Comments from The Remnant Newspaper
While I would admit that there are elements of Vatican II which were deliberately
termed with ambiguity so-as to allow the progressives room to implement their
changes, many modernist and heretical notions have been introduced by Vatican
II, such as ecumenism and religious liberty.
Lionel:
The ambiguity comes with the use of an irrational
premise and interpretation in the Letter of the Holy Office
1949.It was carried over into Vatican Council II. It is an
objective error.
This cannot be the teaching of the Holy Spirit in Vatican
Council II.
premise and interpretation in the Letter of the Holy Office
1949.It was carried over into Vatican Council II. It is an
objective error.
This cannot be the teaching of the Holy Spirit in Vatican
Council II.
Yes, with this ambiguity progressives have room
to implement changes.Doctrinally and pastorally
they are teaching heresy.
to implement changes.Doctrinally and pastorally
they are teaching heresy.
__________________
In "A Brief Critical Study of the Novus Ordo Missae", Cardinals Ottaviani, Bacci
and others stated that the Novus Ordo, "both as a whole and in its details, a
striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass as it was formulated
in Session XXIII of the Council of Trent."
and others stated that the Novus Ordo, "both as a whole and in its details, a
striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass as it was formulated
in Session XXIII of the Council of Trent."
Lionel:
Yes!It is a different theology. It is not a Catholic
theology. It is an innovation. It leads to heresy. It
is good that the SSPX has rejected this interpretation
of Vatican Council II with this new theology.But
they must choose the alternative and not just keep
rejecting Vatican Council II( Feeneyite).
There is a choice for all Catholics.We can interpret
Vatican Council II without this new theology and
then the Council will be traditional.The progressives
will not find any citations in the Council.
Cardinal Ottaviani did not know what caused the
new theology and ecclesiology. He himself was
using the irrational premise and conclusion. He
had accepted the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.
So did Archbishop Lefebvre.
The new theology comes from the Letter of the
Holy Office 1949 which assumed that the baptism
of desire referred to objectively known cases in
the present times,cases of people saved without the
baptism of water. So a connection was made with the
dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).What
was specualtive was considered real and defacto.
This derailed the old theology.How could a connection
be mae between an invisible case and the teaching on
all needing to be incorporated into the Church as
members for salvation. All need to physically and
visibly enter the Church for salvation and if there
was an exception it would have to be visible and known.
So an innovation had now come into the Church and
Cardinal Ottaviani did not notice it. Instead he
criticised Fr. Leonard Feeney who was not saying
anything new.
_________________________
Archbishop Lefebvre said, "The Novus Ordo Missae, even when said with
piety and respect for the liturgical rules ...is impregnated with the spirit of
piety and respect for the liturgical rules ...is impregnated with the spirit of
Protestantism. It bears within it a poison harmful to the faith."
Lionel:
He is referring to the new theology.
At the Council of Trent they still affirmed the
'rigorist interpretation' of the dogma EENS.
This was not so after 1949.The dogma was eliminated
in 1960-65 with the irrational pemise. LG 16 was
supposed to refer to known and visible cases saved in
invincible ignorance and without the baptism of
water..So the Novus Ordo Mass was being offered
with confusion in salvation theology.The new
salvation theology said there is known salvation outside
the Catholic Church. So Fr.Karl Rahner S.J put
forward the Anonymous Christian theory and Pope
Benedict XVI accepted it in the Catechism of the
Catholic Church 846.It says all who are saved are
saved through Jesus and the Church. It does not say
all need to enter the Church for salvation. Cardinal
Ratzinger was accomodating the baptism of desire
etc as being explicit and as being exceptions to the
the dogma EENS.So with these 'invisible visible'
cases he too was saying like Rahner that there is
salvation outside the Church. This is the cause of
the hermeneutic of rupture and he does not notice it.
___________________________
In the face of such scandal and sacrilege, where was the outrage?
Lionel:
There was no outrage since no one knew ( or said
so in public) that the cause for the confusion was
there in the interpretation of Vatican Council II
and that there is a traditional choice.No one was
choosing the traditional option. Now that the monks
at Norcia know about it, do you think they would be
allowed to interpret Vatican Council II in harmony
with Feeneyite EENS and the old ecclesiology?!
I doubt it.The whole world will come swooping
down on them.
______________________________
we find ourselves the children of this unprecedented deception.
Lionel:
Unprecedented deception! I agree with you!
Where was Cardinal Ratzinger, the Prefect of the
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith? Where
was Pope Pius XII in 1949?
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith? Where
was Pope Pius XII in 1949?
Did they not notice the bad philosophy and
theology?
theology?
_______________________________
Only through the complete abrogation of the Novus Ordo and full restoration
of the Traditional Latin Mass, will we begin the process to removing modernism
from the Church.
of the Traditional Latin Mass, will we begin the process to removing modernism
from the Church.
Lionel:
The fault is not there with liturgy but ecclesiology.
Once we identify the irrational premise and avoid it
we are back to the old ecclesiology, without doing
anything new.With the ecclesiology, based on Feeneyite
EENS, there can only be an ecumenism of return and
we can interpret the hypothetical references in Vatican
Council II (UR 3, NA 2, LG 8, LG 16 etc) as just being
hypothetical and imaginary and so they cannot be
explicit exceptions in 2016 to the old ecclesiology.
So we would have the old ecclesiology, the only
rational theology, at the Novus Ordo Mass and the
Tradtional Latin Mass.
we are back to the old ecclesiology, without doing
anything new.With the ecclesiology, based on Feeneyite
EENS, there can only be an ecumenism of return and
we can interpret the hypothetical references in Vatican
Council II (UR 3, NA 2, LG 8, LG 16 etc) as just being
hypothetical and imaginary and so they cannot be
explicit exceptions in 2016 to the old ecclesiology.
So we would have the old ecclesiology, the only
rational theology, at the Novus Ordo Mass and the
Tradtional Latin Mass.
________________________________
-Lionel Andrades
superior-for-italy-objects-to-scandal-in-sweden
No comments:
Post a Comment