Pope Benedict’s
December 22, 2005 Address to the Roman Curia is heretical and schismatic on
Vatican Council II.He is officially supporting mortal sins of faith and this would be automatic excommunication for an ecclesiastic. He is using the
False Premise as usual, to create the hermeneutic of discontinuity with
Tradition (EENS, Syllabus of Errors with no known exceptions etc), and calls it ‘the reforms’ of Vatican
Council II.
Anyone who uses the False
Premise-pope or lay man creates heresy and schism. Since the False Premise (invisible
cases of LG 16 etc are physically visible examples of salvation outside the
Church, in the present times) creates exceptions for Tradition, He assumes that there are practical exceptions for the past
exclusivist ecclesiology. It is then wrongly inferred by him that there are practical
exceptions of the baptism of desire (LG 14) and being saved in invincible
ignorance (LG 16) for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS), the Athanasius
Creed etc.So they become obsolete. There is a New Theology which says outside the Church there is known salvation. So it is possible based upon the New Theology created with the False Premise, to have a New Ecumenism, New Ecclesiology, New Evangelisation etc.
The premise ( invisible cases of personally known non Catholics being saved outside the church) is false. But if there are no known persons, physically visible people, they cannot be practical exceptions for EENS, the Syllabus of Errors etc.So he needs to confused what is invisible as being visible to produce a new theology and exceptions for Tradition.
So what is implicit (LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3) he assumes is explicit and calls it 'a development of doctrine' with Vatican Council II ( irrational).Then there are new liberal doctrines on salvation, mission, Roman Missal, liturgy etc.
He has stated in public in an interview in Avvenire that EENS today is no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century. He said that there was a developmen of doctrine with Vatican Council II. He meant Vatican Council II, interpreted with the False Premise by him has exceptions.
His New Theology which supports the hermenutic of rupture with Tradition is false since there are no practical exceptions to EENS etc in our reality. Being saved in
invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire can only be known to God. There
are no physically visible cases in 1965-2022.We cannot say that there were 25 cases of the baptism of desire last year or 20 cases of being saved in invincible ignorance the previous year.We cannot meet a Christian saved in 'imperfect communion with the Church'. We cannot meet a non Christian saved with elements of sanctification in other religions(LG 8) or where the Church subsists outside its visible boundaries (LG 8).
If Pope Benedict had
used the Rational Premise ( invisible cases of LG 14, LG 16 are invisible in
2022, they are hypothetical and speculative only ), there would be no practical
exception mentioned in the entire text of Vatican Council II, for the past
ecclesiocentrism of the Catholic Church, inspired by the Holy Spirit.
Now the whole Church is following his error as he supports a vague and liberal 'spirit of Vatican Council II' based upon an irrational interpretation of the baptism of desire, invincible ignorance and the baptism of blood. The Council then contradicts the Athanasius Creed, the Catechism of Pope Pius X, 24Q,27Q etc.
There are two interpretations of Magisterial Documents(Council of Trent etc) the traditional interpretation with the Rational Premise and the new political interpretation with the False Premise.
The changes in faith and morals in the German Synodal Path with Vatican Council II cited as a reference by Cardinal Maex, comes from the same Fake Premise,which is used by the Society of St. Pius X and the liberals in Germany and which can be seen in this 2005 address.-Lionel Andrades
_____________________________________________
MARCH 3, 2022
The hermeneutic of reforms of Pope Benedict supported the 'spirit of Vatican Council II' of the liberals
What is at the heart of the progressivist attacks on the Traditional Latin Mass and the accusations that people who want it are “against Vatican II”? Here’s what it is.
...here is the important address Benedict XVI gave to the Roman Curia before Christmas in 2005, his talk about how to interpret the Second Vatican Council. Benedict identified an interpretive approach or hermeneutic of continuity against a hermeneutic of discontinuity and rupture.
Here’s some of that talk with my emphases:
The question arises: Why has the implementation of the Council, in large parts of the Church, thus far been so difficult?
Well, it all depends on the correct interpretation of the Council or – as we would say today – on its proper hermeneutics, the correct key to its interpretation and application. The problems in its implementation arose from the fact that two contrary hermeneutics came face to face and quarrelled with each other. One caused confusion, the other, silently but more and more visibly, bore and is bearing fruit.
Lionel : 'The proper hermeneutics, the correct key to its interpretation and application', depends upon the use of the Rational Premise and the rejection of the False Premise.Pope Benedict has used the False Premise, the irrationality, to interpret the Council and create a fake break with Tradition, and then calls it 'the spirit of the Council '.
On the one hand, there is an interpretation that I would call “a hermeneutic of discontinuity and rupture”; it has frequently availed itself of the sympathies of the mass media, and also one trend of modern theology. On the other, there is the “hermeneutic of reform”, of renewal in the continuity of the one subject-Church which the Lord has given to us. She is a subject which increases in time and develops, yet always remaining the same, the one subject of the journeying People of God.
Lionel: The 'hermeneutic of discontinuity and rupture' of the mass media and the popes since Paul VI, comes with the False Premise which creates exceptions for the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX and traditional ecclesiocentrism.This exclusivist ecclesiology is obsolete for Pope Benedict since there are supposedly 'practical exceptions, when the Council is interpreted with the False Premise, by him.
In an interview with Avvenire a few years back he has said that extra ecclesiam nulla salus today is no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century. He means there is a rupture, a discontinuity. He called it 'a development of doctrine' with Vatican Council II.He refers to Vatican Council II, which he interprets only, irrationally.
The hermeneutic of discontinuity risks ending in a split between the pre-conciliar Church and the post-conciliar Church. It asserts that the texts of the Council as such do not yet express the true spirit of the Council. It claims that they are the result of compromises in which, to reach unanimity, it was found necessary to keep and reconfirm many old things that are now pointless. However, the true spirit of the Council is not to be found in these compromises but instead in the impulses toward the new that are contained in the texts.
Lionel: The False Premise creates the split between the pre-conciliar Church and the post-conciliar Church. The False Premise creates the hermeneutic of discontinuity.
The hermeneutic of discontinuity is the result and not the cause. The cause of the hermeneutic of discontinuity is obviously the False Premise( invisible cases of being saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16) are visible in 2022).
These innovations alone were supposed to represent the true spirit of the Council, and starting from and in conformity with them, it would be possible to move ahead. Precisely because the texts would only imperfectly reflect the true spirit of the Council and its newness, it would be necessary to go courageously beyond the texts and make room for the newness in which the Council’s deepest intention would be expressed, even if it were still vague.
Lionel: He is a liberal here and supports 'the spirit of Vatican Council II' which depends upon the False Premise. With the Rational Premise he would have to return to Catholic orthodoxy and the past exclusivist ecclesiology.
There could not be any innovation when Vatican Council II is interpreted with the Rational Premise. Since then there would be no practical exceptions in the text of the Council, for the past ecclesiocentrism of the Church. -Lionel Andrades
In a word: it would be necessary not to follow the texts of the Council but its spirit. In this way, obviously, a vast margin was left open for the question on how this spirit should subsequently be defined and room was consequently made for every whim.
The nature of a Council as such is therefore basically misunderstood. In this way, it is considered as a sort of constituent that eliminates an old constitution and creates a new one.
https://wdtprs.com/2022/02/what-is-at-the-heart-of-the-progressivist-attacks-on-the-traditional-latin-mass-and-the-accusations-that-people-who-want-it-are-against-vatican-ii-heres-what-it-is/
MARCH 3, 2022
The FSSP deletes the reference to the 'hermeneutic of reforms' of Pope Benedict which was mentioned in the original communique.
The FSSP deletes the reference to the 'hermeneutic of reforms' of Pope Benedict which was mentioned in the original communique. -Lionel Andrades
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2022/03/the-fssp-deletes-reference-to.html
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2022/03/the-hermeneutic-of-reforms-of-pope.html
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment