Pope Benedict XVI does not trace the hermeneutic of discontinuity to the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 and Cushingism

The question arises: Why has the implementation of the Council, in large parts of the Church, thus far been so difficult?

Well, it all depends on the correct interpretation of the Council or—as we would say today—on its proper hermeneutics, the correct key to its interpretation and application. The problems in its implementation arose from the fact that two contrary hermeneutics came face to face and quarreled with each other. One caused confusion, the other, silently but more and more visibly, bore and is bearing fruit.

On the one hand, there is an interpretation that I would call “a hermeneutic of discontinuity and rupture”; it has frequently availed itself of the sympathies of the mass media, and also one trend of modern theology. On the other, there is the “hermeneutic of reform,” of renewal in the continuity of the one subject-Church which the Lord has given to us. She is a subject which increases in time and develops, yet always remaining the same, the one subject of the journeying People of God.

The hermeneutic of discontinuity risks ending in a split between the pre-conciliar Church and the post-conciliar Church. It asserts that the texts of the Council as such do not yet express the true spirit of the Council. It claims that they are the result of compromises in which, to reach unanimity, it was found necessary to keep and reconfirm many old things that are now pointless. However, the true spirit of the Council is not to be found in these compromises but instead in the impulses toward the new that are contained in the texts.- Rorate Caeili 10th Anniversary of the Hermeneutic of Continuity Speech

http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2015/12/10th-anniversary-of-hermeneutic-of.html#more

Lionel:

The question arises: Why has the implementation of the Council, in large parts of the Church, thus far been so difficult?

Since the error from the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 was not identified and the error was repeated in Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church. It is also there in magisterial documents like Redemptoris Missio and Dominus Iesus. It is one single cause responsible for the heremeneutic of rupture in the interpretation of Vatican Council II. 

Here is the troublesome passage.

' that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it is necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing.'- Letter of the Holy Office 1949

___________________________________

Well, it all depends on the correct interpretation of the Council or—as we would say today—on its proper hermeneutics, the correct key to its interpretation and application. The problems in its implementation arose from the fact that two contrary hermeneutics came face to face and quarreled with each other. One caused confusion, the other, silently but more and more visibly, bore and is bearing fruit.

Lionel:

The hermeutic of rupture was caused by the irrational premise and inference in this passage ' that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member,( this is a negation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus responsible for the traditional ecclesiology)  but it is necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing ( it is being assumed that those who are united by desire and longing are known, visible and seen in the flesh to be explicit exceptions to the dogma on all needing to actually be a member of the Church for salvation'). This pattern of error will be repeated in Vatican Council II.
Lumen Gentium 16 ( invincible ignorance) would be interpreted as being explicit and so an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Vatican Council II would then  be a break with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors. So here we have the rupture with the past.

________________________

On the one hand, there is an interpretation that I would call “a hermeneutic of discontinuity and rupture”; it has frequently availed itself of the sympathies of the mass media, and also one trend of modern theology.

Lionel:

It has not been traced to the Letter of the Holy Office 1949. Nor is it mentioned that the new theology is based on this error, the error of the false premise and inference.I call it Cushingism as opposed to traditional Feeneyism, which has a continuity with the past.

_______________________

 On the other, there is the “hermeneutic of reform,” of renewal in the continuity of the one subject-Church which the Lord has given to us. She is a subject which increases in time and develops, yet always remaining the same, the one subject of the journeying People of God.

Lionel:

The hermenutic of reform seems a meaningless term since doctrine has been changed. The change in doctrine is the cause of the break with the past.

___________________

The hermeneutic of discontinuity risks ending in a split between the pre-conciliar Church and the post-conciliar Church.

Lionel:

With Cushingism we have a break with the pre-1949 magisterium of the Church.

____________________

 It asserts that the texts of the Council as such do not yet express the true spirit of the Council.

Lionel:

Without Cushingism, without the false premise and inference, we have the old theology, the Feeneyite interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus. We then also have Vatican Council II interpreted with Feeneyism ( there are no explicit exceptions to the dogma on salvation) in agreement with the traditional 'rigorist interpretation' of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla nalus (Cushingism interprets the dogma with explicit exceptions). There is no more a new theology. Vatican Council II is in harmony with the pre-1960 Magisterium of the Catholic Church. 

___________________

 It claims that they are the result of compromises in which, to reach unanimity, it was found necessary to keep and reconfirm many old things that are now pointless.

Lionel:

Completely off the mark!

__________________

 However, the true spirit of the Council is not to be found in these compromises but instead in the impulses toward the new that are contained in the texts.

Lionel:

He still has not identified the exact cause. It's Cushingism which is non traditional, irrational and heretical and it is used to interpret the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 and of course Vatican Council II.The result is non traditional,irrational and heretical it is a rupture with the past.

-Lionel Andrades