Religious Liberty Dissected — Interview with Stephen Kokx
Stephen Kokx invited me on his program to discuss the conciliar doctrine of religious freedom, its ideological history and most importantly, its relation to previous Catholic teaching
Summary
The intrepid Stephen Kokx, who runs the Kokx News publication, invited me on his program, Church and State, to discuss the conciliar doctrine of religious liberty. An error that was officially taught at the Second Vatican Council and now, approaching the seventy year mark, has been subsequently interpreted, implemented and developed by conciliar authorities.
The springboard for this conversation was the preface I had written to a translated work from Fr. Hervé Belmont, which is invaluable in my estimation. Time permitting, readers are encouraged to read Fr. Belmont’s analysis, before listening to my discussion with Stephen. Find it below:
Turning to the conversation with Mr. Kokx, we covered several aspects of the question of religious liberty, including its intellectual roots. In summary, the following points were addressed:
Catholic tradition on religious freedom, along with the teaching of PP. Pius VII, Gregory XVI, Pius IX, Leo XIII and Pius XI
The state of the American Catholicism and the hierarchy before Vatican II
Fr. John Courtney Murray’s agitation for religious freedom
The opposition between Dignitatis Humanæ and Quanta Cura
A big thank you, again, is to be extended to Stephen Kokx for having me on Church and State. Now, without further ado, please enjoy our conversation below!
Post Script
In anticipation of potential objections to the rupture thesis presented in the video, the following essays deal with, perhaps, two of the strongest. They are from Fr. Bernard Lucien and Prof. Thomas Pink. The refutation to each argument was made by Fr. Hervé Belmont and Gregory Dubois, respectively:
Excellent discussion and very important topic. Thank you for all your great work!
Even if DH's religious liberty is compatible with what the Church has always taught, I still believe there is an inconsistency between Vatican II and what the Church has always taught. Unitatis Redintegratio says, "The brethren divided from us also use many liturgical actions of the Christian religion. These most certainly can truly engender a life of grace in ways that vary according to the condition of each Church or Community. These liturgical actions must be regarded as capable of giving access to the community of salvation.
It follows that the separated Churches(23) and Communities as such, though we believe them to be deficient in some respects, have been by no means deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Church."
But Pope Boniface VIII writes, "Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff."
https://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decree_19641121_unitatis-redintegratio_en.html
https://www.papalencyclicals.net/bon08/b8unam.htm