Steve Bannon does not ask Bishop Athanasius Schneider the question important for conservatives and the center right

 

Steve Bannon interviews Bishop Athanasius Schneider this month and does not ask the question which would be important  for conservatives and the center right. The question is: If Vatican Council II is interpreted rationally, with the Rational Premise and Inference, then would the Council become conservative, orthodox, ecclesiocentric and traditional? 

The answer is: Yes!

Then if Vatican Council II is conservative, orthodox, ecclesiocentric and traditional, when invisible cases of LG 8,14,15,and 16 refer to invisible cases in 2022, then there are no objective exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus? Yes.

We are back to Tradition, with Vatican Council ? Yes.

If Vatican Council II is ambigous and there are passages which contradict traditional passages then it means the Irrational Premise is being chosen? Invisible cases are visible? Answer: Yes.

VATICAN COUNCIL II IS TRADITIONAL

1.There is no ambiguity in Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II(See graphic below). The passage in red refers to hypothetical cases.So the red passages do not contradict the blue orthodox passages which support traditional extra ecclesiam nulla salus.The Red is not an exception for the Blue.

1.

________

2.The Red is not an exception to the Blue also in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. There is no ambiguity. 

2.

______________

3.

If the Red was an exception to the Blue in the Catechism of the Catholic Church then there would be ambiguity.It would mean the Irrational Premise is being chosen. The Red passages are interpreted as being visible, seen in the flesh, objective and practical cases in the present times. So they become objective examples of salvation outside the Church.

3.

______________________

4.

In the Catechism of the Catholic Church 847 would contradict 846 if it referred to objective cases in 2022. It would mean this is a reference to a physically visible example of salvation. So there are practical exceptions for the orthodox blue passages which support Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

4.

__________________

5.The Red passage in CCC 847 refers to a hypothetical case always. So it does not contradict the blue orthodox passage in CCC 846. 

5.

____________

6.

Again there is no ambiguity in Vatican Council II when the hypothetical passages in Red do not contradict the orthodox passages in Blue in Lumen Gentium 14.

6.

___________

So Vatican Council II is not ambiguous. It supports the past ecclesiocentrism only. Only. There is only one rational interpretation. Then there is only one ethical interpretation. The Council is traditional, orthodox and ecclesiocentric.To interpret the Council with the Irrational Premise( the Red is an exception to the Blue) would be dishonest.-Lionel Andrades

https://www.bitchute.com/video/Z7ZgsVeCm9qS/

Bishop Athanasius Schneider: The Formative Years Of Religion

https://rumble.com/v1pnmht-bishop-athanasius-schneider-the-formative-years-of-religion.html

We can end the liberalism in the Church by choosing the Rational Premise

 Yet, looking back, for me and for those few of my generation who retained the Faith, I feel as if we were travelers, returning home after a long journey, to find the ruins of a once-great civilization—unable to understand why, exactly, our forefathers had torn down and abandoned its great halls and magnificent temples.

https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2022/10/lofty-concepts-and-great-hopes-cannot.html

Lionel: We now know how to create unity with our forefathers in the Catholic Church. After 60 years we know precisely what to do to end the liberalism in the Church. We do not have to make the mistake of the popes and the traditionalists. Sixty years has been a long time to discover the secret.

We immediately end the division between the traditionalists and liberals when we identify the cause of the division. There is then the hermeneutic of continuity and it is permanent. We go back to the faith of our forefathers.

It is simple for me.I always interpret what is invisible in Vatican Council II as being invisible.So then there are no practical exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS). Invisible cases of LG 8,14,15 and 16 cannot be  visible exceptions for the traditional teaching on all needing faith and baptism for salvation.There can be no known exceptions.Since people in Heaven are known only to God.

So the past ecclesiocentrism of the Church is intact for me, with Vatican Council II. There can only be an ecumenism of return with Feeneyite EENS since the Council does not mention any practical exceptions for the Athanasius Creed.This Creed says all need the Catholic faith for salvation.All. So with Vatican Council II I have returned to the faith of the past centuries on an ecumenism of return, religious liberty as at the time of the papal states,inter religious dialogue which is missionary, traditional mission based upon exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church and the traditional proclamation of the Social Reign of Christ the King in all politics, since outside the Church there is no known salvation.

This is interpreting Council II rationally and ethically though in a politically incorrect way. So I do not expect Peter Kwasniewski and Rorate Caeili to want to follow me.If they were interested they would have done so a long time back.

It is in their interest to interpret LG 8,14,15 and 16 as being visible and not invisible people in 2022. Then like the pope and the liberals they have to pretend that these visible cases of non Catholics saved outside the Church, who are,alllegedly personally known, are objective exceptions for EENS.So the Athanasius Creed becomes obsolete for the traditionalists and the liberals.They cannot choose to use the Rational Premise i.e invisible cases of LG 8 etc are invisible. Otherwise they would be Feeneyite which is politically not accepted.

So they maintain the traditionalist-liberal division and pretend that the Novus Order Mass has brought division in the Church or they will vaguely blame Vatican Council II and not say that the real fault lies with them not choosing the Rational Premise like me.

The liberalism of the popes, traditionalists and sedevacantists comes only with the False Premise.We can create unity in the Church without liberalism. We now know how to do it.Anyone can do it even with no degree in theology.

Of course politically the Lefebvrists too need the liberalism as does Bishop Robert Barron, George Weigel and Massimo Faggioli.

Unity in the Church could be expensive for them.-Lionel Andrades

“Lofty concepts and great hopes cannot be separated, in practical judgment, from their effects” — Guest article on the Birthday of Vatican II

https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2022/10/lofty-concepts-and-great-hopes-cannot.html