Saturday, March 12, 2022
Is the German Synodal Way legal?
Is the German Synodal Way legal?
Even after being informed the organizers of the German Synodal Way tell a lie and expect everyone to do the same. They want all to affirm a non Catholic ideology, a break with Tradition. The lie is a condition for employment, entry into religious communities, receiving educational grants and other finances, for German Catholics.
Without the lie, and instead with a Rational Premise,
they would have to claim that there is exclusive salvation in
the Catholic Church and ask others to also do the same. This would create
tension and bring persecution for them in the body politic in Germany, which is
secular with a Protestant culture.
The Fake Premise, which the organizers use to interpret Church Documents,
is the lie. With the Fake Premise comes the Fake Inference. This is followed by
the false, non-traditional, heretical and schismatic conclusion which they
expect all Catholics to follow in Germany. This is one of two interpretations
of Vatican Council II and not the rational one.
This is not Catholic and neither honest. It is supported by the present two
popes and the cardinals and bishops, for political reasons.
The irrational premise, which brings down German Catholic Tradition, is: ‘invisible
people are physically visible in the present times’, ‘Lumen Gentium
8, 14 and 16 refer to physically visible non Catholics in 1965-2022’.
So unknown and hypothetical cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3. NA
2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II are projected as physically known non
Catholics saved outside the Church. This is the False Premise of
the organizers of the German Synodal Way. What is subjective is
confused as being objective, invisible as being visible.
Then the Fake Inference is that since there are physically visible cases of non Catholics saved outside the Church, as referenced in LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc , there are objective exceptions for the traditional interpretation of the dogma ENS which had no exceptions. So exceptions are created for the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX on an ecumenism of return to the Catholic Church. False exceptions are created for the Athanasius Creed which states all need to be members of the Catholic Church for salvation. Then the fake and dishonest conclusion is that Vatican Council II is a break with Catholic Tradition.This is official for the German Synodal Way.
For me as a Catholic, LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc refer to hypothetical
cases only. So they do not contradict the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX,
the Athanasius Creed and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS). The
Council supports EENS in Ad Gentes 7 and Lumen Gentium 14. They say all need
faith and baptism for salvation. So for me Vatican Council II is not
a break with Tradition.
There are no baptism of desire cases in our reality confirmed Archbishop
Thomas E. Gullickson who has served as Apostolic Nuncio to Switzerland and Liechtenstein.
There are no known cases of being saved in invincible ignorance said Fr.
Stefano Visintin OSB, former Rector and Dean of Theology at the University of
St. Anselm, Rome. The baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance
are 'zero cases' in our reality said the American apologist John Martignoni.
They indicate that the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of
Boston relative to Fr. Leonard Feeney made an objective mistake. It confused
unknown cases of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance
as being known and practical exceptions for Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla
salus(EENS). This was the mistake repeated by some of the Council Fathers (1965).Among
them were the Germans Fr. Karl Rahner sj and Fr. Joseph Ratzinger.
So Archbishop Thomas E. Gullickson, Fr. Stefano Visintin OSB and John
Martignoni are confirming what is obvious, what is common sense and common
knowledge. Any judiciary in Germany would say the same i.e. there are no
objective cases of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance
in our human reality. There are no objective cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3,
NA 2, GS 22 etc in the present times (2021-2022).
So it is dishonest for the organizers of the German Synodal Path to use the
Fake Premise, False Inference and non-traditional conclusion. They are rejecting
common reasoning and this impacts Catholic Germans in different walks of life.
The organizers need to admit that they made a factual error (it is a fact
of life that there are no objective cases of being saved in LG 8, 14 and 16
etc). They need to issue an apology and affirm Catholic Tradition, in particular,
the past exclusivist ecclesiology, which was there before, after and at Vatican
Council II.
Under false pretensions the organizers elicit donations and claim that they
are Catholic, when they really reject Vatican Council II and other important
Church Documents, interpreted rationally. -Lionel Andrades
MARCH 11, 2022
School children in German Catholic schools are not told the truth about Vatican Council II
School children in German Catholic schools are nottold the truth about Vatican Council II otherwise they would know that there is exclusive salvation in only the Catholic Church.Ad Gentes 7 and Lumen Gentium 14 support the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) while hypothetical cases of LG 14 ( the baptism of desire) and LG 16 ( being saved in invincible ignorance) are not practical exceptions in the present times (1965-2022).The children grow up believing that LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II, are practical exceptions for Tradition. -Lionel Andrades
MARCH 11, 2022
Cardinal Luiz Ladaria Prefect of the CDF is allowing the German Synodal Way to continue with the irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II.A False Premise creates a false break with de fide teachings of the Catholic Church. This is public heresy and schism supported by the CDF. It is not magisterial.
Cardinal Luiz Ladaria Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican, is allowing the German Synodal Way to continue with the irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II.A False Premise is used by the Germans to create a false break with de fide teachings of the Catholic Church. This is public heresy and schism supported by the CDF. It is not magisterial.
LG 8 LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2 GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II are always hypothetical. So they cannot be practical exceptions for extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS), the Syllabus of Errors and the Creeds and Catechisms. How can this be legal in Germany?
It is a lie to project LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc as being practical exceptions for the Syllabus of Errors and the rest of Tradition.But vocations for the religious life in Germany, have to do just this.
In Rome I interpret all Magisterial Documents with the Rational Premise (invisible people are invisible in 2022). The Society of St.Pius X in Italy and Germany, use the same False Premise as the German cardinals and bishops (invisible people are visible).
So for them LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II refer to physically visible and personally known non Catholics saved without faith and the baptism of water in 1965-2022.Otherwise they could not be exceptions for extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) etc. They infer that these ‘objective examples’ of salvation outside the Church, are practical exceptions for the Syllabus of Errors etc.So the False Premise is followed by the False Inference.
So this is the New Theology based upon a False Premise which makes the Syllabus of Errors, EENS etc, obsolete. There is a false break with Tradition.
For me LG 8 etc are not practical exceptions for the past ecclesiocentrism. Since hypothetical and theoretical cases cannot be practical exceptions in 2022, with Tradition (EENS etc).There is no hermeneutic of discontinuity with Tradition for me.
So we all affirm Church Documents but they interpret them with the invisible- people- are- visible- confusion and I avoid it. For them Vatican Council II is a break with Tradition and for me it is not. Their conclusion is non-traditional, heretical and schismatic. Mine is orthodox without a rupture between faith and reason, without ‘the development of doctrine’ and without the common liberalism.-Lionel Andrades
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2022/03/cardinal-luiz-ladaria-prefect-of-cdf-is.html
MARCH 11, 2022
Cardinal Marx cannot pretend that ecclesiology is changed with Vatican Council II and so changes in faith and morals are possible in the German Synodal Way. Since with Vatican Council II (Rational), the Church returns to the old theology and the old ecclesiocentrism. The ecclesiology before, after and at Vatican Council II is exclusivist, orthodox and traditional.
Cardinal Marx cannot pretend that ecclesiology is changed with Vatican Council II and so changes in faith and morals are possible in the German Synodal Way. Since with Vatican Council II (Rational), the Church returns to the old theology and the old ecclesiocentrism. The ecclesiology before, after and at Vatican Council II is exclusivist, orthodox and traditional.
We cannot meet or see someone saved outside the Church. There are no literal and invisible cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in our reality. But Cardinal Jean-Claude Hollerich, president of the European bishops’ conferences (COMECE), Bishop Georg Bätzing, president of the German bishops’ conference,Cardinal Marx, former president of the German Bishops Conference, Thomas Sternberg, president of the Central Committee of German Catholics (ZdK), Irme Stetter-Karp and Bishop Franz-Josef Bode, Vice Presidents, ZdK, project invisible cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II as being exceptions for the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Since they are exceptions for them, it is implied that they are visible cases. Invisible people cannot be exceptions. So they use a False Premise to reject Tradition and in particular the past ecclesiocentrism of the Catholic Church. -Lionel Andrades
MARCH 11, 2022
German government offices interpret Vatican Council II with a Fake Premise.
MARCH 10, 2022
The German Synodal Way has its theological foundation based upon a Fake Premise. So all their meetings and programs are in vain.
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2022/03/the-german-synodal-way-has-its.html
MARCH 9, 2022
With the Rational Premise in the interpretation of Vatican Council II even Massimo Faggioli, like Pope Francis, would not find any exceptions for the past theological ecclesiocentrism
How Synodale Weg came to be is also illustrative. It emerged out of the increasingly diverging trajectories between the progressive Catholic Church in Germany (bishops, theologians, and laypeople alike) and the Vatican, especially under John Paul II.
The progressive Catholic Church in Germany and Pope John Paul II were using the False Premise to interpret Vatican Council II as a break with Tradition (Syllabus of Errors etc) and this was supported by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the German Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. It is the same with Pope Francis and there is divergence.
Additionally, the German synod expresses a Catholic culture that relies on academic theology and on institutional systems of representation of the laity; it is rooted in Vatican II but without the qualms about the compatibility between modernity and Christian faith.
With the Rational Premise in the interpretation of Vatican Council II even Massimo Faggioli, like Pope Francis, would not find any exceptions for the past theological ecclesiocentrism.-Lionel Andrades
Where German Catholics & Pope Francis Diverge
https://www.commonwealmagazine.org/where-german-catholics-pope-francis-diverge
________________________________
MARCH 7, 2022
Massimo Faggioli notices?
Massimo Faggioli seems to have finally realized that Pope Benedict made a mistake with his interpretation of Vatican Council II and his New Theology is now straw. It’s foundation was a False Premise.
It reminds me of the fake scientific proof, upon which Teilhard de Chardin erected this theology, supporting re-incarnation.-Lionel Andrades
MARCH 4, 2022
Pope Benedict’s December 22, 2005 Address to the Roman Curia is heretical and schismatic on Vatican Council II.He uses the False Premise to produce a hermeneutic of rupture with Magisterial Documents
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
