Editor’s Note: In this series Mr. David Armstrong represents the “Conservative” view point and T. S. Flanders represents the “Trad” view point. As a lay apostolate, Meaning of Catholic does not identify as “Traditionalist” nor does Mr. Flanders personally. Nevertheless, Flanders’ contention is that the Trad movement is not schismatic and is a reasonable and legitimate position for Catholics to hold. Thus the Trad assertions should be openly debated by Catholics, as this dialogue attempts to accomplish. (See also The Modern Liberal Disaster: Why Conservatives and Trads Must Unite.) The dialogue is introduced, then Mr. Armstrong’s critique of the Trad Movement is taken as a starting point.
1. Armstrong Introduction to the Dialogue (Feb. 2, 2020)
2. Armstrong Critique of the Trad Movement (Dec. 3, 2012)
3. Flanders Reply: Public Rebuke and the State of Emergency (Feb. 21, 2020)
4. Armstrong Reply: State of Emergency? and Newman (Feb. 25, 2020)
5. Flanders Critique of Armstrong’s Vatican II Causality (July 30, 2020)
6. Armstrong Reply: Is Vatican II Analogous to “Failed” Lateran V? (Aug. 11, 2020)
7. Flanders Reply: Von Hildebrand’s Charitable Anathema (Aug. 24, 2020)
8. Armstrong Reply: On the Reactionary Denial of the Indefectability of the Church (Aug. 24, 2020)
9. Flanders Reply: The Unfruitful Council and Our Agreed Solution (Nov. 16, 2020)
10. Armstrong Reply: Papal Indefectibility, Pastor Aeternus & the “Charitable Anathema” (Dec. 1, 2020)