Wednesday, December 23, 2015

Britain's Got Talent 2015 S09E06 Emma Jones Beautiful Performance of Ave Maria

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

Traditionalists should make this clear today even if it means admitting that they and their religious leaders were wrong all these years

The Vatican Document on the Jews says it is not a magisterial document. So what, magisterial documents  state ' God is not limited to the Sacraments' (CCC 1257)  and 'all who are saved  are saved through Jesus and the Church' (CCC 846), implying all do not need to be formal members in the present times for salvation.
Similarly  the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 which was an inter- office letter, from one bishop to another and was made magisterial by the liberals, placing it in the Denzinger, says ' 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.' In other words there are known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and so it is not required for all to be incorporated into the Church with the baptism of water.
This is the magisterial teaching, this is the official interpretation of the dogma. This is the new doctrine ( since 1949) in the Catholic Church.
So to reject the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus with alleged known exceptions in the present times, is magisterial.
If God is not limited to the Sacranments then why do Jews need to convert into the Catholic Church?  They don't!- according to this theology blessed by Pope Benedict XVI.
This is the new theology based on explicit exceptions to the dogma on salvation, which even Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and the SSPX bishops and priests have accepted .This theology, based on physically being able to see non Catholics in Heaven, without the baptism of water, forms the new ecclesiology which the FSSP priests  have to accept to offer the Traditional Latin Mass.
It is time for sedevacantists, traditionalists and those who love the Truth to annnounce that there are no known exceptions, there are no physically visible exceptions, to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, we cannot meet any one on the streets who will be saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church and nor can we see any one in Heaven saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church. So there cannot be any exception to the old ecclesiology, there cannot be any exception to the Feeneyite version of the dogma, the traditional interpretation of outside the Church there is no salvation.
When this rational announcement is made the magisterium will have to clarify its position on Catholic doctrine.
The Vatican then cannot say that we physically know people in 1915-1916 who are in Heaven without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.They cannot say that we know of  someone who will be saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church. This would be contrary to common sense. Since only God can SEE OR KNOW if there is someone who will be saved without 'faith and baptism'( AG 7, LG 14). We humans cannot SEE OR KNOW some one in 2015 who is an exception to the dogma.For someone to be an exception he or she has to be  seen and known TODAY, in the present time. We cannot say a saint of the past is an exception to the dogma TODAY.We cannot say that the Good Thief died without the baptism of water( as if we could know) and is an exception to the dogma TODAY.The dogma says all need to formally enter the Churh TODAY. All need the baptism of water which can only be given in the present time, today.
So it was wrong for the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to state' 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.' It IS ALWAYS REQUIRED that one be incorporated into the Church actually as a member and Pope Pius XII, Cardinal Francesco Marchetti, Cardinal Ottaviani and Cardinal Richard Cushing and the Jesuists did not know of any exception. They could not know of any exception i.e someone saved outside the Church.
Traditionalists should make this clear today even if it means admitting that they and  their religious leaders were wrong all these years.
-Lionel Andrades
 
Here's an old announcemt which was ignored by the Vatican and which is still relevant today.
 
 
 
 
 
An announcement which can be made in 2015-2106 is:-
 
 
ATTENTION : Pope Francis,Vatican Curia, Press Office.
There are no known exceptions, there are no physically visible exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. We cannot meet any one on the streets who will be saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.Nor  can we see any one in Heaven saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church. So there cannot be any exceptions to the old ecclesiology.
There cannot be any exception to the Feeneyite version of the dogma, the traditional interpretation of outside the Church there is no salvation.
 
So it was wrong for the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to state' 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.'
 
Holy Father, physically we cannot see  Catholics in Heaven, saved without the baptism of water.
 
So there cannot be any exception to the traditional, strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. There cannot be any exception to the dogma in the text of Vatican Council II or the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
 
 
-Lionel Andrades
 
 
 

Vox, this is no small feat in what you wrote. The words flowed from grace and wisdom that is given to you from God - George Brenner

George Brenner said...

Vox,

   Your one paragraph defining 'Extra ecclesiam nulla Salus' (no salvation outside the Catholic Church) is the most concise, accurate and absolutely clear explanation that I have ever seen. It is totally and completely spot on. This has been the faithful teaching and understanding for Centuries of our one, holy, Catholic and Apostolic faith. It is our right and duty to obey this teaching if we are to be truly Catholics. Vox, this is no small feat in what you wrote. The the words flowed from grace and wisdom that is given to you from God.

 
 
There is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. No Protestants. No Jews. No Muslims, No Hindus. No Buddhists. No Mormans. No Jehovah's Witnesses. No animists, no atheists, no pagans. None will get to Heaven. All will go to Hell for all eternity...Now, can these Protestants, Jews and Muslims and others be saved by God? That is up to Him...If one of these is saved...We cannot know who these are, who are saved or if in fact they will be.- David Domet, Vox Cantoris
Related image
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Vox Cantoris's photo.