- Lionel Andrades
OCTOBER 27, 2022
Bishop Athanasius Schneider’s interpretation of Vatican Council II was modernist.
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2022/10/bishop-athanasius-schneiders.html
Thursday, October 27, 2022
Little children, be instruments of love for all those who have not come to know the God of love - Medugorje Message October 2022 from Our Lady
October 25, 2022
“Dear children! The Most High permits me to be with you, and to be joy for you and the way in hope, because mankind has decided to die. That is why He sent me to keep teaching you that without God you do not have a future. Little children, be instruments of love for all those who have not come to know the God of love. Witness joyfully your faith and do not lose hope in a change of the human heart. I am with you and am blessing you with my motherly blessing. Thank you for having responded to my call.”
https://medjugorje.com/latest-25-message/our-lady-of-medjugorjes-october-25-2022-monthly-message-for-the-world/
Bishop Athanasius Schneider’s interpretation of Vatican Council II was modernist.
Bishop Athanasius Schneider’s interpretation of Vatican Council II was modernist. It was a break with Tradition. My interpretation of Vatican Council II with the Rational Premise is rational. It is in harmony with Tradition. It was rational and so it is ethical. There is no break between faith and reason.There is no break with the past Magisterium.It has the hermeneutic of continuity with the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus of the missionaries and Magisterium of the 16th century. It supports the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX, the Catechism of Pope Pius X and the Athanasius Creed, interpreted rationally.
VATICAN COUNCIL II CAN BE INTERPRETED WITH CUSHINGISM OR FEENEYISM
When invisible cases are considered invisible I call it Feeneyism. When invisible cases in the present times are considered visible I call it Cushingism. Vatican Council II and other Magisterial Documents( Creeds and Catechisms) can be interpreted with Feeneyism or Cushingism and the Conclusion will be different.
In the interview with Steve Bannon, Bishop Schneider interpreted Vatican Council II with irrational Cushingism and not rational Feeneyism. So he presented the Council as a break with Tradition; as supporting heresy etc.Yes - the Council interpreted with Cushingism is heretical and schismatic. He was correct. I agree with him.
THERE ARE NO LITERAL CASES OF THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE
When interviewed by Dr.Taylor Marshall ( see video above) he said that there were no literal cases of the baptism of desire (LG 14).So here he was interpreting Vatican Council II with Feeneyism.He was using the Rational Premise i.e invisible cases of people being saved with the baptism of desire in the present times, are physically invisible on earth. So they are not objective examples of salvation outside the Church.They cannot be practical exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Athanasius Creed. Hypothetical cases of the baptism of desire do not contradict Feeneyite EENS. If someone was saved outside the Church it could only be known to God.The 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston made an objective mistake. The 1949 Letter of the Holy Office ( LOHO) was heretical and schismatic.
THE LOHO WAS HERETICAL
It projected exceptions for EENS, and that too by confusing invisible cases as being visible. It brought theological liberalism into the Catholic Church.It was based upon a philosophical error, an empirical error.There were no literal cases of the baptism of desire but the LOHO assumed that there were there real and physically visible cases.
The LOHO with its objective mistake was referenced in Vatican Council II(LG 16) and placed in the Denzinger by Fr.Karl Rahner and his colleagues.Bishop Schneider has not criticized the mistake in the LOHO.
WE CAN BE ECCLESIOCENTRIC WITH THE SUPPORT OF VATICAN COUNCIL II
However recently in Kazakhstan when he said that there was salvation in only Jesus and in only the Catholic Church, he was going back to Tradition and was rejecting Vatican Council II Irrational. He was rejecting the liberalism of the LOHO.He was correct in doing this.I agree with him.Vatican Council II irrational has to be rejected by all.It is unethical.The Council cannot be interpreted with the LOHO mistake.
I too am affirming the past ecclesiocentrism like he did at Khazkistan but I do not have to reject Vatican Council II, when the Council is interpreted with the Rational Premise.
THE RED IS NOT AN EXCEPTION FOR THE BLUE FOR ME
Schneider told Bannon that there are good things in the Council. But he was still interpreting the Cushingite passages in the Council as a rupture with the Feeneyite passages. The 'Red was an exception for the Blue' for him.He was confusing hypothetical cases of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance as being non-hypothetical objective examples of salvation outside the Church.This is a mistake. They are not literal cases, as he referred to LG 14, in the Taylor Marshall interview.Marshall too, agreed with him. He said that there are no explicit cases of Aquinas’ implicit baptism of desire.
ALL THE INTERVIEWS THIS MONTH WERE CUSHINGITE
So Bishop Schneider should have told Steve Bannon that the interpretation of Vatican Council II by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,Vatican is irrational and dishonest. It is unethical, heretical and schismatic.This was the Council which he criticized before Bannon this month.It was the same interpretation of the Council in his interview with John Henry Weston of Life Site News and Raymond Arroyo at EWTN World Over.
He could have interpreted the Council with rational Feeneyism and said that Vatican Council II supports the past exclusivist ecclesiology and has a hermeneutic of continuity with the Athanasius Creed.
THE CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH SUPPORTS THE PAST CATECHISMS INTERPRETED RATIONALLY
Even the Catechism of the Catholic Church of Pope John Paul II when interpreted with the Rational Premise has a continuity with the Athanasius Creed, when, also interpreted with the Rational Premise. So the Catechism of the Catholic Church supports the Catechism of Pope Pius X , the Baltimore Catechism and the Catechism of Trent, when alll are interpreted rationally.
Without rejecting Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church we have returned to the old theology of the founders of the great religious communities, St.Francis of Assisi, St. Dominic…
Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church are in harmony with the Patristic period and the great popes from the 12 th to 16 th century.The Golden Period in the history of the Church.The Council interpreted rationally, Bannon had to be told, is not a break with Tradition,the Early Christians, the Early Catholics. Since it supports Feeneyite EENS it supports the proclamation of the Social Reign of Christ the King in all political legislation, to save the maximum souls from going to Hell, for in Heaven, there are only Catholics.Lionel Andrades
OCTOBER 26, 2022
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
