In Dijon, France the Catholics do not have unity on the First Commandment, the Creed and Catechisms and Bishop Roland Minnerath is allowed to offer Holy Mass.The laity could ask the bishop and the FSSP priests and parishioners, to interpret Vatican Council II without the fake premise, and use the rational premise, instead.It is then tht Holy Mass can be offered with no scandal.Now with the fake premise they create a rupture with extra ecclesiam nulla salus ( with no known exceptions), the Athanasius Creed ( with no exceptions), the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX ( with no exceptions) and the Catechism of Pope Pius X( with no exceptions to 24Q and 27Q).
Bishop Minnerath, the FSSP priests and the parishioners accept the Letter of the Holy Office 1949(LOHO) which says every one does not need to be a formal member of the Catholic Church for salvation.Since for the LOHO invisible cases of the baptism of desire(BOD) and invincible ignorance (I.I), are physically visible examples of salvation outside the Church.They become objective exceptions to traditional extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS),for them.This is irrational. It is false reasoning.How can the LOHO, and Bishop Minnerath, reject centuries of teaching on ecclesiocentrism by projecting hypothetical and speculative cases of BOD and I.I as being practical exceptions to EENS in the present times(1949-2021).They say every one does not need to enter the Church formally because of imaginative and theoretical exceptions, which cannot exist in reality for them.Where were the known people saved outside the Church in 1949 or later? There were none in Rome or Boston.This was a mistake of the cardinals who approved the LOHO. It was also a mistake of the Archdiocese of Boston.
LOHO then refers to ‘ a necessity of means’ as if the baptism of water is not always necessary for salvation, practically.We cannot give any one the baptism of desire and we do not know of any one who will be saved with the baptism of desire.So ow can the baptism of water, practically, be relative and conditional to being saved with the baptism of desire?
The LOHO is heretical and schismatic and Bishop Minnerath the FSSP priests and the Carmelites and other religious communities, accept it and offer Holy Mass, in this condition.With the false reasoning; the false premise of the LOHO they create a break with the ecclesiology of the Church of the 16th century when the Traditional Latin Mass was offered. So the Latin Mass today in Dijon does not have the same theology as the Mass over the centuries, since the false premise of LOHO is used to interpret Vatican Council II , the Creeds, Catechisms,the First Commandment etc and reject the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX.This is first class heresy in Dijon at every Mass in all rites.
The laity could hold placards outside the Church asking the bishops and priests to reject the irrationality of the LOHO and affirm Magisterial documents without the false premise.Then there is a hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition.There is a continuity with Tradition even for those who attend Mass in French.
They could also appeal to the cardinals and bishops in France to reject the false reasoning of the LOHO and declare it a heretical document which is not part of the Deposit of the Faith.
LOHO brings division into the Catholic Church and is a break with the traditional teachings of the Church Fathers and St.Peter and St. Paul on outside the Church there is no salvation.
Based on the false reasoning of LOHO Bishop Minnerath wrote his books and articles, wrongly re-interpreting Vatican Council II and the Syllabus of Errors with the common false premise.The laity must bring this deception and irregularity to the attention of the Administration in Dijon. - Lionel Andrades
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment