Archive for the ‘Fernando Ocáriz’ Category

Opus Pharisaei

December 6, 2011
Msgr. Fernando Ocáriz, the Vicar General of Opus “Dei” (Opus Pharisaei, in truth) is one of Pope Benedict’s representatives in the theological discussions that took place between the SSPX and Rome from 2009-2011. The day after we commented on Bp. Fellay’s recent ‘interview’ and pointed to the discrepancy in Rome’s allowance for discussion of Vatican II teachings while anathematizing discussion of ‘The Holocaust,’ a work of artifice from Msgr. Fernando Ocáriz was published in the Pope’s journal, L’Osservatore Romano HERE.

This document contains a formula which amounts to relativistic tyranny:

The [Second Vatican] Council’s [innovative] doctrinal teachings require of the faithful a degree of assent called “religious submission of will and intellect”. Precisely because it is “religious” assent, such assent is not based purely on rational motives. This kind of adherence does not take the form of an act of faith. Rather, it is an act of obedience that is not merely disciplinary, but is well-rooted in our confidence in the divine assistance given to the Magisterium, and therefore “within the logic of faith and under the impulse of obedience to the faith” …

… A number of innovations of a doctrinal nature are to be found in the documents of the Second Vatican Council … These innovations in matters concerning faith or morals, not proposed with a definitive act, still require religious submission of intellect and will …

I take this as an answer to Proud Pharisee David Rosen’s self-interested insistence that Nostra Aetate and Lumen Gentium be considered “fundamental doctrines of the Church,” and that it be impossible to question them “without challenging the authority of the church.”

Those who know the religion of Judaism know what’s going on here. The rabbis “don’t listen to heavenly voices.” They say, “the Torah is not in heaven.” Their god says, “my sons have defeated me.” Their god is mutable; nothing more than a totem the possession of which gives them absolute, tyrannical authority which they use to innovate and enforce doctrines as needed, or to destroy and blot out problematic doctrines.

Expect much more of this kind of relativisation of perennial Church teaching enforced by absolute authority (at the service of the rabbis) as long as religious relations with the rabbis continue. And play close attention to how that authority is selectively enforced.

Also see:

Benedict’s “Hermeneutic of Continuity” and the Rabbinic “Genius”