Monday, May 2, 2016

At least before Fr.Hans Kung passes away an announcement should kindly be made

There were the old moral theology manuals, of St. Alphonsus Ligouri etc, which mentioned the different types of mortal sin and how they were committed. They have been discarded. Instead a new moral theology was created which mentions exceptions for mortal sin.With this two fold attack on traditional Catholic morality, approved by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Catholics do not know any more what is a mortal sin.They do not believe in a mortal sin.
Related imageSo when Amoris Laetiotia(AL) 301 says a mortal sin cannot always be called a mortal sin it is acceptable for Cardinal Raymond Burke. It is the familiar moral theology too for Joseph Shaw at the LMS Chairman blog.
So we have two well known traditionalists, advocates of the Traditional Latin Mass(TLM) supporting the new moral theology based on known exceptions to mortal sin, even though we humans cannot judge any case as an exception.
We can go back to the old morality by recognising that there are no known exceptions to mortal sin, no subjectivism made objective in defacto cases.We can go back to traditional moral teachings associated with the TLM, the pre Council of Trent times. We can use the Catechism of the Council of Trent since it is error-free.
The contemporary magisterium cannot be trusted.Fr.Hans Kung S.J, friend and colleague  of Pope Benedict, said Fr.John Courtney Murray did away with the dogma on the infallibility of the pope, since Vatican Council II contradicted extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS). The magisterium actually agreed with him!.Fr.Hans Kung was using  subjectivism to interpret Vatican Council II. LG 16 for example, referred to known in the flesh  exceptions, visible cases on earth,  of persons saved without the baptism of water.LG 16 was an exception to the traditional interpretation of EENS.No one contradicted Hans Kung on this point.Even today no one says LG 16 refers to hypothetical and not objective cases in 2016. So Fr.John C. Murray could not contradict the dogma EENS with anything in Vatican Council II.
The Vatican instead made Catholic universities have Fr. Kung's books placed in their libraries.The books did not contain a clarification or correction from Cardinal Ratzinger. He did not say LG 16 refers to invisible and not visible cases. He did not even say that the baptism of desire refers to an invisible instead of a visible case.Instead as head of the International Theological Commission, in the ITC  theological paper, Christianity and the World Religions(1997), he assumed that LG 16 refers to visible cases.He also approved the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 which suggests that the baptism of desire refers to objective cases and so they were exceptions to the interpretation of EENS according to Fr.Leonard Feeney.Hypotethetical but visible in the flesh exceptions!
Even now after thousands,(literally a few thousand) of blog posts(euchartistandmission) on this subject on the Internet over the last few years no one at the Vatican wants to comment.
With known exceptions to the dogma EENS, known to human beings, the CDF changed traditional Catholic salvation theology.With power consolidiated in Cardinal Ratzinger , Pope John Paul II being ailing, the Catholic Church had new doctrines on morals and faith and it was being implemented at all levels of the Church.
So it would not be a surprise if Pope Benedict approved N.301 in Amoris Laetitia.Before AL was announced he issued a statement via Avvenire,confirming the official change in the Church's salvation theology, it's faith teaching. He said the dogma EENS was not more like in the 16 th century. Vatican Council II had changed( developed) it. He was clear.
We now know that with theology, faith and morals were changed in the Church during his tenure as Prefect of the CDF. A defined dogma like EENS was rejected and traditional mortal sin which was still there at the time of the Council of Trent, now had known exceptions.The exceptions can be judged case by case, AL says.
With this same new irrational theology Vatican Council II is interpreted as a break with the dogma EENS and  Tradition in general.
Related image
Hopefully, before Fr.Hans Kung (88) passes away some one will announce in the Catholic Church that there are no known exceptions to the traditional teaching on faith and morals.All his work was a waste of time.
They could announce that Vatican Council II does not obviously contradict the dogma EENS, since LG 16, LG 8 etc refer to invisible and not visible cases.Kung did not know. May be no one told him about this.-Lionel Andrades

Abp.Augustine Di Noia like Card. Burke uses subjectivism and known exceptions to interpret Vatican Council II as a break with EENS according to the 16th century missionaries

Cardinal Burke interprets Vatican Council II like Fr.Hans Kung: contradicting the infallibility of the pope ex cathedra
 Related image
Fr.Gaudron, like Cardinal Burke and Joseph Shaw does not see how judgement of hypothetical cases result in a non traditional conclusion in Vatican Council II

For Burke and Shaw subjective cases are objective, this is the norm.So they interpret Vatican Council II as a break with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus

No comments: