Theologian John Lamont still does not see the connection between Vatican Council II and the heresy of the Letter of the Holy Office. However he acknowledges that there has been a big change.Exclusivism is no more the teaching of the Church after Vatican Council II. It was no more the teaching of the Church after 1949 and he still does not see the error.
If you consider the Holy Office or Fr.Leonard Feeney in heresy determines how you interpret Vatican Council II http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/01/if-you-consider-holy-office-or.html
A Christmastide Gift for our Readers:
- Attacks on Thomism: a special historical and theological essay
- Attacks on Thomism: a special historical and theological essay
Attacks on Thomism
a special essay for Rorate Caeli by John Lamont
Conclusion
The success of the neomodernists in seizing power in the Church was partly due to their tactical adroitness and to the favourable conditions that existed for them in the Church. They had learned from the first modernist crisis how to deal with magisterial opposition; there was not the will at the top of the Church to take drastic steps against them of the sort that had been successfully used by St Pius X, and there was no understanding of the necessity for such steps – Pius XII seems to have believed that his now forgotten encyclical Humani Generis had dealt with the situation adequately; for reasons that are not fully understood, the clergy and bishops were much more receptive to their message than was the case 40 years earlier.
The protean character of their position was also a key to their success. The idea that doctrine should be adapted to the thought of the day does not specify what adaptations should be made. This enabled neomodernists to be all things to all men, tailoring their appeal to the particular desires of any audience. This made possible alliances with powerful elements in the Church who were attracted not to neomodernism as such, but to abandoning particular doctrines that they found inconvenient or repellent. These doctrines were all concerned in one way or another with the exclusive character of the Catholic Church as a means for salvation; the condemnation of non-Catholic Christians as heretics and schismatics, the condemnation of non-Christian religions as paths to damnation, the insistence that the state must acknowledge and support the Catholic faith as the one true religion. These alliances were what permitted the neomodernists to achieve hegemony in the Church, and it is the support of these allies that to this day prevents any move against neomodernism by ecclesiastical authorities. Such a move would require enforcing all of Catholic doctrine, which would mean an intolerable return to exclusivism; it is found preferable in the last analysis to accept and promote those who reject all of that doctrine.-John Lamont, Rorate Caeili.
John Lamont teaches in the Archdiocese of Sydney where they assume that it was Fr.Leonard Feeney who was in heresy and not the Archbishop of Boston and Cardinal Marchetti-Selvaggiani, who had issued the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.
The former Archbishop of Sydney, Cardinal George Pell, would not answer two questions which show that there are no known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So there are no exceptions in Vatican Council II to the rigorist interpretation of the dogma, according to Fr.Leonard Feeney.The Holy Office made a mistake.
We can still interpret Vatican Council II 'with the exclusive character of the
Catholic Church as a means for salvation' if John Lamont agrees that it was the Holy Office which made an objective mistake.
Anyway, the excommunication of Fr.Leonard Feeney was lifted without him having to recant. The St.Benedict Center also issued a statement, it is reported, saying that Fr.Leonard Feeney did not change his view and interpretation of the dogma .The Holy Office 1949 did not excommunicate him again.
The Holy Office 1949 in a way, was saying that they were wrong.
-Lionel Andrades
_________________________________
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2015/01/a-christmastide-gift-for-our-readers.html#more
TWO QUESTIONS which Cardinal George Pell, John Lamont, and the SSPX (USA) will not answer.
TWO QUESTIONS which Cardinal George Pell, John Lamont, and the SSPX (USA) will not answer.
1) Do we personally know the dead now saved in invincible ignorance, a good conscience (LG 16) etc,can we see them, are they physically visible to us in 2014 ?
2) Since we do not know any of these cases, in real life, they are not visible for us, there are no known exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, or Ad Gentes 7 which states 'all' need 'faith and baptism' for salvation ? Is the answer YES or NO?
LIGHT OF THE WORLD ERROR SHOWS THAT THERE ARE NO REAL DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE VATICAN AND THE SSPX
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/04/light-of-world-error-shows-that-there.html
For the Lefebvrists, It's the Last Call to the Sheepfold
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment