If Bishop Schneider interprets the Council rationally then: the Council in its text can be faithfully interpreted in the light of Tradition. It is possible for the Conciliar documents in the Council itself to be seen and treated as a faithful continuity with the timeless teaching of the Church
Bishop Athanasius Schneider cannot be considered schismatic if he continues to affirm Vatican Council II with a hermeneutic of continuity with extra ecclesiam nulla salus ( with no exceptions), Athanasius Creed( with no exceptions), the Syllabus of Errors with no exception on ecumenism etc. He would be affirming LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc as referring only hypothetical and theoretical cases. They do not contradict Tradition, in particular exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.
He would also be affirming hypothetical and speculative cases only of the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I). So BOD, BOB and I.I being invisible in 2001 cannot be objective exceptions to Feeneyite EENS, the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors etc.
He would not be rejecting Tradition. Vatican Council II would be interpreted in harmony with Tradition, with the hermeneutic of continuity with the past.
On the contrary the popes since Paul VI interpret Vatican Council II by confusing LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc as being visible examples of salvation outside the Church.
Similarly the popes since Pius XII have interpreted EENS by confusing BOD, BOB and I:I as being visible examples of salvation outside the Church.
With the irrational interpretation of Magisterial documents, the present two popes are heretical and schismatic. They contradict the past Magisterium over the centuries.
They can correct their error.-Lionel Andrades
FEBRUARY 27, 2021
When the hermeneutic of continuity is mentioned is it continuity with extra ecclesiam nulla salus interpreted with or without exceptions, Athanasius Creed with or without exceptions, the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX with or without exceptions, the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance visible or invisible
I affirm Vatican Council II without the false premise so I would teach a traditional Catechism in the parishes, like the saints , who affirmed exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. This was the Catechism taught by St. Peter Alcantara, St. John of the Cross, St. Teresa of Avila, St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Augustine and the Jesuit missionaries
When Bishop Athanasius Schneider announced that Lumen Gentium 16 was un-acceptable he was assuring the Left that he interprets Vatican Council II like them. If he announced that he accepts LG 16, as hypothetical and theoretical and so he accepts it and does not reject it the Left would be in an uproar
Bishop Athanasius Schneider is not talking about the false premise otherwise his theology will have to change.He will no more be able to interpret Vatican Council II with the New Theology
If Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke and Bishop Athanasius Schneider do not say that they can see and meet non Catholics saved outside the Church without faith and baptism, who are now in Heaven, ( in other words, interpret Vatican Council II with an irrational premise) then Pope Francis will approve a Decree of Prohibitions for them too, as has been done for the St. Benedict Center, NH. To be legally a Catholic, a Catholic has to choose an irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II, the Creeds and Catechisms...
When all the cardinals and bishops interpret Vatican Council II without the false premise there is no liberalism in the Church. The traditionalist-liberal divison ends. Also collegiality is no more an issue when all the popes, cardinals and bishops have to choose only a rational interpretation of Vatican Council II which does not contradict Tradition. There is unity on doctrine and theology
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment