Much of the confusion in the Church comes with theology. But when we
make the invisible-visible, distinction things begin to clear up. It is as if
we have found the key to solve a big puzzle.
It is the same with Pope Francis' Apostolic Exhortations Traditionis Custode and now Desiderio Desideravi.
Here are some some passages Fr.John
Zuhsldorf has quoted and commented upon.
16. We owe to the Council — and to the liturgical movement that
preceded it — the rediscovery of a theological understanding of the Liturgy and
of its importance in the life of the Church.
Pope
Francis, like Pope Benedict, here mean that the Council, interpreted with the False Premise, i.e confusing what is
invisible as being visible, creates alleged practical examples of salvation
outside the Church in the present times. So it is inferred, that there are
practical exceptions for the dogma EENS, the Syllabus of Errors and the rest of
Tradition.The exceptions make the dogma EENS obsolete.So the past
ecclesiocentrism is not there. This it is believed is the action of the Holy
Spirit and is responsible for the changes in faith and morals over the last 50
years or so. This is the spirit of Vatican Council II and it is expressed in the
liturgy with the divorced, the Pelosis, the practicing homosexuals and others
in mortal sin being able to receive the Eucharist at Holy Mass.This is a big
break with the past ecclesiology of the Traditional Latin Mass.So Pope Francis
does not want Catholics to go back to Tradition at the Latin Mass while
rejecting Vatican Council II interpreted with a False Premise ( there are visible
cases of non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance, LG 16), False Inference ( visible cases of Lumen Gentium 16 (invincible ignorance) in 2022, are practical examples of
salvation outside the Church and so are exceptions for EENS, the Athanasius
Creed etc) and Non Traditional Conclusion ( Vatican Council II is a break with
Tradition and so there can be the spirit of the Council with new reforms in
faith and morals expressed also in the liturgy).This is ‘the rediscovery of the
theological understanding of the liturgy’ created with a Fake Premise, a False
Inference and the expected Non Traditional Conclusion.
18. From what I have recalled above it is clear that the Liturgy is, by its
very nature, the most effective antidote against these poisons. Obviously, I am speaking of the Liturgy in its theological sense and
certainly not, as Pius XII already affirmed, Liturgy as decorative
ceremonies or a mere sum total of laws and precepts that govern the cult.
‘Obviously,
I am speaking of the Liturgy in its theological sense’ Pope Francis writes. Since
only with the False Premise there could be a New Theology and with the New
Theology comes the New Ecumenism, New Evangelisation, New Ecclesiology etc.Then
there are new morals ( Amoris Laetitia), new soteriology (Abu Dhabi
declaration), new moral conditions for receiving the Eucharist ( Nancy Pelosi)...Pope Francis is following the same New Theology of Cardinal Ratzinger.
26. It should be clear to all, then, that God
cannot be honored worthily unless the mind and heart turn to Him in quest of
the perfect life, and that the worship rendered to God by the Church in
union with her divine Head is the most efficacious means of achieving sanctity.
So the worship being rendered to God is true for Pope Francis only when the False Premise is chosen to interpret Vatican Council II. There would not be true worship if Vatican Council II is interpreted with the Rational Premise.He would call it being rigid, closed, triumphalitic and extremist, the same labels being used by the political Left.
But is it true worship when someone knows that he uses a False Premise to interpret Vatican Council II and so
will also be using that same False Premise to interpret the Creeds amd create
a New Theology which is a break with the past old exclusivist theology of the Magisterium ? Changing the Creeds is a mortal sin
of faith.Reinterpreting Magisterial Documents is a scandal.
Pope Francis, the cardinals and bishops all use
a False Premise and so now there are two interpretations of Vatican Council II,
theirs and mine. There are two interpretations of the Creeds, theirs and mine.
There are two interpretations….
I use the Rational Premise to interpret Vatican
Council II and Pope Francis and Pope Benedict use the Irrational Premise.
Our interpretation of Vatican Council II,
with reference to Traditionis Custode and Desiderio Desideravi, would also be
different. Since our premises, inferences and conclusions are different.
So when Pope Francis refers to the liturgy being
based upon the Council he must be shown that the Council when interpreted
rationally can only support the past exclusivisit ecclesiology and so, only the
Roman Missal ( pre-1962).
-Lionel Andrades
https://wdtprs.com/2022/06/look-at-more-of-desiderio-desideravi/
Posts
