In the last Confraternity of Our Lady of Fatima Question and Answer session Bishop Athanasius Schneider interpreted Vatican Council II with the False Premise.This is similar to the Society of St. Pius X, and the Ecclesia Dei communities. The False Premise creates exceptions for the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors etc, Traditional ecclesiocentrism with no known exceptions is rejected. The bishop has chosen to interpret Vatican Council II politically like the present two popes. They too use the False Premise to produce schism with the past Magisterium.
Bishop Athanasius Schneider who said that the Society of St. Pius X was not in schism had some time back in an interview with Eric Sammons of Crisis Magazine described the Council as being Christocentric. He did not say that the Council was ecclesiocentric. So he accepts the New Ecumenism etc in the interpretation of Vatican Council II which can only be created with a False Premise.
His interpretation of Vatican Council II is deceptive. He is assuming that there are literal cases of the baptism of desire (LG 14).
Some time back he had also asked for the removal of Lumen Gentium 16 indicating that he interprets LG 16 with the False Premise ( invisible cases are visible).For him LG 16 would contradict the past ecclesiocentrism of the Catholic Church.But not for me, since LG 16 refers to an invisible case in 2022. So his interpretation is the same as the liberals and Masons.
Schism is a mortal sin of faith. Changing the interpretation of the Creeds is first class heresy.This is a scandal.
The priests of the
SSPX, Ecclesia Dei and Bishop Schneider hear Confessions of Catholics who are
sin…
They have not supported the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, traditionalists at the St. Benedict Center, Still River, USA. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and the bishop and judical vicar in the Diocese of Manchester, USA, wanted Brother Andre Marie MICM, Prior, to interpret extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Vatican Council II with the False Premise.So there is a Decree of Prohibitions being maintained against the St. Benedict Center but this is avoided by Bishop Schneider and the Lefebvrist tradtionalists who use the False Premise.
The Lefebvrists had to announce that the baptism of desire etc were practical exceptions for Feenetyite EENS.They also had to announce that LG 14 etc were practical exceptions for EENS.This is irrational. It is with the irrationality that schism is created.
It is with this same irrationality that Bishop
Schneider has interpreted the Council in his recent statement posted on Gloria TV. This interpretation by the traditionalists is politically correct with the Left and the Vatican. -Lionel Andrades
JANUARY 19, 2022
Bishop Athanasius Schneider said that the Society of St. Pius X was not in schism. But the SSPX is in schism when they interpret Vatican Council II with the Fake Premise, like the Ecclesia Dei communities at Cortalain, France last September. The False Premise has to create schism.
In the last Confraternity of Our Lady of Fatima Question and Answer session Bishop Athanasius Schneider said that the Society of St. Pius X was not in schism. But the SSPX is in schism when they interpret Vatican Council II with the Fake Premise, like the Ecclesia Dei communities at Cortalain, France last September.
The False Premise has to create schism.
Now the SSPX cannot affirm the Athanasius Creed since there are exceptions created with the Fake Premise.There are none for me.
They cannot affirm the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX on an ecumenism of return to the Church since there are exceptions created with the False Premise. So their New Theology is the same as the liberals and the Masons.
Their website rejects Feeneyite EENS since for them the baptism of desire, invincible ignorance and the baptism of blood are objective cases since 1965.
The Catechism of Pope Pius X (29Q-invincible ignorance) contradicts the same Catechism (24Q.27Q-outside the Church there is no salvation).This is all schism with the past Magisterium.
The past Magisterium did not use the False Premise to interpret the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance. St. Thomas Aquinas did not say that the man in the forest saved in invincible ignorance was a known case and so a practical exception for EENS, which he held. Hypothetical cases of the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance were not objective exceptions for the strict interpretation of EENS, for St. Robert Bellarmine. This is common sense.
The SSPX interprets the Council schismatically like the FSSP. So the FSSP did not correct Bishop Roland Minnerath at Dijon, France, who has written books supporting a theology of religious pluralism and the rejection of the Syllabus of Errors.
This is schism. This is first class heresy. Schism and heresy are mortal sins of faith.
Today the SSPX can get out of schism and choose the hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition. They have to admit that Pope Pius XII made an objective error in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 and that unknown cases of the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance cannot be known and visible exceptions for traditional Feeneyite EENS. They must announce that LG 8, LG 14. LG 16, UR 3, NA2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II refer to invisible cases in 2022.This is something obvious.
So then there would be nothing in the Council-text to contradict the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors and 16th century EENS.
Vatican Council II would be traditional, exclusivist and in harmony with the popes, saints and martyrs of the past.
This though, is not the Vatican Council II of the popes from Paul VI to Francis I. It is they who are in schism and can choose orthodoxy with the Rational Premise.-Lionel Andrades
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment