Sunday, June 25, 2017

Mons. Brunero Gherardini misled the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary and many traditionalists

Image result for Photo Brunero Gherardini
Mons. Brunero Gherardini misled the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary and many traditionalists. 1 In a crude way he interpreted hypothetical cases superficially, mistaking them for being known people who had been saved outside the Church. He also inferred that the dogma EENS had been contradicted by Vatican Council II (Cushingite).So Lumen Gentium 16 ( invincible ignorance) and Lumen Gentium 8 ( elements of sanctification and truth)referred to personally known people saved outside the Church.He was not aware of his error. Otherwise he would have announced that Vatican Council II( LG 6,LG 8, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc) did not contradict the dogma EENS as it was interpreted over the centuries.If he was aware of the error he would have concluded that Vatican Council II is not a rupture with the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church.
On the website of the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, Richmond, N.H( there is a positive report by Brother Andre Marie MICM on Brunero Gherardini and his new book on Vatican Council II, even though the book is based on philosophical errors. These philosophical errors are accepted by Brother Andre Marie in his interpretation of Vatican Council II( invisible people are examples of salvation outside the Church and so they contradict the dogma EENS).
Image result for brunero gherardini
Brunero Gherardini has also influenced the Franciscans of the Immaculate and has been a speaker at their conferences in the presence of Fr.Stefano Mannelli.
He is quoted by Bishop Bernard Fellay and other traditionalists.
I mention all this not for the sake of criticizing the traditionalists but to point out the specific eror which they can get rid of and which was unknown to the respected Mons.Gherardini.
Like Mons. Gherardini, the St. Benedict Centers, the SSPX and the sedevacantists have been interpreting Vatican Council II with an irrational premise ( invisible people are visible on earth saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church) and non traditional conclusion( these now visible people are exceptions to the dogma EENS and are examples of salvation outside the Church).This is now the new theology, fantasy theology based on imaginary people on earth being concrete examples of the traditional interpretation of outside the Church there is no salvation.
So the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 stated 'Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member' and this was not noticed by the traditionalists.This is first class heresy based on an irrational premise.
The traditionalists now have a choice and can reject the Monsignor's interpretation.

From his irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II, which I call Vatican Council II ( Cushingite) they can switch to Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite).It avoids the premise and so the conclusion is the usual traditional one.
The SBC communities, the SSPX and the Catholic sedevacantists can all affirm Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) and avoid the mistake Brunero Gherardini made.
They then put themself in a position 'to ask Rome to come back to the Faith', by affirming Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) in harmony with EENS ( Feeneyite). Pre and post Vatican Council II doctrine will be in harmony with the interpretation of all magisterial documents with Feeneyism ( Catechism of the Council of Trent, Catechism of Pope Pius X, Catechism of the Catholic Church 1995 etc).
So they will be affirming magisterial documents but without the New Theology.
Not only can Rome(Vatican) be asked to come back to the Faith but even the sedevacantists who have broken away from the Church because of Vatican Council II ( Cushingite) can be asked to come back into the Church.

Bishop Donald Sanborn can still offer the Tridentine Rite Mass and can affirm the old ecclesiology in line with Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite).
Bishop Sanborn has said ( see Youtube video) in a debate with Prof. Robert Fastiggi if he can be shown in Vatican Council II, a continuity between the pre and post Vatican Council II Church ( in theology and doctrine) then tomorrow he would go to the Chancery office and report to the local bishop.
Bishop Sanborn, the SSPX and the SBC have not been able to contradict what I have been writing on this blog over the years and specifically mentioning them.
I do not claim to be a theologian, but fundamentally what I have been saying is that invisible people cannot be visible exceptions to the dogma EENS in the present times.Invisible cases of the baptism of desire etc cannot be defacto and concrete exceptions to all needing to be 'card carrying members of the Church' to avoid the fires of Hell.This is something obvious. It is common sense.So the magisterium and the traditionalists were wrong to accept a new theology based on this bad philosophy.

 Vatican Council II: An Open Discussion. The volume is published by Casa Mariana Editrice, a publishing house connected to the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate, and it boasts a forward by Bishop Mario Oliveri (of the Albenga and Imperia diocese) and an introduction by Archbishop Malcolm Ranjith, the former secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship, who is now the Archbishop of Colombo and Metropolitan of the Church in Sri Lanka. 2


Cardinal Malcom Ranjit told me personally in Rome that the Syllabus of Errors no more applies.Since there was known salvation outside the Church for him the dogma EENS was superseded.It was the same for Cardinal Ratzinger as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. So there was now a new ecumenism and inter-religious dialogue based on a new ecclesiology and the New Theology. The  Syllabus of Errors was contradicted for them.In 2015 the Vatican did not celebrate the 150th anniversary of the Syllabus of Errors.4.Cardinal Ranjit and Cardinal Ratzinger were in line with Gherardini.Even for Fr.Stefano Manelli F.I and the Franciscans of the Immaculate there was only Vatican Council II ( Cushingite) and all magisterial documents were being interpreted with Cushingism instead of Feeneyism.
I am not a sedevacantist, and I can still say that "the Church" has not proposed for us any heresies for our belief. There is a vast area of study here concerning the criteriology for Catholic belief, one that is largely ignored by priest and layman alike, the learning of which would help us navigate these waters writes Brother Andre Marie in a comment on Catholicism. org  5

Cushingism leads to heresy. It changes the interpretation of the Nicene Creed, the dogma EENS, Vatican Council II, the Catechism of the Catholic Church , the Catechism of Pope Pius X etc.With a new theology new doctrines are created in the Church.-Lionel Andrades


Vatican Council II: An Open Discussion, by Monsignor Brunero Gherardini

No comments: