Tuesday, October 19, 2021
For a renewal in the Catholic Church we need to interpret all Magisterial Documents with the Rational Premise
Raymond Arroyo asks Bishop Athanasius Schneider how can there be a renewal in the Church?
I cannot see a renewal with
Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre’s theology.It is based upon the False Premise. It is the same with the liberals.We cannot ‘unite the clans’ with liberalism.There cannot be unity with Cushingite theology. This is the
theology of the traditionalists approved by the Left.
The Left controls the churches of the
Catholic Church in Rome with Government approved Committees.Also the police are
there at Holy Mass, most of them non Christians.So if a priest does not affirm
liberalism created with the False Premise which produces a break with
Tradition, he has his incardination cancelled by the Rome Vicarate or he could be transferred.
So all the FSSP priests at the church
Trinita dei Pellegrini, Rome, for example, offer Mass in Latin, with the fake
theology.Cardinal Raymond Burke and Fr. John Zuhlsdorf are allowed to offer
Holy Mass there or elsewhere in Rome, only because they affirm the common fake
theology created with the False Premise.This is the theology of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.
The SSPX priests at their St.Catherine
of Siene chapel in Rome also interpret Vatican Council II, EENS etc with the
Fake Premise. The police are there to control them.
So the priests do not say that they interpret Vatican Council II with the Rational Premise and so accept the Council in harmony with the strict interpretation of EENS, the Syllabus of Errors ( with no exceptions) and the Athanasius Creed ( with no known exceptions). They are politically correct for the police.It is the same at the Novus Ordo Mass in Rome.
For a renewal in the Catholic Church we need to interpret all Magisterial Documents with the Rational Premise.-Lionel Andrades
Lionel Andrades
Writer on Vatican Council II being dogmatic and not only pastoral.It is in harmony with the extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX, the Athanasius Creed etc.
It is found that there are two interpretations of Vatican Council II, one is rational and the other irrational. Since one uses a Rational Premise and the other a False Premise.One is Magisterial with the past Magisterium and the other, the common one, has an objective error and so cannot be Magisterial.It is the same with the Creeds and Catechisms.There can be two interpretations.
Why should Catholics choose the irrational version which is heretical, non traditional, liberal and schismatic, while a rational option is there, which is traditional ?.
__________________
Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict’s version of the Council is out. It’s obsolete.It is based upon the False Premise which creates the hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition.We now have a rational option.
Bishop Athanasius Schneider did well not to answer Raymond Arroyo’s loaded remark and question.The Left want him out of the way. They want him to make a mistake.
Arroyo referred to “the clear definitions articulated by Pope John Paul II, Pope Benedict XVI on Vatican Council II”, and Bishop Schneider did not pick up the bait.He was not yet ready to present an overhaul of the Council.What he has said in the interview with Dr. Taylor Marshall is enough. Any one is free to develop it and re-interpret Vatican Council II in harmony with Tradition.Raymond Arroyo and ‘the papal posse’ could do it.They don’t need Bishop Schneider. They could comment on the interview with Dr. Taylor Marshall.
For a renewal of the Church,mentioned in the interview with Arroyo, we have to
harmonize Vatican Council II with Tradition.We cannot go along with the present
George Soros - approved version of the Council.It is created with the False
Premise which Bishop Schneider exposed in the Dr.Taylor
Marshall-interview.
Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict’s
version of the Council is out. It’s obsolete.It is based upon the False Premise
which creates the hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition.We now have a rational option. -Lionel Andrades
Lionel Andrades
Writer on Vatican Council II being dogmatic and not only pastoral.It is in harmony with the extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX, the Athanasius Creed etc.
It is found that there are two interpretations of Vatican Council II, one is rational and the other irrational. Since one uses a Rational Premise and the other a False Premise.One is Magisterial with the past Magisterium and the other, the common one, has an objective error and so cannot be Magisterial.It is the same with the Creeds and Catechisms.There can be two interpretations.
Why should Catholics choose the irrational version which is heretical, non traditional, liberal and schismatic, while a rational option is there, which is traditional ?.
__________________
The "clear definitions articulated by Pope John Paul II, Pope Benedict XVI" on Vatican Council II is referred to by Raymond Arroyo : he means the Council interpreted with the False Premise with which he is comfortable
Bishop Athanasius Schneider was not
ready to make the direct attack on Vatican Council II by mentioning the Rational Premise in the interpretation of
LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc and neither was Raymond Arroyo at
EWTN’s the World Over.This is not the time.
Bishop Athansius Schneider spoke of the
need to restore the beauty of the Catholic faith and the truths received from
the Apostles.
He did not make a direct attack on
Vatican Council II.
Bishop Schneider has already indicated
in the interview with Dr. Taylor Marshall that we can re-interpret Vatican Council
II without the New Theology from Pope Pius XII ( on extra ecclesiam nulla
salus) and Pope Paul VI ( on Vatican Council II).It’s simple. We do not confuse
what is implicit as being explicit, invisible as being visible and unknown as
being known and then project practical exceptions for the past ecclesiocentrism.
This is the only way the Left can do away with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Syllabus of Errors (an
Ecumenism of Return with no known exceptions) and the Athanasius Creed with no known
exceptions, to all needing the Catholic faith for salvation.There are no literal cases of the baptism of desire, said Bishop Schneider to Dr. Taylor Marshall.
Bishop Schneider has to keep talking
about the False Premise. It is something obvious.There are no visible cases of
being saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16) in 2021. This is a fact.There are
no known cases of being saved with the baptism of desire (LG 14) for the
traditionalists in 1965-2021 at the Latin Mass. Nor at Mass in other rites and
languages.-Lionel Andrades
Lionel Andrades
Writer on Vatican Council II being dogmatic and not only pastoral.It is in harmony with the extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX, the Athanasius Creed etc.
It is found that there are two interpretations of Vatican Council II, one is rational and the other irrational. Since one uses a Rational Premise and the other a False Premise.One is Magisterial with the past Magisterium and the other, the common one, has an objective error and so cannot be Magisterial.It is the same with the Creeds and Catechisms.There can be two interpretations.
Why should Catholics choose the irrational version which is heretical, non traditional, liberal and schismatic, while a rational option is there, which is traditional ?.
__________________
Cardinal Luiz Ladaria sj has said that the SSPX are not separated from the Church : Dialogue continues so that they may be only Christocentric and not ecclesiocentric too
CARDINAL LUIZ LADARIA SJ
HAS SAID THAT THE SSPX ARE NOT SEPARATED FROM THE CHURCH : DIALOGUE
CONTINUES SO THAT THEY MAY BE ONLY CHRISTOCENTRIC AND NOT ECCLESIOCENTRIC TOO
Cardinal Luiz Ladaria sj,the Prefect for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican, has said that the Society of St. Pius X
(SSPX) are not separated from the Church.Of course, dialogue with them will
continue so that they may be only Christocentric and not ecclesiocentric too.
Ladaria did not grant the SSPX canonical recognition in the
past, since even though Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and the SSPX bishops
interpreted Vatican Council II with the False Premise,like Pope Paul VI, they
could not accept the Council with the non traditional co conclusion.For
Lefebvre it would be heresy and schism. He was correct.
But then Lefebvre may not have known, his books indicate, that Vatican Council II could be interpreted with the Rational Premise and there would be no break with Tradition.At least the popes did not tell him about it.
Lefebvre did not use the Rational Premise and so with the Fake Premise in the interpretatioin of Magisterial Documents(Creeds, Catechisms, Syllabus of Errors, EENS etc ) he too was prmoting the common heresy and schism, which was official but could not be Magisterial.Since the Holy Spirit would choose the Rational Premise like the past Magisterium.
It is possible that Pope Francis may also welcome non Catholic, Christian religious communities into the Catholic Church and grant them the same recognition given to the SSPX.They will only have to accept Vatican Council II interpreted with the Fake and not Rational Premise.The break with traditional ecclesiocentrism is important for the pope and the Masons.This is also the condition for the Ecclesia Dei communities.
So all that is expected of the SSPX now is that they discard any trace of the past exclusivist ecclesiology. The dialogue continues.
Cardinal Ladaria led the Vatican side at the Vatican-SSPX doctrinal during the pontificate of Pope Benedict.Both sides were using the Fake Premise to intepret Vatican Council II etc. Pope Benedict approved it.
However the SSPX General Chapter Statement (2012) called for accepting extra ecclesiam nulla salus with no exceptions. This would only be possible if Vatican Council II and EENS were interpreted with the Rational Premise.This was not welcomed by the Vatican and the Left.
Bishop Bernard Fellay and the SSPX breakaway groups would continue to issue statements interpreting the Council only with the False Premise. They were following Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and were politically correct with the Left. -Lionel Andrades
OCTOBER 18, 2021
230 German theologians use the same False Premise as Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Mattei and Ferrara
OCTOBER 18, 2021
Archbishop Lefebvre interpreted the Athanasius Creed, Nicene Creed and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) with the Fake Premise and so did the SSPX bishops and priests. This is heresy. It is also schism with the past Magisterium over the centuries, which did not use the same Premise
Archbishop Lefebvre interpreted the Athanasius Creed, Nicene Creed and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) with the Fake Premise and so did the SSPX bishops and priests. This is heresy. It is also schism with the past Magisterium over the centuries, which used the Rational Premise to create the old theology.SSPX lay supporters today are also in heresy and schism unless they avoid the False Premise. Heresy and schism are mortal sin of faith. Peter Kwasniewski, Joseph Shaw, Eric Sammons, Michael Matt, Matt Gaspers, Edward Pentin and John Henry Weston have no denial.Their interpretation of Magisterial Documents is heretical and schismatic. Catholics are following them.
John Henry Weston interviewed Eric Sammons and neither of the two of them affirm the teaching outside the Church there is no salvation. There are exceptions for them.This is heresy and schism. How can there be practical exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus in 2021 for them ? This is Cushingism and not Feeneyism.
Chris Ferrara debated Mark Shea on the subject outside the Church there is no salvation and both used the False Premise. They are Cushingites in a break with the past Magisterium.
Roberto dei Mattei has written that outside the Church there is no salvation but with the False Premise.So he changes the interpretation of EENS but also the Catechisms, Vatican Council II, the Creeds etc- this is heresy and schism.
Maria Guarani’s blog Chiesa e Post Concilio has a home page full of reports and videos on Vatican Council II interpreted with the False Premise.This is all now obsolete.
How can those who support heresy and schism and
division call themselves Catholics ?Traditionalists
cannot also be liberals who use a Fake Premise.-Lionel Andrades
Lionel Andrades
Writer on Vatican Council II being dogmatic and not only pastoral.It is in harmony with the extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX, the Athanasius Creed etc.
It is found that there are two interpretations of Vatican Council II, one is rational and the other irrational. Since one uses a Rational Premise and the other a False Premise.One is Magisterial with the past Magisterium and the other, the common one, has an objective error and so cannot be Magisterial.It is the same with the Creeds and Catechisms.There can be two interpretations.
Why should Catholics choose the irrational version which is heretical, non traditional, liberal and schismatic, while a rational option is there, which is traditional ?.
__________________
Posts
