of course and i mean it's called just liberal catholicism or with a capital l um well so people get mad at the council for um uh you know for allowing allowing um there to be um like if you have dogmatic development before you know it you might have some rather it's can of worms arguments slippery slope type arguments these these tend to be the things but but um you know it's not but sometimes people have concerns about specific things about in um dignitas or wherever there can be some texts that that people are bothered about yeah so we can probably go through um each of the constitutions rather quickly just to get your comments on them so for instance um okay so for instance uh there's a sacro sanctum concilium and my question is how did that constitution affect the liturgy and can you explain the current controversies around the liturgy well so they were they were seeking um a greater participation of the lady and internal and external participation for example they were seeking um you know more more hymns and more more lay responses they um they were also seeking um a wider scriptural diversity in terms of the readings so they wanted the old testament to be read um not not solely the psalms but also they wanted an old testament reading you know they um they they felt that the laity um you know we're we're not um participating interiorly as deeply as as should be and and understanding what the what um the reality is faith now the problem was um that that you know the fact is that that the the you know the church has always had this problem somewhat the it's difficult you know people have trouble being christian you know they kind of show up for mass it's and they kind of and a lot of them don't come to mass this has always been the case you know and people people have trouble living the christian life of truly participating interiorly you know their hearts and so so the council so this was a problem that the people the people recognize you know in the 20th century they were concerned you know that young people and and um uneducated people and and educated people just simply were falling away from faith and and of course this accelerated after after the second world war um world war ii you know on this look fa the faith was declining it was among young people and there was a lot of warning signs and so they thought they thought they tried to you know renew it by renewing the um renewing the liturgy they also had to deal with the effect of um you know the the global expansion of catholicism you know meaning that you have caused them in asia catholicism in africa and places where catholicism hadn't been as spread as much and so that that they also then addressed the issues of inculturation now these issues have been addressed before but they um the council in sacramento concern addresses um issues related to enculturation you know and the basic idea is is everybody gonna have to have build european cathedrals which are very expensive you know it's how you're going to build a european cathedral you know in in africa different which if in countries that might not have the money and and then um get all get everybody singing gregorian chant now remember the secretary of concilium um still advocates for the primacy of gregorian chant look it's it says but the question was like and some in some countries are really not going to say that everybody's got to be doing gregorian chants why is that really fundamental you know to um the liturgy for for all cultures and and that the the council um thought that it might not be you you see but this was i mean to me you were talking about like infallible and non-infallible yeah um you know i think it would be debated like if you want to debate it if you want to say that if you want to say that your grand chant is part of the deposit of faith remember the council advocates for the primacy of gregorian chant i'm not i'm not criticizing myself i think the council itself proclaims the prime minister of grand chant and i i accept that very much but but if you're if you're saying that everybody in africa and other countries where they have their own musical traditions you know where christianity has has spread widely only in the past um two centuries you know if you're saying that all those people have to now have a european education and be sent to germany to learn gregorian chant or something anyway to me this is a debatable matter yeah you know i have a position on it but this is debatable so these are the things these are the things that the council was trying to do um like sacramento doesn't say anything about moving the altar around and changing the um you know the direction of liturgical worship it doesn't stand about that it doesn't it doesn't it doesn't reject latin in fact it in fact it insists upon the primacy of latin in the mass although it does say that vernacular can be used and as soon as you as soon as you open the door you know you do have um you've got potential for slippery slope you know um so these are these are um that's maybe enough to say what do you think yeah i mean so and then the the hot the hot uh kind of phrase is the novus ordo right that's what everyone's talking about like uh you know um that was after the that was after the council okay okay so like i've always heard no the novus ordo being associated with vatican ii but basically the council set the door for the novus ordo basically um no in truth i mean there was some there was some development toward the novus ordo um as far as i understand it look i'm i'm not a um i'm not a historian religion but i do think there was some during the council during the council itself there was some development toward the novice order i think that's pretty that's clear but um but but you got to remember the new the whole thing comes after the council that's not part of secretary clinton i'm considering them but no disorder is not it's not a um it's not conciliar it comes after the council and the whole issue with no disorder as far as i'm concerned you know would be like does the pope have the authority to approve a um liturgical right now i think i think it i think it may be the case that liturgical rights um you know written after the council are put together right after the council you know maybe there needs to be renewal including reform or you have the whole liturgical movement that was all about reform so i i see no reason why we can't have reform you know if if i mean literatures always love to reform the liturgy you know and and i i think i think that the the altar um the direction of the of the worship um the direction the priests and the people need to face the same in the same direction you know they need to face the altar um during the eucharistic prayer i've written about that and i think that's i think that's the case but um so i certainly agree with um joseph ratzinger on on that but my point though is yeah this this wasn't um none of these things including the novus ordo and these these were things that were part of the implementation you know there was remember the newest one the the second century when psyllium does say that it wants um some renewal and reform of the right the roman rights you know so it does call for that it calls for some renewal and reform you know and and um you know again it would have to do with things like like i mentioned earlier you know but it doesn't it doesn't spell that out in terms of in terms of like um you know what we want is it's just not spelled out you know so it does open the door for it opens the door for um different ways of implementing it you can implement the council faithfully and this way or in that way and and then a lot of it also is is um you know trial and error you know they they had certain goals in mind they wanted a deeper participation they wanted them more use of the whole bible and they wanted more more lay response you know and late involvement in terms of the hymns and so on and and they wanted their responses you know they wanted more um they wanted to be sure that the laity uneducated people they were especially thinking about uneducated people who were all becoming marxists and also the educated people were all become marxists you know at that time you know but they want to be sure that all that they could understand the liturgy and they knew what they were participating in and they also wanted to be sure about enculturation um that the liturgy would be something that could be adapt adaptable um to cultures that only only recently had been receiving christianity these were all concerns that they had but i don't think that going back to infallible i don't think that anything that they said was infallible in terms of that they were just trying to implement um you know it was really kind of like the trojan movement they weren't trying to implement the children's goals and then and then kind of you have that's different though from the actual implementation the council and the implementation are not the same thing all right so i was going to talk to you about maybe uh let's see you already talked about uh the deburr room a little bit but uh let's see here there's lumen gentium and goddamn it's best i think i'll just kind of uh put those questions aside because i want to get into some of the uh questions that one of my friends wanted to ask so i have a friend of mine i think it's okay if i drop his name his name is daniel jackson and he collects you know a lot of people with cyclicals he even like even goes so far as to like i think buy them and translate them or get translated versions of them so he's very passionate about you know this past time this hobby of his so he had three questions he wanted to ask you and they're they're quite technical so you know um you don't have to respond to every single bit and piece but just uh what the you know the main thrust of the question which is usually the last part so here's the first question that daniel wanted to ask so he said some seek discontinuity between dignitatis humane and earlier papal documents like mirari wuss kwantakura libertas uh praestante on the matter of religious liberty and church-state relations is there a change in doctrine or in policy maybe i'll leave it at that uh okay well yeah so i think to have some money would be the most controversial of all the all the documents you know um joseph ratzinger talks about dignity and i believe he talks about it in that in that famous 2005 um homily that he gave um you know i believe was to the cardinals i i've forgotten now um anyway um there's no doubt there's some development of doctrine but here here's i mean here's sort of what i my view i i accept i accept the basic beauty point as so far as i can understand it that um that nicholas healey and and david schindler um argue for and even if i didn't accept that viewpoint i would want also to to um think think with um charles cardinal or journey i think he's an important figure in these discussions um now he was associated with maritime and usually people who are concerned about this um don't like maritime at all but you know jordan i think is a is a deep thinker and he has an entire ecclesiology um and he he thought about this problem in a in a very profound way so i i think that journey might be someone you know to read on the topic i also said i'm healey and schindler and then also you know obviously anything that russell hittinger writes as well and then also of course i'm joseph ratzinger what what he said in 2005 but look the um again you do have to kind of think about these matters and and in the sense of here you are gonna are going you're looking to to tradition and you're asking you're asking questions about about what what parts of of our of the handing on of our faith you know what what parts of these this have been taught definitively by the church and and what parts have um have not been taught definitely so so you're gonna there i think you will get some debate over um you know whether whether the the doctrine on church state that was taught in the 19th century and and um i think someone in the 20th century but certainly the 19th century church state doctrine like what aspects of that um are are definitively um taught and and then what aspects are not i'm definitely taught but you know when you're going to get down to the bottom line though as i see it um so these are my debate and um but then once you get down to the bottom line and you've read everything you know you've read all the others that i just mentioned and and and so on you know kind of the bottom line issue as i s as i see the issue um has to do with um you know what what how are we going to to treat um uh let's let's turn let's turn it around okay let's let's turn around let's think more about um let's just say that you and me were um episcopalians okay or or maybe maybe we're um we're muslims you know how about how about if we be muslims for today so you got to turn it around you got to think of it like this and or we could just be episcopalians and or anglicans and so and as you probably know in the in the um in the 16th century it wasn't safe to be a catholic and an anglican realm because um there wasn't there wasn't the fact is that catholics were a danger to the state in the sense that um you know the the good of the state and basically the basic argument always is that the common good of the state requires um that the church guide the state in order for with common good and you don't want to have heretics running around because heretics um they they weaken the state by by um turning people from from the truth you know so that's the problem with heretics is heretics they not only cause their own eternal damnation but people who don't believe the truth um weaken the state by undermining um the common good uh by because they've turned away from the truth and so therefore they do things that are against the truth and they um they also attack the truth you know they they um they public they try to publish things against the truth they spread they spread falsehood they um but they also do things you know maybe they get involved in and some some things that we we know to be sons and so on so the way that it used to be to handle these people you know and just imagine like if we're muslims or if you imagine you're we're all type where you and me are talking we're muslims or else were england's in the 16th century so the way it used to be to handle these people is that you would um you would give them some opportunity to convert you know unless they were unless they were jews you know and then and then if you might you might even allow them to worship in private so long as they did nothing public you know you you would not allow them to to build houses of worship you know unless they were jews you would allow um in the ghetto you ghetto areas you would allow um synagogues to be built uh perhaps but often other times you wouldn't allow that by the way but but the point the point is that what you would do then is for the common good um and to make sure that that the whole society is functioning in a corporate truth you would um you would if if if the person fell away from let's say they rejected they rejected the angry and faith or they rejected the muslim faith if they fell away from that faith then what you do is you bring them in and you talk to them give them a chance to convert and then if they won't convert then you could expel them from the land or you could um you could also the death penalty also you know for for damn you know the state could implement the death penalty um or or you might simply persecute them by taking away their goods and making sure that they were um you can you can imprison them and so on so but my point is that this is the bottom line the bottom line is if suon tomorrow is ceases to be a catholic like tomorrow you become a baptist well what do i do with you you know do i um allow you to build up any house of worship because baptist baptist faith is false and it doesn't build up the common good because how could falsehood build up to common good so soon becomes a baptist so what in the heck am i gonna do with him okay well i bring him in but he's he insists he's gonna go he he said this he's gonna proclaim the baptist gospel because he's you know um siobhan says that the state can have an impact on him and he knows that the church is false he hates the catholic church and he tells he tells um he says you people are enslaved to the pope and you're enslaved to everything and he hates god attrition and you say my gosh this guy is a complete mess and so you say well what do we do well we can't let sun run around we can't see on cause damage in in our in the state because that would damage the common good and it would weaken the faith of of the common people so let's what do we do with tsunami well maybe we could expel him or should we should we give him the should we maybe we should give him the death penalty for um you know for what he's you know for what he's done okay see this is really kind of the bottom line of the thing and and i was um it has to do also i was talking to some uh to a person and and the person told me that you know in a catholic state and he thinks that we we need to recover a catholic state you know it would be like a jewish state it would be essentially like um like is the state of israel and so you if you're not a catholic you would not have full citizenship you know you wouldn't wouldn't be able to serve on um you know i'm not not talking about israel i'm just talking about his ideas okay so the basic idea would be like you would not be able to serve on the law courts you wouldn't really be able to be a lawyer you could not um you couldn't be a professor of certain disciplines because you would be too filled with your falsehood you probably could be a medical doctor you could certainly be involved in um finance but you you could not be um you couldn't be a politician and you could not um you know have citizenship rights and so you'd be and so therefore you wouldn't really be allowed to vote do you understand these are very these measures um we have to think about this you know how and we need to think about like how do we like when catholics are treated like this by the way soon we're going to have a totally secular state catholics are going to get treated um like this you know but two wrongs don't make it right you know so do we is this how christians should treat other other people you know is this the kind of state that that really reflects christ but anyhow these are but these are think these are things to think about in terms of whether we really want to compel people who in conscience today they were catholic but now they're baptists and in conscience they have to be baptist so are we going to compel them to lie are we going to ask them to lie to go to pretend to go to mass or they're going to force them to go to mass at least nine times a year even though we know they don't believe even though even though in conscience they reject the church and they are baptist you see these are very serious matters about compelling um people of conscience i i find it very worrisome uh any and my point is that dignitas um you know it doesn't it doesn't reject catholic states i don't i don't think that dignitas hamane does what people who are concerned about it um say it does um but but i i just think i think people need to think deeply about about really these are these are matters where if you look back in the history of church there's been there's been some very serious problems um like burning heretics like um you know all the persecutions of jews the incredible amount of persecution that jewish people endured so i'm just saying that we got a um before we sort of like go back to the golden pass and and so on we want to think about all this but i i began the whole comment just by saying well the first let the first thing we do is like re read schindler's book um which you come out there with healy and then we you know read um read russ inger and and then read charge renee and and let's think about this you know um that was a really nice and rigorous answer dr levering uh okay let me ask you let me ask you one last question and i think we can wrap up the interview here so um i wanted to ask you about your thoughts on the the sspx and the radtrad movement you know uh and you know like the ss where i am right right now studying at university here at k-state kansas state university i'm very close to saint mary's and you know often i can just drive down and be in the sspx community and then move out you know and then also um what is it uh uh when it comes to the radtrad movement you know it's mainly like an online sort of movement especially with people youtube channels and podcasts who have just kind of you know attacked bishop baron or have just really said they reject the second vatican council or they think it was it's part of the the woes that the catholic church is currently facing could you comment on the sspx and the the uh the radshrad movement okay well and i do want to do i want to do a quick answer to the other two questions that your friend asked though but um oh sure okay but look yeah but but but let me answer this one first though well well look the fact is that that the churches is um oh as always the church i think is in need of reform and there there is there are real resources in the preconciliator period for reform and for renewal in other words the church is always facing different problems so so there's no reason that the church can't recall upon it it should call upon the pre-concealer period um to face um certain problems in dealing with especially especially with what i've called liberal protestantism anything that rejects the dogmatic principle or the sacramental principle of the church the church does need to be careful and to um to retrieve there's nothing wrong with retrieving things that are pre-conciliar of course of course the church should have all all her heritage and so um you know there there are dangers facing the church and and so on and so i i see no i myself see no problem you know with um with kind of efforts to retrieve and to to deepen um our current as uh faith our current practice um and so to my mind that's what the the sxpx and then also the radtrad you know they're basically they always kind of emphasize the problems and they they don't they don't point to any of the of the good things that have happened since the second round council but they really emphasize the problems and there are real problems and so i far be it for me to to deny you know this the reality of these problems and then but i would i would want to say a couple things first of all we have to keep on the communion of the church under under the i mean there's nothing there's nothing more like the defined doctrine than that that's a total that's a defined doctrine so the unity of the church under the pope and to to undermine that unity is a very serious sin so um let's be really careful there because that's a deep sin against charity and and if there's anything infallible that's got to be that's got to be it you know we don't want to sin against charity by undermining the unity of the church as led by the successor peter and and also um you know to to say to make arguments that that somehow um you know somehow like the the successor of peter really isn't the success for peter no that's that's just pure silliness and and ridiculous you know because and you find it that way because i a lot of times people who make that argument they can't figure out which was the last pope that really was the successor of peter then they're going to argue forever it's it's protestantism that's what this is um if you if you study if you study protestantism that they too argued like when did the church um you know decline was was it year 1000 was it 1200 like when when did um was it 400 you know when did the church fail you know anyway it's it's the same basic idea that you get with these folks that are saying that the church no longer has a valid pope or whatever other kind of stuff but so but and also then in terms of charity you know um i would say uh you know if you're going to deal with any bishop or any theologian and and you got to be and kind of you attack the person and and it always becomes very ad hominem and then you also have just stuff like i mean like i i mean are you attacking the person that agrees with you almost on 95 of everything you know why why not why not um i mean i don't know so i i feel there's a lack of charity but there's also a lack of a lack of sense for um for nourishing the unity of of the faith and and so on so i'm definitely um concerned about the radchat movement i i support elements of i i support retrieving neo-scholastic um and all sorts of insights and wisdom from the pre-concealer period i support all that but um but this whole thing with the radchat seems to be something quite different it seems to be um you know very to me you know very very um very much a step a step that is not moving in the direction of the unity of the church and that is not um going to be able to retain an ecumenical counsel so basically like this is a total gift to the liberal protestants and so you couldn't have a better gift it's like this is christmas you know i mean it's like here are the conservative catholics handing over the vatican it's just like you can have the vatican we're conservative catholics we're going to give you the vatican and we're going to give you an ecumenical council it's like here take it all the other economic councils were all true supposedly but this final economic council of vatican ii you can have it it's false and this is a total gift this this is like an attack it's an attack upon the dogmatic principle and it's an attack upon the sacramental principle as well and so it's a it's a gift it's liberal protestantism it's a form of that really but even though they do it as conservatives it's just it's really devastating for um for the catholic church and so this is not the way you know they're but their their motives though their motives are good and their motives are like you got to retrieve things from the pre-conciliar there's lots of good bear there's lots of great stuff in the neos classic well of course that's all true you know so um that's all good and we and so we should do that um okay but let me quickly answer let me do the questions the second third questions from your friend because i feel guilty for rambling on no you're good so let me actually ask them and then i'll let you answer okay so uh these were daniel's other two questions so uh i'll just i'll read them in their entirety you know to give the audience all the details and then dr levin you can answer however you want so here are the two uh the last few questions that my friend asked so he said again specifically does the ecclesiology of lumen gentium and unitatis redin tegrazio differ substantially in doctrine from pius xii mystique corporis christie pius the 11th mortalium animos and leo the 13th status quo nitium or cognitum does vatican 2 teach that the mystical body of christ is identical to the catholic church who are the members of the church according to vatican ii and then the last question he asked is based on the current trends among professing catholics how will vatican 2 be evaluated in future decades all right take it away well uh okay well there's a lot of in terms of the practical i i think that the catholic church is it's quite clear that um read and de grazio and lumen jensen both teach that the catholic churches is the church founded by christ there is no other church and there may be um you know there are there are elements of sanctification or elements of of um you know other other churches have scripture have the scriptures and and and um they they have baptism you know so look but it's quite clear in fact one of my dearest protestant friends recently in in a book um called dogma and ecumenism has an essay where he he expresses kind of her at united's reading grazio and and the his horror is that he says that united states teaches that the catholic churches is the church founded by christ and that the protestant churches are not they're not they're not the church founded by christ and then they're not even like branches of it he in other words as a protestant he recognized that what the catholics were teaching do you see what i'm saying so yes there is a continuity there's a con that's my point that there's a continuity um that it is this one you know the church is a church founded by jesus christ and um the protestants do not have the sacrament of the eucharist they don't have the sacrament orders they don't have other sacraments they do have baptism they have they have scripture of course they don't have scripture and it's full of it's because they don't have all the books the old testament but but so on so look there but there is a difference in attitude so there's not any there's no indifferentism and nor is there any denial that the churches is the one church the church is a church founded by jesus and it has the mark of unity so there's there's no indifferentism or denial of that but um but there is a different attitude and different practice basically um the idea is do we have to sit around and condemn protestants you know do we have to do we have to spend our lives condemning condemning protestants and and the church kind of thought well why do we i mean let's and and so again pious condemned indifferentism and he was very worried that um things like the world council of churches are just would essentially um amount to um an attack on dogma an attack on um and essentially it's like umbrella umbrella churches like federations or branches so none of that is none of that is accepted by vatican ii in other words like um all the things that pius is worried about vatican 2 rejects but but vatican 2 doesn't where vaticanu differs though is basically like it's basically in terms of the stance or the attitude it's it makes an effort to talk about the ways in which that protestants and also each north box participate in the participate there's elements of participation i named baptism for example you know i named um i named the the scriptures and so batting two talks about this and it also says that we must seek we must seek to deepen um you know the communal bond among christians in other words that's what humanism is all about is deepening the communal bond about among christians so we can value each other certainly we can learn from each other i mean there's a lot of things that calves can learn from evangelicals i know that as a fact and then of course we can learn from each other but we don't we don't that doesn't mean we're going to weaken the catholic church but but we we're going to have an attitude not not just of condemnation you know not just of um rejection condemnation and sort of negativity and and this is to me this is an example of christian charity this is how this is how do unto others as you would they do unto you you know this is how christians ought to you know and baptize people are christians so christians ought to behave to each other like this and christians should behave to other to non-christians also um in this way of charity you know and a desire to see the good and to recognize the good and and not just to be people running around condemning everybody and and negative so negative this was a concern in the vatican to um address this now now their problems that prominent real problems can arise and problems have arisen after the council and so they're gonna definitely needs you know church always needs renewal and so on okay so i answered i answered i think i answered that question yes i could but there was when there were another thing i forgot there was i think there's one other thing that i forgot um i can't remember now did i answer the things or did i miss stuff let's see here uh so the last question my friend asked was about um so yeah you touched on the fact that it is the uh the catholic church is the mystical body of christ and then the other question my friend asked was who are the members of the church according to vatican ii catholics members but they have to have charity faith and charity you know so people you do that you do need interior favoring charity but if you're a baptized if you're baptized catholic that means that you're you're um a member unless you've separated yourself in some public way you know i mean that that's i mean so of course those are members but the thing is um the question is like can there be people like in um who are baptists you know can there be people who will be among among the saved you know and remember that question was answered definitively um by pious one before the count before the council you know in response to um the finite affini um crowd uh i i met i met a bunch of the aging phenites this was in 1990s i i met them at their at their monastery there saint benedict's uh in petersham or somewhere like that i forget where it was it was in massachusetts and they were wonderful people they you know they're i don't know anyway they were all but look they knew that they i hope they knew but it doesn't matter that pius rejected their view so the point is that you don't have to be um you don't have to be a catholic and you don't even have to be a christian to be among the saved that the catholic church has never taught that because interiorly grace may be working in you and there may be reasons why why you why you are not a catholic there may be very good reasons for example um think of think of the jewish people as a whole you know catholics have witnessed um they proclaimed jesus christ but the words when when catholics say the word jesus christ to the jewish people as a whole and what the jewish people as a whole tend to hear is this history of persecution and so it sounds to them when we say jesus christ it shouldn't mean love and mercy but the catholic counter witness has made it mean hate and persecution and horror and so this is you know this is just a fact and i could i could talk more about that but the thing is that there may be reasons why people are not um are not externally members of the catholic church but we but grace um you know aquinas and others this has always been a part of the kind of faith um but it's possible there for people who are not visibly members to be among the saved and therefore to be in terribly united you know with the church right so the church has always saw that that's a traditional teaching of the church yeah there's something i didn't answer i know there was well the last question he asked was the last question he asked was based on current trends among professing catholics how about it can two be evaluated in future decades well they're they're um you know i think that one thing would be like is there going to be any catholics at all in future decades remember jesus jesus said like when i when he come back is there going to be faith on the earth and maybe and maybe 50 years from now um you know all the catholics will have separated the church will be very divided that you know you'll you'll have tons of little churches all claiming to be the catholic church you know you'll have something in and like springfield illinois or something in topeka kansas you know where where um or where the true catholics are you know um and and then that you might have in europe a bunch of other people who are the true catholics and then others you see i mean there can be a lot of division in 50 years and so i mean if the main thing is this is in 50 years vatican ii will be by by catholics who are who are catholic catholics who are right um in communion with the pope in 50 years catholics and communion pope will think that vatican ii was a valid ecumenical council and therefore it's one of the um the 20-some you know valid economical councils and those councils deserve respect and deserve to be it's not like everything they said or every canon that they wrote or everything is um something that we gotta got now to go do you know that would be ridiculous but but those councils are valid councils and the um they are they contain the catholic truth um that we receive so that's what that's my point that's my answer is that complex in 50 years will know and praise batting two as a valid ecumenical council that taught truth now that doesn't mean they won't have criticisms and um i don't think they're going to be forced to read the council hopefully you know it's tough to read the council documents it gets boring so maybe by that time they won't have to read the council but um but the thing is it's a valid counsel we praise it and it'd be like you know we ought to read the council trend more you know so we got to read these councils you know we have to like grin and we just go ahead and do it all right well dr levering thank you so much for coming out the uh this afternoon uh dr lebron is there anything you want to say before i end the episode oh well i just hope i didn't say anything wrong you know no no the legend is infallible i i'm just i'm just a little theologian you know and no no bishop is infallible no theologians valuable so i understand that we're gonna have disagreements they're gonna be discriminated and and that i may say something wrong and so on the main point is um you know let's just agree with charity let's let's try to um see the good let's um let's follow saint paul what saint paul says when christians are divided and in the corinthians and you know saint paul really urges them to um you know kind of turn to the core you know to christ in his self-sacrificial love to love that is patient kind that endures all things you know and that um you know it doesn't want to just i can't i can't quite switch i never was a pro a protestant of a protestant kind i did grow up quaker though so anyway but you gotta you gotta say you gotta you know go back and read what saint paul says about like how to handle um how to handle this type of thing the church has always had struggles and we really need um we need charity and we're gonna need bravery courage i mean obviously the church is gonna is facing some very serious trials so we have to really have bravery and courage and patience and all the all the virtues that saint paul talks about so let's go pray for them to meet me first and me first i'll be i'll be praying all right i'll be praying to become the kind of feeling okay all right thank you dr levering

Channel: Intellectual Conservatism

Views: 834

Rating: 5 out of 5

Keywords: Pope, Francis, Jude Law, HBO, Notre Dame, Catholic Answers, Apologetics, Protestant, Catholicism, Catholic, Robert Barron, Bishop, Word on Fire, Lecture, Infallibility, Papal, Magisterial, Magisterium, Capturing Christianity, Cameron Bertuzzi, Matt Fradd, Pints with Aquinas, Breaking the Habit, Dogma, Fatima, Our Lady, Rosary, Hymn, Worship, Carlos Acutis, Miracle, SSPX, Vatican Catholic, David Bentley Hart, Reasonable Faith, William Lane Craig, Atheism, Theism, Graham Oppy, The New Pope, Religion

Id: Tcuik7u-gqo

Length: 71min 48sec (4308 seconds)

Published: Fri Oct 16 2020