Pope Benedict needs to be honest and apologize to the Society of St. Pius X(SSPX) . He demanded that they interpret Vatican Council II and Magisterial documents with the common false premise ( invisible people are visible in the present times) and accept the non traditional conclusion for canonical recognition.
This interpretation of Vatican Council II is deceptive and unethical. This was brought out by Bishop Athansius Schneider when interviewed by Dr. Taylor Marshall.The bishop avoids the fake premise.He says that there are no objective cases of the baptism of desire in the present times.
Lumen Gentium 14( baptism of desire )in Vatican Council II refers to a hypothetical case and not an objective and known person saved outside the Church in 1965-2021.It would be the same for LG 8,LG 16, UR 3, GS 22 etc.
Pope Benedict’s interpretation of the baptism of desire, Vatican Council II and extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) is still based upon a lie. He must correct the scandal.It is unethical even by secular standards.
Pope Benedict must also ask the Regina Apostolorum and John Latran universities in Rome, to stop offering courses and academic degrees, on his theology.Since he has made a major mistake in the interpretation of Magisterial documents. Even Redemptoris Missio and Dominus Iesus were written with this error, so also his book on Ecclesiology and Vatican Council II.He was forcing all this bad theology, with deception, upon the SSPX, in exchange for regularizing their status in the Church.
It was Pope Paul VI who interpreted Vatican Council II with the false premise.Cardinal Ratzinger, as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, did not correct the error.
Instead he excommunicated Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre who would not accept Vatican Council II with a non traditional conclusion.
There was no apology from Cardinal Ratzinger for the CDF’s excommunication of Fr. Leonard Feeney.The Jesuit brave priest from Boston would not say that unknown cases of the baptism of desire were known exceptions to 16th century EENS.For him there were no practical exceptions for the past ecclesiocentrism of the Catholic Church.
He was excommunicated for some 19 years and the CDF never acknowledged their error(Holy Office 1949) even after the death of the priest.-Lionel Andrades
AUGUST 30, 2021
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment