Traditionis Custodes Was Never Merely About the Liturgy
— Church Life Journal (@ChurchLifeND) August 2, 2021
by Shaun Blanchardhttps://t.co/KsmsJ0Cafp
A stirring article from Gregory DiPippo on the 16th anniversary of NLM, The scholarly work of Gregory and the team continues to set a dauntingly high standard. Prayers of thanksgiving and petition for them today.@NLMbloghttps://t.co/E3ON6Iuqo2
— Fr Timothy Finigan (@FatherTF) August 2, 2021
5 comments:
AUGUST 3, 2021
Peter Kwasniewski appeals for a return to the faith of Pope Francis : many traditionalists are already there
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/08/peter-kwasniewski-appeals-for-return-to.html
AUGUST 3, 2021
Peter Kwansnewiski's concept of the faith is the same as Pope Francis
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/08/peter-kwansnewiskis-concept-of-faith-is.html
Archbishop Carlo Vigano issued another politically correct statement on Vatican Council II. He interpreted the Council like the Times of Israel, New York Times and Associated Press and of course the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican. It was also the interpretation of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. The Deep State-approved version.
If the editors of his book, Brian McCall and Maike Hickson, used the TWO COLUMN approach to view Vatican Council II, they would cease to be Lefebvrists like Vigano.
If the interpreted Vatican Council II with the RATIONAL PREMISE, RATIONAL INFERENCE AND TRADITIONAL CONCLUSION, they would emerge Feeneyites on extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS), the Athanasius Creed( Feeneyite-with no exceptions) and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX( Feeneyite-with no known exceptions).
But they have to follow Archbishop Carlo Vigano's approach to Vatican Council II which is also that of Cardinal Claudio Hummes when he offers Holy Mass in Brazil, in the language of the Amazonians, and he will interpret the Council, with the fake premise to reject the First Commandment,’thou shalt have no other God beside me’.
This will also be the approach of Ralph Martin, Robert Fastiggi at the Sacred Heart Major seminary, Detroit, USA and Scott Hahn and Alan Schreck at the Theology Department of the University of Steubenville, USA.They will be at Mass in Engish without the past exclusivist ecclesiology, since Vatican Council II is interpreted with the fake premise, creating a New Theology, which says outside the Church there is salvation, even among those who do not know or do not believe in Jesus Christ.
Scott Hahn, Alan Schreck, Robert Fastiggi and Ralph Martin have decided not to discuss this issue since they are obliged to teach Vatican Council II interpreted with the fake reasoning.
It’s a political interpretation of the Council which creates schism with the past Magisterium and the Tridentine ecclesiology of the Catholic Church.
Cardinal Hummes, like Vigano, is not telling the Brazilian Catholics, that there is true worship in only the Catholic Church when Vatican Council II is interpeted rationally.
At the Amazon Synod he interpreted Vatican Council II with the fake premise and concluded that there is no exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.He criticized the SSPX for beleiving that outside the Church there is no salvation, since, he said, that they do not accept Vatican Council II. He was referring to Vatican Council II interpreted with the fake premise.
The SSPX also interprets the Council with the fake premise, like Cardinal Hummes, but then rejects the non traditional conclusion. Archbishop Lefebvre did the same.
So the FSSP, at Dijon, France, made of the same cloth will not affirm Vatican Council II with the rational premise, inference and traditional conclusion and tell Bishop Minnerath, that he is wrong in his writings to support a ‘theology of religious pluralism’ . Since there is no known salvation outside the Church according to Vatican Council II. There are no personally known non Catholics saved outside the Catholic Church in 1965-2021.Practically also, we cannot meet any such person.So how can the bishop propose a theology of religions when there is no known salvation outside the Church to contradit Feeneyite EENS ? The theology of religions which is the subject of some of his books was condemned by Pope John Paul II ( Notification, CDF, Fr. Jacques Dupuis sj, 2001).
Archbishop Vigano and the SSPX supporters have never responded to so many reports on this blog over a long time, which refers to them. Well, what are they going to say? That they interpret Vatican Council II without the false premise, unlike Archbishop Lefebvre, Roberto dei Mattei and Michael Davies ?
The Times of Israel will object.-Lionel Andrades
France needs to accept the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II then at every Holy Mass in the French language, the only rational choice will be the Tridentine exclusivist ecclesiology of the past.
‘Rome will have come back to the Faith’, as Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre wanted.
We go back to the exclusivist ecclesiology of the French Vendees. Since there will be no exception to the past ecclesiology of the Church found in Vatican Council II.LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2,GS 22 etc will be hypothetical and no more confused as being practical and known examples of salvation outside the Church in 1965-2021.
We go back with one simple action, i.e choosing the rational premise, to the understanding of Church of the times of the St. Joan of Arc. This will be at every Holy Mass and not only those in Latin.-Lionel Andrades
The SSPX has to show Pope Francis that his interpretation of Vatican Council II is schismatic and so would be unacceptable and that they choose a rational and non traditional version.
So the SSPX would be in schism, as the media states, if they did not accept Vatican Council II. But there are two interpretations of Vatican Council II. One is rational and the other irrational. One is with the false premise and the other without it.Pope Francis and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith refer to the irrational version.
So the SSPX simply has to affirm the rational version and tell Pope Francis and the CDF to do the same.Otherwise they would be in schism.
With their false premise, there would be the expected break with the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS), the Athanasius Creed with no known exceptions and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX with no known exceptions.Now there is a break with the Catechism of Pope Pius X ( 24 Q,27Q-other religions, need for conversion) and the Council of Trent ( exclusive salvation).
The SSPX must realize that the interpretation of Vatican Council II with the false premise cannot be Magisterial.Since the Holy Spirit cannot make an objective mistake and confuse invisible cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, etc are being examples of salvation in 2021 and so them project them as practical exceptions to EENS etc.
So under no condition must the SSPX accept Pope Francis’ irrational and schismatic version of Vatican Council II when the rational and non schismatic is available.Check the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II on the Internet ( Blog eucharistandmission ).
Pope Francis interprets Vatican Council II with a false premise to create a false rupture with Tradition and he calls it the work of the Holy Spirit, in the Letter which accompanies Traditionis Custode.
A recent stage of this dynamic was constituted by Vatican Council II where the Catholic episcopate came together to listen and to discern the path for the Church indicated by the Holy Spirit. To doubt the Council is to doubt the intentions of those very Fathers who exercised their collegial power in a solemn manner cum Petro et sub Petro in an ecumenical council, and, in the final analysis, to doubt the Holy Spirit himself who guides the Church.- Letter of Pope Francis which accompanies Traditionis Custode(Emphasis added)
https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/letters/2021/documents/20210716-lettera-vescovi-liturgia.html
How can the Holy Spirit make an objective mistake and use a false premise to interpret LG 14( baptism of desire) and LG 16( invincible ignorance),for example ?
For me LG 14 and LG 16 refer to hypothetical and theoretical cases always. They are always speculative and not real people saved outside the Church in the present times, 1965-2021. This is something obvious.
How can LG 14, LG 16 etc be exceptions to EENS, the Athanasius Creed and Syllabus of Errors ? Yet this is how he is interpreting Vatican Council II and it is different from the rational way I interpret the Council.I interpret the Council with the rational premise ( invisible people are invisible) and consider it Magisterial.Since it is not a rupture with the past Magisterium. Pope Francis cannot say the same.
The SSPX could simply affirm Vatican Council II without the fake premise and also come back to Tradition, since Tradition would not be contradicted with Vatican Council II, with the rational premise.So they should tell Pope Francis that his interpretation of Vatican Council II is irrational and schismatic.He has to switch to the rational one for them to accept the Council.-Lionel Andrades
John Henry Weston in a follow up program to the one on outside the Church there is no salvation , has to clarify, since Catholics are confused, that, there is an extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) with the baptism of desire(BOD) and invincible ignorance(I.I) being exceptions and there is an EENS with BOD and I.I not being exceptions.
The EENS with BOD and I.I being exceptions is the Society of St.Pius X(SSPX) version and the EENS with BOD and I.I not being exceptions is the St. Benedict Centers(SBC) version.
Then he needs to clarify that there is a Vatican Council II with LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc being exceptions to EENS and there is a Vatican Council II with LG 8, etc not being exceptions to EENS.
Vatican Council II with LG 8 etc being exceptions to EENS is the common interpretation of the Council. It’s official.
Vatican Council II with LG 8 not being exceptions to EENS is the Lionel Andrades interpretation of the Council.
It would be helpful for John Henry Weston to talk to Brother Andre Marie MICM, Prior at the St. Benedict Center, NH, USA. He could speak on the difference between speculative and practical theology and how it is important not to confuse the two, with reference to EENS and Vatican Council II.-Lionel Andrades
Post a Comment