Joseph Shaw's new book The Case for Liturgical Restoration is a real bluff.He was projecting the Traditional Latin Mass of the 1950's as the same as the one today, as if it had the same ecclesiology.He will not affirm extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) like the Magisterium in the 16th century and the missionary priests of that time, when they offered the Tridentine Rite Mass.
The Latin Mass today is permitted only with the New Ecclesiology.It is based on outside the Church there is salvation. The Traditional Latin Mass was based on the Old Theology and the Old Ecclesiology. Outside the Church there is no salvation.
So evangelisation had its foundation on the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.It was only after the Fr. Leonard Feeney case that the New Theology emerged and it was introduced into Vatican Council II.
The traditionalists at the St. Benedict Center, New Hampshire affirm Feeneyite Vatican Council II and EENS while he does not do so. So which traditionalists are being referred to in the book, he edited?
There can be traditionalists today who attend the Latin Mass, and affirm the Feeneyite EENS.
I can attend Mass in the vernacular and affirm the Old Ecclesiology with traditional mission. If the Catholic religious leaders, lay and religious, did the same, there could be a restoration.
Otherwise how can Catholics offer the Latin Mass with Cushingite theology which creates a rupture with the Syllabus of Errors, the Athanasius Creed and the Catechism of Pope Pius X,and then expect a Restoration in the Church ?
How can heresy, officially supported by the cardinal and the bishops in Britain, with the support of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, lead to a Restoration?
-Lionel Andrades
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment