Catholic laity protest Cdl Marx, call him to repent for leading German church down schismatic ‘synodal path’ is the title of a LifeSite report.It is still not understood that the German bishops consider the Lefebvrists and the ACIES ORDINATA as being in schism, since they reject Vatican Council II ( Cushingite) and no one seems to know that Vatican Council II( Feeneyite), avoids a schism with the past popes on EENS, Athanasius Creed, Syllabus of Errors etc.
Cushingite Roberto dei Mattei who wrote a book on Vatican Council II with a false premise and inference, has no apology or correction to offer and now he is asking the German bishops to turn around.
For him invincible ignorance is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus( EENS). I have mentioned it before in these reports and he has no comment.
In other words, hypothetical cases of an unknown person saved outside the Church is a practical exception to EENS for him.So he rejects the dogma EENS, the Athanasius Creed and the Catechism of Pope Pius X on EENS and this is schism. He wants the German bishops to leave their schismatic path, which is based upon Vatican Council II.
Mattei is politically correct on all magisterial documents which he interprets with Cushingism like Cardinal Marx, and then he is standing there at Munich as if he is an example of orthodoxy.
Just as he compromised on the faith, Cardinal Marx is doing the same, to protect his wealth and other worldly interests.
It would be something if Roberto dei Mattei was standing at Munich and affirming exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church with no known exceptions.He would have to admit that Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre interpreted Vatican Council II with Cushingism and not Feeneyism, and so made a mistake.
Plineo Correa de Oliveriera, the Hildebrands, Michael Davies,Princess Elvina Pallavicini of the past and Princess Gloria von Thurn und Taxis, of today, also made a mistake over Vatican Council II.Once this is admitted then the error can be corrected and the Church can simply go back to its old ecclesiology. This would be unbelievable for the liberals in Germany.
It is only then that he can ask the German bishops to follow traditional faith and morals.Now the German bishops justify their un-orthodoxy,for me, with Vatican Council II; Vatican Council II, Cushingite.This issue was not addressed in the statement issued at Munich.It was not also addressed at the Round table Conference before the Amazon Synod.
I repeat - the liberals keep saying that the changes in doctrine and theology is the result of Vatican Council II. It is like a new revelation in the Church. They consider themselves orthodox and the Lefebvrists,as being schismatic, for rejecting Vatican Council II.The two popes support them.
I too reject Vatican Council II Cushingite but I affirm Vatican Council II, Feeneyite, which supports tradition and avoids schism.
Cardinal Marx could interpret the Catechisms and Creeds with Feeneyism, but he chooses Cushingism like members of the ACIES ORDINATA.
The liberalism of the German bishops does not come from out of the blue, it has a theological basis and this is never addressed at the traditionalist conferences.Joseph Shaw, John Lamont, Thomas Pink and John Rao do not discuss this issue since it would finally mean having to affirm Feeneyite EENS and Vatican Council II and they want to protect their teaching jobs.
In the ACIES ORDINATA statement on the German bishops there is no reference to Vatican Council II (Cushingite) and Vatican Council II( Feeneyite). The German bishops base their doctrinal and theological changes on Vatican Council II ( Cushingite).Then they justify other changes in ecclesiology.
The Life Sites Statement did not point out that the German bishops need to affirm Vatican Council II( Feeneyite) i.e the Council interpreted with hypothetical cases just being hypothetical.Then the common false premise is avoided.
Cardinal Marx and the Left know that members of the ACIES ORDINATA do not affirm Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) since then it would mean that they support the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church with an ecumenism of return.They would not want to do this in public formally and oppose the Left.
So the Lefbvrists go along with Vatican Council II( Cushingite) which is a rupture with Tradition and is the theological foundation at the German universities. It was the same for the German Cardinal Ratzinger. Nothing new.
Roberto dei Mattei, Michael Matt, John Henry Weston and John Smeaton could affirm Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite), point out that it is traditional and rational and then ask the German bishops to do the same, since Cushingism is irrational and leads to heresy and sacrilege.
The issue still is exclusive salvation in the Church with no known exceptions.The issue is not a vague reference to Vatican Council II.
Is Michael Matt ready to say that there is exclusive salvation in only the Catholic Church and that BOD,BOB and I.I are not practical exceptions to EENS ? Neither is LG 8, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc practical exceptions to EENS ? NO.His personal interests have always been the priority.
I had asked this question before the 'round table' discussion on the Amazon Synod.No one responded.
Does John Smeaton affirm Feeneyite EENS(BOD,BOB and I.I are not exceptions) or Cushingite EENS ( BOD, BOB and I.I are exceptions)?
Does Roberto dei Mattei admit that Plineo Correa de Oliveriera and Archbishop Lefebvre held on to Cushingite Vatican Council II and EENS and so made a mistake? The new theology is Cushingite and they did not now it 50 years back.
Professor Roberto dei Mattei does not want to be called a Feeneyite.So he interprets Vatican Council II and EENS with Cushingism like Cardinal Marx. Cushingism cannot be the teaching of the Holy Spirit. It has a human error.But how can the professor affirm exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church with no exceptions?- he is a rich man like Cardinal Marx.- Lionel Andrades
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment