George Weigel mocks the Social Kingship of Christ on EWTN - The World Over

George Weigel teaches us the Social Kingship of Christ is a dead doctrine in the post-Vatican II Pluralistic Church. The Church taught it for nearly 2,000 years (see: http://www.latin-mass-society.org/2006/socialkingship.html http://www.catholictradition.org/Christ/kingship2.htm & http://www.christorchaos.com/ACatechismoftheSocialReignofChristtheKing.htm ) but times have changed. Weigel and Bottum assert the Social Kingship of Christ doctrine has morphed into a Kingship of Christ over the individual. For Weigel and those of us who agree with him, Vatican II has allowed a lot of great changes, this is one of them. After the revolutionary victories over the social authority of Christ the King and His Church, our society can focus on better things like pluralism and spreading freedom around the globe.

George Weigel proclaims the state should never place itself under the authority of Christ the King and under the authority of the Church.

Joseph Bottum was wrong in stating Pope Leo XIII opposed the Social Kingship of Christ. Pope Leo XIII in fact supported the Social Kingship of Christ. This is what Leo XIII taught:

"This world-wide and solemn testimony of allegiance and piety is especially appropriate to Jesus Christ, who is the Head and Supreme Lord of the race. His empire extends not only over Catholic nations and those who, having been duly washed in the waters of holy baptism, belong of right to the Church, although erroneous opinions keep them astray, or dissent from her teaching cuts them off from her care; it comprises also all those who are deprived of the Christian faith, so that the whole human race is most truly under the power of Jesus Christ.

"In these latter times especially, a policy has been followed which has resulted in a sort of wall being raised between the Church and civil society. In the constitution and administration of States the authority of sacred and divine law is utterly disregarded, with a view to the exclusion of religion from having any constant part in public life.... When men's minds are raised to such a height of insolent pride, what wonder is it that the greater part of the human race should have fallen into such disquiet of mind and be buffeted by waves so rough that no one is suffered to be free from anxiety and peril? When religion is once discarded it follows of necessity that the surest foundations of the public welfare must give way, whilst God, to inflict on His enemies the punishment they so richly deserve, has left them the prey of their own evil desires, so that they give themselves up to their passions and finally wear themselves out by excess of liberty.

"And the greatness of this power and the boundlessness of His kingdom is still more clearly declared in these words to the Apostles: "All power is given to me in heaven and on earth" (Matthew xxviii., 18). If then all power has been given to Christ it follows of necessity that His empire must be supreme, absolute and independent of the will of any other, so that none is either equal or like unto it: and since it has been given in heaven and on earth it ought to have heaven and earth obedient to it. And verily he has acted on this extraordinary and peculiar right when He commanded His Apostles to preach His doctrine over the earth, to gather all men together into the one body of the Church by the baptism of salvation, and to bind them by laws, which no one could reject without risking his eternal salvation.... Therefore not only Catholics, and those who have duly received Christian baptism, but also all men, individually and collectively, have become to Him "a purchased people" (I Peter ii., 9). "

(ANNUM SACRUM - ENCYCLICAL OF POPE LEO XIII http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_en... )

Also see Pius XI's encyclical: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_1...

Category:

Education

Tags:

• George
• Weigel
• Social
• Kingship
• of
• Christ
• Vatican
• II
• Catholic
• Church
• Ethics
• and
• Public
• Policy
• Center
• First
• Things
• Witness
• to
• Hope
• St.
• Thomas
• Seminary
• School
• Theology
• James
• Madison
• Foundation
• Evangelicals
• Catholics
• Together
• Project
• for
• the
• New
• American
• Century
• Ecumenism
• EWTN
• The
• World
• Over
• Raymond
• Arroyo

[TheNewCafeteria]

Trads who reject V2 are in greater schism, according to Benedict XVI, than the Orthodox Christians. According to Benedict XVI, to be in union with Rome, Orthodox Christians are not bound to accept Vatican I and all the councils of the past 1,000 years defining the role of the pope. All the Orthodox have to do is accept the primacy of Peter as some Orthodox understood it in the first millennium (primacy of honor, etc).

Traditional Roman Catholics are BOUND to accept Vatican II.

[StSimonOfTrent]

No

They are Anti Popes

There have been well over 40 Anti Popes in Church History

This is nothing new

Vatican 2 was a Judeo Masonic Hijacking

Malachi Martin was a conduit agent for the Jewish ADL, traveling from Rome to NY to brief them on events during the council

THE PLOT AGAINST THE CHURCH by Maurice Pinay, Outlined the plans from these enemies of the Church even before it happened.

[TheNewCafeteria]

"Convoking Vatican II was a personal decision of Pope John XXIII." So says traditio and Fr. Michael.

Good grief, can you follow the theological teachings of Pope Benedict XVI, John Paul II, and Paul VI which are identical to the teachings of Vatican II?

[TheNewCafeteria]

So you are a sede. Don't be a sede, it is not right.

[TheNewCafeteria]

Wow, you trads are really blinded. But you have to be in order to attempt straddle the great chasm. You want one foot on the old pre-V2 Church and one foot on the New Conciliar Church, led by popes who all teach from the V2 documents. So you personally know what Pope Paul VI intended. The same pope who signed the V2 document in the same fashion as the other ecumenical councils. The same person who instituted those V2 changes into the Church. The same pope who theologically taught from V2.

[StSimonOfTrent]

Paul V1 Was an Anti Pope

Vatican2 contradicted 2000 years Catholic teaching

Nostra Aetate- absolved the Jews for Killing Christ

'CRUCIFY HIM, HIS BLOOD BE UPON US AND OUR CHILDREN' Matthew 27:25

Thess 2:14-16

' For ye, brethren, became imitators of the churches of God which are in Judaea in Jesus: for ye suffered the same things of your own countrymen, even as they did of the Jews; who both Killed the Lord Jesus & the prophets, drove out us, and pleased not God and are contrary to all men'

[TheNewCafeteria]

What matters is not the words of some priest, but the the theological teachings of the popes, their encyclicals and words of the popes. Every pope since Paul VI has held V2 taught doctrine. Almost everything they taught in the past 35 years was influenced by the new doctrines of V2. If you reject V2, you not only reject the council, but all their writings. You position's logical conclusion is that the popes since Paul VI are manifest heretics, and that cannot be true - popes decide doctrine.

[TheNewCafeteria]

If Paul VI changed the Church's stance on artificial contraception, Lefebvre and the other traditional bishops would have probably declared Paul VI to be an anti-pope and broke from the Church. Back then, there were anti-V2 cardinals still alive and they could have started a Great Western Schism II. There were certain things Paul VI would not touch, changing baptism, for instance. Doing these things would have opened far too many people's eyes.

Most trads are unaware NFP was a new invention.

[StSimonOfTrent]

Wrong

"We can say that the Pope has the power to call a council. We can say that the authorities in the Church can call upon the Holy spirit to

guarantee, in a very narrow set of cases, that what comes from this council is de fide. And nothing in Vatican II was pronounced de

fide. "To call a council is a practical decision of the pope. A person may piously believe that God inspired it. But no one can say that this

is an object of faith." --Fr. Gregory Hesse,

[StSimonOfTrent]

Wrong It is clear, as the following extracts confirm, that neither did Pope John XXIII, who convoked the council, authorize the council to

treat dogma nor did Pope Paul VI, who promulgated the documents of the

council, intend them to be part of the essential Magisterium of the Church.

Both regarded the council to be pastoral, not dogmatic, in

nature, and therefore not part of the essential Magisterium of the Church.

"Convoking Vatican II was a personal decision of Pope John XXIII.'