Sermon by Fr. Michael Johnson FSSPX, “Carthago delenda est! (So, what about Vatican II ?), Remnant News
October of three years ago marked two events of special significance: the 50th anniversary of the close of the Second Vatican Council; and, deliberately timed to coincide with that anniversary, the second synod on marriage and the family, called by Pope Francis, the bitter fruits of which are only now being realized in another nefarious document, Amoris Laetitia – The Joy of Luv, which is the illegitimate child of that synod.
At the end of the day, however, we may point to the Second Vatican Council itself, as the grandmother of the child – as the baneful root of all of the evils of our present already too long post-conciliar age ..
Lionel: Fr. Michael Johnson is referring to Vatican Council II, Cushingite, the Council interpreted with the false premise to create a rupture with Tradition.
__________________________
At the end of it all, Cardinal Gerhard Müller, fired last year by Pope Francis from his position as Prefect of the CDF, whether intentionally or unintentionally, did us – did the Society – a huge favor. As he departed his post, his Eminence reinforced by reiterating in a letter addressed personally to Bp. Fellay what he had said in 2012, namely that, before any so-called “regularization” of the status of the SSPX could be possible, the Society must accept the Second Vatican Council, as well as all of the documents subsequent and consequent to that council; and we must also accept both the liceity and validity of the Novus Ordo Mass and of all the reformed Sacraments. This has effectively ended the quest (on both sides) for rapprochement between the Society and Rome, at least for the foreseeable future.
Lionel: He was referring to Vatican Council II, Cushingite, the only interpretation of the Council known to Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and the SSPX bishops.This interpretation of the Council is a rupture with Tradition.
____________________________
It must be admitted, however, that one of consequences of this quest has been a fair amount of softening on the Society’s attitude towards the ongoing modernist devolution of Holy Mother Church, and towards that devolution’s chief engine, the Second Vatican Council. In attempting to make the Council more palatable, some on our side have even taken to slicing and dicing it, identifying 95% of it as more or less acceptable, but the remaining 5% contrary to what the Church has always taught; and, therefore, to be rejected.
Lionel: Even this would be interpreting Vatican Council II with the false premise.
_____________________________
The 95% deemed more or less acceptable was then further dissected into two more parts: the larger part said to be comprised of direct quotations of earlier orthodox magisterial documents; while the remaining smaller part was deemed ambiguous, and in need of clarification to bring it into line with traditionally accepted doctrine.
Lionel: Still this would be Vatican Council II(Cushingite) and not Vatican Council II(Feeneyite).
______________________________.
And so, at the end of the day we are left with what might be called the good, the bad, and the ugly: the good allegedly comprising the bulk of the Council, and being perfectly orthodox, therefore, to be assented to with supernatural faith, failure to do so implying heresy, or at least schism on the part of the one dissenting.
Lionel: We are also left with Vatican Council II, Feeneyite, the Council interpreted without the false premise. Then there is no schism with the popes over the centuries on EENS, the past ecclesiology and the old ecumenism of return. The Syllabus of Errors would no more be obsolete. This would be acceptable to the traditionalists.
_______________________________
The bad, of course, is to be passed over entirely, while the ugly must somehow be beautified. If this sounds like “making a silk purse out of a sow’s ear”, who could blame you for thinking it?
Lionel: Fr. Johnson is not aware of Vatican Council II, Feeneyite.
_______________________________
But is this proper? If the Council is indeed an authentic expression of the Magisterium; if it is truly doctrinally and historically contiguous with all that makes up the deposit of Faith before it (as Benedict XVI, the current Pope emeritus, once asserted it to be), who are we to pick and choose what of it we will accept, what we will re-interpret, and what we will reject?
Lionel: The interpretation of Vatican Council II by Pope Benedict and the SSPX is heretical. Cushingism is modernism. It causes the hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition. It negates the dogma EENS and other de fide teachings of the Church, which it is obligatory for a Catholic to believe in.
_________________________________
Is this not precisely the essence of heresy? In her condemnation of this tactic, at least, if in nothing else, Rome is both consistent and even Catholic. We must look then at this curious notion of “dissecting the Council”.
Lionel : With Vatican Council II, Cushingite, Rome has lost the Faith and so have the Lefebvrists.Remnant News needs to start interpreting Vatican Council II without the irrational premise which creates a rupture with Tradition. - Lionel Andrades
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment