Wednesday, June 22, 2016

Pope Benedict changed 'the rule of faith' : lex credendi of the Traditional Latin Mass was suppressed

Musings of a Pertinacious Papist

From the blog Musings of a Pertinacious Papist :
"Guest editorial: Fiat continuity and the case of Papa Ratzinger"
JM said...
David Young: The heretical ideas of Ratzinger are not one liners, but entire approaches.See James Larson. His diagnoses are awfully hard to protest.


Article 8: A Sobering Assessment

A Sobering Assessment - James Larson 
If we think deeply about it, we must see that the prayer for the conversion of the Jews embodies many elements which are at the heart of what the Mass is all about. Its suppression would be entirely in keeping with Pope Benedict's statement in the Motu Proprio that the two forms of the Mass will enrich one another. This alteration in the Traditional Mass would be in accord with the rule of faith now governing the Church, but would amount to a suppression of the lex credendi of which the Traditional Mass is the expression...
The rule of faith has been changed. Since Pope Benedict replaced the traditional theology of Feeneyism ( there are no known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus) with Cushingism ( there are known exceptions to the dogma.The baptism of desire is not  hypothetical but an objective exception).So the lex credendi had been changed by him.

We must realize, above all else, that Pope Benedict XVI believes in the reforms of Vatican II...
the irreconcilable differences in the rules of faith and prayer. The fact is that unless Benedict XVI is fully converted to the traditional approach to the Catholic faith, we can reasonably expect the Mass to be altered and "essentialized."
Yes the Traditional Mass has been altered with a new rule of faith, a new lex credendi.This was done with Cushingism.Cushingism is based on an irrational premise. With the irrational premise a new theology was created.This is really modernism has James Larson rightly observes.Pope Benedict rejects the Syllabus of Errors.
If this is to happen, it might very likely start with the prayer for the conversion of the Jews. Such a prayer is in severe contradiction with sector #3 mentioned in the Pope's address to the Curia. In part, it states:
"In particular, [standing] before the recent crimes of the Nazi regime and, in general, with a retrospective look at a long and difficult history, it was necessary to evaluate and define in a new way the relationship between the Church and the faith of Israel."
Pope Benedict has made it abundantly clear that, according to his rule of faith, such a relationship does not involve conversion.
The Pope has made it clear that Jews do not need to convert in the present times. This contradicts the Bible.Pope Benedict has also made it clear that Jews do not need to convert formally into the Church since he has replaced the new old theology with irrational Cushingism.This is heresy.
In my exchange with Michael Davies in the pages of Christian Order, I made the following statement: "Would it not be the final irony if Satan was able to draw the 'elect' into a denial of the Catholic Faith through their attachment of the Mass?"
Today the FSSP offers the Traditional Mass with the new ecclesiology based on Cushingism.The SSPX also offers the Traditional Mass with confusion. They affirm the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus but theologically they also accept the baptism of desire etc as an exception to the dogma.
The Franciscans of the Immaculate cannot offer the Traditional Latin Mass since they affirm the old ecclesiology, like the SSPX, but they too, consider hypothetical cases as being exceptions to the dogma EENS.This is the stuff of the new theology.This is also Pope Benedict's understanding of faith.
So we have the denial of the Catholic Faith by the FSSP, the SSPX and the F.I and Pope Benedict.

Interestingly enough, some of those very people who just a short time ago were calling Cardinal Ratzinger a liar and deceiver over his "revelation" and interpretation of the Third Secret of Fatima, or were accusing him of promoting the heresy of indifferentism in his ecumenical statements concerning the Jewish "Covenant", are now "down in adoration" over Summorum Pontificum. And yet, we are still dealing with the same man who apparently possesses the same lex credendi – as seen to be operative in the Pope's Christmas, 2005 address to the curia, or as evidenced by images of a Pope praying in a Mosque in Turkey. And it is this same Pope who has laid down the principle that the Mass must conform to this rule of faith.
Correct! Both Pope Benedict and Pope Francis are liberal, they are Cushingites, they support the Rahner-Ratzinger New Theology.For Pope Francis too the Traditional Mass is 'ideological' if it accompanies the old ecclesiogy( Feeneyite).So the Traditional Latin Mass is now flourishing in the dioceses of liberal bishops, since it is accompanied with the new Cushingite theology. The Traditional Latin Mass now conforms to this new 'rule of faith'.Lex credendi has been changed though the liturgy is the same.

Article 9: Triumph or Chaos

Triumph or Chaos - James Larson 

"Nonetheless, it is still true that the great legacy of the Council, which opened a new road, is a 'magna carta' of the Church's path, very essential and fundamental."
The first thing we should understand, consequently, is that this Pope is absolutely committed to Vatican II, and that he does not intend Summorum Pontificum as some sort of major historical turning point back towards tradition. Benedict XVI considers Vatican II to be the "great charter" for the Church's path into the future.
Pope Benedict did not realize that the second part of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 made an objective error and this objective error is repeated in Vatican Council II. This objective error is the basis of the new theology, which he Rahner, Congar, Dupuis, Kung, Kasper and others supported at Vatican Council II.
There are superfluous passages  in Vatican Council II which comes from the factual mistake made in 1949.It was an error to refer to the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance (LG 14, AG 7) since they were irrelevant to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. They are also not exceptions to the Syllabus of Errors.Someone made a mistake at Vatican Council II !!
Similarly when UR 3 refers to those saved in imperfect communion with the Church this is a hypothetical case. There is no such known case.UR 3 cannot be considered an exception or relevant to the dogma EENS or the Syllabus of Errors. It should not have been mentioned in Vatican Council II. Someone made a mistake!
The mistake in principle, in Vatican Council II, is it indicates that hypothetical cases are not just hypothetical but that they are explicit. It then permits the inference of these explicit cases being exceptions to the dogma EENS.The Syllabus of Errors also becomes obsolete.

Secondly, the Pope offers us a solution for understanding and properly living out these "difficulties" which we have encountered on this "new road:"
"Along this road, we must grow with patience and we must now, in a new way, learn what it means to renounce triumphalism."
He has rejected the dogma EENs.In the Catechism of the Catholic Church,the liberal Cardinal Ratzinger who accepts Cushingism as a theology, calls EENS 'an aphorism'(CCC 846).
Triumphalism? It was a word that was fairly common when I converted 27 years ago, but I haven't heard it used for years. Why now? And what does the Pope mean when he says that we must learn "in a new way" what it means to renounce it?
We will start with a good definition of triumphalism. Fr. Hardon gives us one in his Modern Catholic Dictionary:
"Triumphalism: A term of reproach leveled at the Catholic Church for the claim that she has the fullness of divine revelation and the right to pass judgment on the personal and social obligations of humankind."
I would consider this a very good definition. What is more, it very much characterizes Catholic teaching and belief up to Vatican II.
'Catholic teaching and belief up to Vatican II', this was when Feeneyism as a general theology was still common in the Catholic Church.With Vatican Council II the error in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 was made official and popular.

So now there are two triumphalisms that must be renounced: the triumphalism of the past, and any triumphalism of the future. This means that any hope which conservative Catholics might entertain for a "springtime of the Church," in which the Church would once again appear "triumphant" is doomed to failure. Remembering our definition of triumphalism to be the belief that the Catholic Church has the fullness of divine revelation and the right therefore to pass judgment on the personal and social obligations of humankind, this renunciation of all triumphalism in effect denies the Gospel itself.
It is into the eye of this holocaust of his own making that Benedict XVI has now inserted the Traditional Latin Mass. We may choose to be optimistic by believing that, according to the alleged principle lex orandi, lex credendi (condemned by Pope Pius XII), the Mass will work as some sort of miraculous leaven to change the rule of faith now dominant in the Church. Or, we may believe that Pope Benedict will apply his "rule of faith" (which is integrally tied to "essentialization"), and the Mass will be changed.
His rule of faith, which is based on Cushingism has been applied to the Mass in all rites.If we are aware of it we can neutralize the error.Use Feeneyism as a theology.The Novus Ordo Mass and the Traditional Latin Mass would then have the old ecclesiology, the 'triumphalistic ecclesiology'.
The Traditional Mass is the supreme act of Catholic Triumphalism. I am convinced that Satan, having failed to eliminate it, will now seek to corrupt it from within. This is the strategy which he has used so successfully against the Church, and it makes perfect sense that this is now his stratagem for that which is the source and summit of all that is holy within the Church and in the world.
Cushingism has been imposed upong the Church. It is supported by the Left within and outside the Church.Cardinal Ratzinger as Prefect of the Congregation of the Faith did not point out that Cushingism is based on a  philosophical irrationality. He also did not tell Archbishop Lefebvre that he could accept Vatican Council II with the theology of Feeneyism.Then the Council would not be a break with the old ecclesiology, the triumphalistic ecclesiology. Instead the Vatican approved the excommunication of Archbishop Lefebvre who offered the Latin Mass with the old ecclesiology, the ideological ecclesiology.
-Lionel Andrades

No comments: