Bellarmine Forums

Debate on NovusOrdoWatch
Page 1 of 1

Author:  Matthew1917 [ Thu Jan 02, 2014 4:54 pm ]
Post subject:  Debate on NovusOrdoWatch

Hello all, I normally do much more reading on this site than I do writing. I find the postings to be a great source of learning for me. However, I am breaking my norm and making a post today.

I just watched a video debate that was offered by Novus Ordo Watch between Bishop Sanborn and a professor of theology, Dr. Robert Fastiggi. Overall, I thought that Dr. Fastiggi's defense was not very good, but I must say that I did not think Bishop Sanborn's was very good either.

The sense I had after having viewed it was that each participant believed his viewpoint very strongly - and defended it very strongly, but I did not come away with the result that one of them really had arguments that won the debate.

It seems, then, that the Novus Ordo individuals who are defending the Vatican II theology and the popes, also use past teachings and history to back up their claims. I find this confusing. I have held to the position for almost ten years now, that Vatican II taught a new religion and the "popes" after Pius XII were not Catholic, but I would like to think that there are more clear teachings on which to rely for defense of the Catholic Faith against the new religion, and more clear teachings to disarm their own attempt at defending their new religion.

If anyone has any information or advice to offer I would appreciate it. Please forgive me if my attempt to express my thought is not very clear.

Thank you -


Author:  Thomas [ Thu Jan 02, 2014 11:39 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Debate on NovusOrdoWatch

Matthew did you watch the follow up conference that Bishop Sanborn held on the ecclesiology of the Church? In it he goes into more detail with the Vatican II documents than he had time to in the debate format.

Author:  Matthew1917 [ Thu Jan 02, 2014 11:50 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Debate on NovusOrdoWatch

Thank you, Thomas. I did not watch it, as I basically gave up when they started the question-and-answer session. Perhaps I will be able to see that one tomorrow then. Thanks again! - God bless you.


Author:  James Schroepfer [ Sun Jan 05, 2014 9:24 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Debate on NovusOrdoWatch

Dear Matthew,

Because of the ambiguity in the Vatican II documents, the modernist can phrase his response in such a way it can be difficult to see the heresy and leave the Novus Ordo religion the appearances of not departing from orthodoxy. Remember this is how the modernists were able to get many of the documents passes in the first place as I believe at least some of the bishops were misled by the wording of the documents. Most laymen must rather look to the laws and practices of the Novus Ordo Church to see clearly that it cannot be the Catholic Church i.e. Canon Law of 1983, universal catechism, new mass. Here, especially in Canon 844 of the new code which allows non-Catholics to receive the sacraments, there is a black and white difference between the teaching of Christ and the heretics of Vatican II. It is inescapable and undeniable. The key point is that if it can be proven that the Novus Ordo Church teaches something of faith or morals which differs from the Catholic teaching, the Novus Ordo Church cannot be the Catholic Church, period, or if the Novus Ordo Church is the true Church, the Catholic Church has failed which we as Catholics know to be impossible as the Church of Christ is indefectible and infallible.

It is by showing the heresies in the application of Vatican II theology by the Novus Ordo Church, one can then logically conclude the documents themselves contain heresy and prove it despite the double speaking modernist heretic to squirm out of the accusation by saying the traditionalist is misinterpreting the documents. Doing this clearly shows the modernist is stretching the meaning of the documents to try and have them maintain a semblance of Catholicism, and the Novus Ordo Church rejects the modernists method of interperting them in any light of a traditional catholic sense. Not to worry though, despite the modernists best effort, there are a few points where the Vatican II documents show themselves to be what they are, HERESY and there is no method available for one to interpret them in a catholic sense. Read through this article of John Daly. It is excellent.


Author:  Matthew1917 [ Sun Jan 05, 2014 11:45 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Debate on NovusOrdoWatch


Thank you for the reply. I had read that article some time ago but will read it again now to refresh my memory - thank you!

I think the most frustrating thing for me is in trying to argue with the Novus Ordo people, they will attempt to show how their "Belief A" is consistent with what the Church has taught before and will use quotes to show that. I know that the Church has, indeed, not taught "Belief A" before as they are showing it, but arguing against it at that point becomes difficult because I feel that we are no longer discussing the same thing in the same manner. Terms are used differently. Even documents from Vatican II are used at first and then when I "seem" to nail them on that, they will bring out a conflicting document, written later in time, that contradicts their first viewpoint but agrees with mine! Does that make sense?

Anyway, I do thank you again, for your response -


Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group