The book Case for Liturgical Restoration comprises FIUV Papers reflect Dr. Joseph Shaw's personal and politically correct views.The Latin Mass which he supports does not have the same ecclesiology as the Traditional Latin Mass of the past, for example, the 16th century. Instead he attends the Latin Mass with the New Theology and the New Ecclesiology, which is the same as that of the Novus Ordo Mass.
The FIUV Papers like, Archbishop Lefebvre and other traditionalists interpret Vatican Council II with a false premise to create a rupture with the Athanasius Creed on no salvation outside the Church.This is appreciated by the liberal ecclesiastics and ecclesiastical Masonry.
For political and personal reasons, Joseph Shaw has been unable to interpret Vatican Council II without the irrational premise and inference, for then the Council would be in harmony with Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS). This would be a threat to him.A threat from the secular forces in Britain and the liberal ecclesiastics like Cardinal Vince Nicols.So he promotes a false Church, a false ecclesiology and then links it to his mental concept of the Latin Mass, which is obviously not the Mass of the centuries, with its heretical understanding of salvation etc.
How can there be a restoration with Cushingite theology, which is a rupture with the past? It is only Cushingite theology which creates what Pope Benedict referred to as the hermeneutic of rupture.
The FIUV Papers had to accommodate Cushingite theology since it would be acceptable to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and Ecclesia Dei.
How can there be an Evangelisation with Cushingite theology which says outside the Church there is salvation and assumes that there are known cases of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible, even when in real life there are no such people, to contradict the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church.
Without the past exclusivist ecclesiology, which Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) does not contradict, there can be no liturgical reform - or even Tridentine Rite Mass.
-Lionel Andrades
The FIUV has been of no help to the Fischer More College and the Franciscans Friars of the Immaculate
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/03/the-fiuv-has-been-of-no-help-to-fischer.html
Pope Francis permits the Traditional Latin Mass only with the new ecclesiology and compromise : Joseph Shaw looks the other way
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/07/pope-francis-permits-traditional-latin.html
Ecclesiology is not changed with I.I and BOD.It never was.Vatican Council II was always orthodox on salvation.The ecclesiology was exclusivisthttp://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/04/ecclesiology-is-not-changed-with-ii-and.html
No text in Quanto Conficiamur Moerore or the Council of Trent says there are exceptions to the traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salushttp://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/04/no-text-in-quanto-conficiamur-moerore.html
May 29, 2014
Cardinal Nicols and FIUV are telling a falsehood. Why do rank and file Catholics have to accept it?http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/05/cardinal-nicols-and-fiuv-are-telling.html
May 20, 2014
If someone is saved with ' a ray of the Truth' (Nostra Aetate 2) it is not known in 2014, so NA 2 does not contradict AG 7 or extra ecclesiam nulla salushttp://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/05/if-someone-is-saved-with-ray-of-truth.html#links
The voice of the Church, in the ancient liturgy, says there is exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church and there are no exceptions.
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/03/the-voice-of-church-in-ancient-liturgy.html
Joseph Shaw removes comments: John Lamont prudently avoids the issue
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment