THE LAITY IF THEY HAVE ANOTHER MEETING WITH BISHOP ROLAND MINNERATH, MUST UNDERSTAND THAT THE LIBERAL BISHOP’S WEAK POINT IS THEOLOGY. THE REAL ISSUE FOR HIM AND THE PRESENT TWO POPES, IS NOT THE MASS BUT THE OLD THEOLOGY, THE OLD ECCLESIOCENTRISM.
The laity, if they have another meeting with Bishop Roland Minnerath, must understand that the liberal bishop’s weak point is theology. The real issue for him and the present two popes, is not the Mass but the old theology, the old ecclesiocentrism. The FSSP priests, are side stepping Vatican Council II interpreted with a false premise and are going back to the sources of Tradition This is the real problem for the bishop and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF).
1.The laity must know that there can be two interpretations of Vatican Council II , one with the irrational premise and the other without it. They can choose the CDF interpretation of Vatican Council II or that of Lionel Andrades, without the irrationality.
2.There can also be two interpretations of the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I). One, in which BOD, BOB and I.I are seen as physically visible people saved outside the Church in 2021,or, as being only hypothetical and theoretical cases, which do not exist in our reality. So the interpretation of BOD, BOB and I.I is rational and the other is irrational. Again the laity have to choose between the interpretations of the popes or Lionel Andrades. They, of course must choose the rational option and ask the bishop to do the same.
This has to be clear.
For it means
that at Mass in Latin, French or that of the Orientals, the theology; the
ecclesiology of all aspects of the Church will be traditional. There will be no
rupture with the exclusivist interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) of Fr. Leonard Feeney, or the
Athanasius Creed which says all need Catholic faith for salvation or the Syllabus
of Errors of Pope Pius IX. This means that the Catechisms of the Council of
Trent and Pius X will not contradict itself, when the strict interpretation of
EENS is supported along with hypothetical cases of BOD, BOB and I.I.
THE THEOLOGY OF THE CHURCH WILL BE TRADITIONAL AND COHERENT BEFORE AND AFTER
VATICAN COUNCIL II.
With the
theology of the Church, before and after Vatican Council II, being traditional
and coherent, the bishop should be asked to affirm the faith.
If he refuses to affirm the dogma EENS and the Athanasius Creed in public and
cites Vatican Council II as a development of doctrine, he is interpreting the
Council with the false premise.
Catholics of all
Rites in France should be able to affirm Vatican Council II ( rational) and the
Athanasius Creed (rational-with no known exceptions).
If the bishop
affirms Vatican Council II and the Athanasius Creed with exceptions, it means
he is using the false premise, and should be checked here.
If the Apostles Creed or Nicene Creed is recited by the laity at Mass, in a
Profession of Faith, it is meaningless, if they interpret the Creeds with the
false premise instead of without it. If they interpret the BOD, BOB and I.I
with the false premise, then they really change the interpretation of these two
Creeds. One interpretation is rational and traditional and the other is
irrational and a break with Tradition.
LAITY WILL OFTEN HAVE TO CHOOSE BETWEEN THE INTERPRETATIONS WITH THE FALSE
PREMISE AND WITHOUT IT SINCE THE CONCLUSION IS DIFFERENT
Similarly if the Four Marks of the Church are affirmed ( one, holy, Catholic
and Apostolic), it can be meaningless and misleading, if the distinction is not
made between the fake and the rational premise. Since with the premise the
conclusion differs. So the laity will often have to choose between the
interpretation of Bishop Minnerath and Lionel Andrades.
It must be remembered that the bishop’s weak point is theology. He has to use
the false premise to support his liberalism, ‘the theology of religions’.
TODAY THE HERESY OF THE FALSE PREMISE IS LIKE THE ARIAN HERESY OF THE PAST
The laity and the FSSP priests must know that like in the past there was the
Arian heresy in the Church today there is the heresy of the false premise.It is
like a theological virus which has become a spiritual epidemic in the Church.
So when they
concelebrate Mass in Dijon, or elsewhere in France, the diocesan priest will
not be a traditionalist, since he interprets Vatican Council II and other
Church documents , with the false premise, which produces a non traditional
conclusion.
Then because of the Leftist laws Bishop Roland Minnerath may want to interpret
Vatican Council II and Magisterial documents with the false premise. There is
no tension or persecution.
THE BISHOP AND
THE DIOCESAN PRIESTS ARE IN AN ‘IRREGULAR SITUATION’
The FSSP will
have to offer Mass with the diocesan priests and Bishop Minnerath who are in an
‘irregular situation’. The false premise puts them in schism with the past
Magisterium over the centuries and in first class heresy with the Creeds.
When they choose the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II it is
not something knew in the Church. The innovation and newness came into the
Church with the false premise, inference and conclusion.I am identifying it and
pointing out the original premise and inference which was responsible for the
traditional conclusion.
Since outside
the Church there is no salvation according to Vatican Council II, the laity in
Dijon need an organization or office to proclaim the Social Reign of Christ the
King, in French politics. According to Vatican Council II membership in the
Catholic Church is necessary to avoid Hell ( Ad Gentes 7- all need faith and
baptism for salvation).They could name this organization Only the Catholic
Church, which until now is only a slogan.
WE CAN PROCLAIM
THE SOCIAL REIGN OF CHRIST THE KING BASED UPON THE EXCLUSIVIST ECCLESIOLOGY OF
VATICAN COUNCIL II
The Latin laity
could organize candidates for political office in France, who will proclaim the
Social Reign of Christ the King in all politics, based upon the exclusive
ecclesiology of Vatican Council II( interpreted with the rational premise) and
Tradition ( Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX etc).Vatican Council II must no
more seen as a break with the traditional understanding of Mission, Ecumenism,
Mortal Sin etc.
The Latin laity should not really be protesting outside the bishop’s office.
They simply have to interpret Vatican Council II without the false premise and
it is the progressivists who will be upset. Since there could no more be a
liberal catechesis, scout program etc, since the Council will have changed
before their eyes. Change your premise and you change the Church. Ecclesiology
depends upon the premise-used.So why protest if the ecclesiology of the Church
today can only be traditional ? Where is the rupture with collegiality,
ecumenism and religious liberty as in the past, when the Council is
traditional, without the false premise ? Let the liberals come outside the
bishop’s office with placards and banners, saying, ‘We don’t want to interpret
VC2 rationally. Give us back our old Church of 1965’.
Once we are aware of the false premise, Pope Francis can create the Amazon and
new rites, for the Mass and the ecclesiology of the Church will not change. It
will still be the same as the Traditional Latin Mass of the 16th century.-Lionel Andrades
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment