Bishop Athanasius Schneider interpreted Vatican Council II with the False Premise.This is similar to the Society of St. Pius X, and the Ecclesia Dei communities. : this is schismatic

 

In the last Confraternity of Our Lady of Fatima Question and Answer session Bishop Athanasius Schneider interpreted Vatican Council II with the False Premise.This is similar to the Society of St. Pius X, and the Ecclesia Dei communities. The False Premise creates exceptions for the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors etc, Traditional ecclesiocentrism with no known exceptions is rejected. The bishop has chosen to interpret Vatican Council II politically like the present two popes. They too use the False Premise to produce schism with the past Magisterium.

Bishop Athanasius Schneider who said that the Society of St. Pius X was not in schism had some time back in an interview with Eric Sammons of Crisis Magazine  described the Council as being Christocentric. He did not say that the Council was ecclesiocentric. So he accepts the New Ecumenism etc in the interpretation of Vatican Council II which can only be created with a False Premise.

His interpretation of Vatican Council II is deceptive. He is assuming that there are literal cases of the baptism of desire (LG 14).

Some time back he had also asked for the removal of Lumen Gentium 16 indicating that he interprets LG 16 with the False Premise ( invisible cases are visible).For him  LG 16 would contradict the past ecclesiocentrism of the Catholic Church.But not for me, since LG 16 refers to an invisible case in 2022. So his interpretation is the same as the liberals and Masons.

Schism is a mortal sin of faith. Changing the interpretation of the Creeds is first class heresy.This is a scandal.

The priests of the SSPX, Ecclesia Dei and Bishop Schneider hear Confessions of Catholics who are sin…

They have not supported the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, traditionalists at the St. Benedict Center, Still River, USA. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and the bishop and judical vicar in the Diocese of Manchester, USA, wanted Brother Andre Marie MICM, Prior, to interpret extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Vatican Council II with the False Premise.So there is a Decree of Prohibitions being maintained against the St. Benedict Center but this is avoided by Bishop Schneider and the Lefebvrist tradtionalists who use the False Premise.

The Lefebvrists had to announce that the baptism of desire etc were practical exceptions for Feenetyite EENS.They also had to announce that LG  14 etc were practical exceptions for EENS.This is irrational. It is with the irrationality that schism is created.

It is with this same irrationality that Bishop 

Schneider has interpreted the Council in his recent statement posted on Gloria TV. This interpretation by the traditionalists is politically correct with the Left and the Vatican. -Lionel Andrades

 JANUARY 19, 2022

Bishop Athanasius Schneider said that the Society of St. Pius X was not in schism. But the SSPX is in schism when they interpret Vatican Council II with the Fake Premise, like the Ecclesia Dei communities at Cortalain, France last September. The False Premise has to create schism.

 

In the last Confraternity of Our Lady of Fatima Question and Answer session Bishop Athanasius Schneider said that the Society of St. Pius X was not in schism. But the SSPX is in schism when they interpret Vatican Council II with the Fake Premise, like the Ecclesia Dei communities at Cortalain, France last September.

The False Premise has to create schism.

Now the SSPX cannot affirm the Athanasius Creed since there are exceptions created with the Fake Premise.There are none for me.

They cannot affirm the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX on an ecumenism of return to the Church since there are exceptions created with the False Premise. So their New Theology is the same as the liberals and the Masons.

Their website rejects Feeneyite EENS since for them the baptism of desire, invincible ignorance and the baptism of blood are objective cases since 1965.

The Catechism of Pope Pius X (29Q-invincible ignorance) contradicts the same Catechism (24Q.27Q-outside the Church there is no salvation).This is all schism with the past Magisterium.

The past Magisterium did not use the False Premise to interpret the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance. St. Thomas Aquinas did not say that the man in the forest saved in invincible ignorance was a known case and so a practical exception for EENS, which he held. Hypothetical cases of the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance were not objective exceptions for the strict interpretation of EENS, for St. Robert Bellarmine. This is common sense.

The SSPX interprets the Council schismatically like the FSSP. So the FSSP did not correct Bishop Roland Minnerath at Dijon, France, who has written books supporting a theology of religious pluralism and the rejection of the Syllabus of Errors.

This is schism. This is first class heresy. Schism and heresy are mortal sins of faith.

Today the SSPX can get out of schism and choose the hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition. They have to admit that Pope Pius XII made an objective error in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 and that unknown cases of the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance cannot be known and visible exceptions for traditional Feeneyite EENS. They must announce that LG 8, LG 14. LG 16, UR 3, NA2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II refer to invisible cases in 2022.This is something obvious. 

So then there would be nothing in the Council-text to contradict the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors and 16^th century EENS.

Vatican Council II would be traditional, exclusivist and in harmony with the popes, saints and martyrs of the past.

This though, is not the Vatican Council II of the popes from Paul VI to Francis I. It is they who are in schism and can choose orthodoxy with the Rational Premise.-Lionel Andrades

Il Sole a Medjugorje che non acceca ma riempie l'anima di Pace- VIDEO

 From Catholicism.org

Remembering Mary Richardson

 JAN 14, 2022  JOE DOYLE

https://catholicism.org/remembering-mary-richardson.html

I. A Secularized Catholic Journalist Mary Richardson, the New England television personality who hosted, for twenty-six years, the news magazine Chronicle, on Boston’s WCVB-TV, has died. She was 76 years old and had been suffering, for some time, from dementia.

Her passing ought to be a moment of reflection for the faithful, not only on the degraded standards of American journalism, but on the infidelity, careerist instincts and assimilationist ambitions of so-called progressive Catholics.

As Richardson, in a media career that lasted more than 37 years, never voiced a word of dissent from the fashionable prejudices and the neo-pagan orthodoxies of her professional class, she was showered with accolades at the time of her death.

The Boston Globe described her as “pioneering,” “groundbreaking,” and “award winning…” Co-host Peter Mehegan called her “fearless.” The headline on her death in Boston.com led with the word “Beloved,” while WCVB characterized her, of course, as “legendary.” Such are the rewards of obedience.

Richardson was an archetype of a secularized, culturally conforming Catholic, who maligned the Faith in public, while maintaining a respectable standing in the Catholic community, and even enjoying comfortable relationships with mainstream Catholic institutions.

Mary Richardson received an Honorary Doctorate from Regis College, founded by the Sisters of Saint Joseph. She hosted the annual fundraising dinners for the New England Province of the Society of Jesus. The homosexualist Father James Martin was among those who lamented her passing:

Richardson was active with the Catholic Schools Foundation in Boston. After her retirement from WCVB, Caritas Christi, the Catholic hospital network in the Archdiocese of Boston, hired her as a community liaison.

All of this masked a television career marked by corrupt ethics, dishonest reporting and an ugly rancor directed against those who upheld the traditional Faith and morals of the Catholic Church.

II. Maligning The Faith In the early 1990’s, when media attacks on the Church in were reaching a crescendo, and when homosexual militants were targeting Catholic Masses for disruption and Saint Patrick’s Day parades for invasion, Richardson’s program Chronicle aired an episode dismissive of the claim that anti-Catholicism was increasing in American society.

With shameless, utterly breathtaking audacity, Richardson brought onto the program, as an expert talking head, the excommunicated ex-priest and venomous apostate, James Carroll, to discuss bigotry against Catholics. The author of The Deputy, Rolf Hochhuth, apparently, was not available.

By that time, Carroll had already authored a number of books excoriating the Faith, and had been writing, for a number of years, a weekly column in The Boston Globe, in which he would routinely savage Catholicism. His methods included reckless lies, unsourced quotes, and revisionist history that was more invention than scholarship.

Even Globe Editor Marty Baron, who directed the destruction of Cardinal Law, would later admit that hiring Carroll to write about religion was a mistake. Richardson however, carried on with the farce of interviewing the Catholic-hating Carroll, who explained, naturally, that anti-Catholicism did not exist in America.

When, in 2006, under pressure from Pope Benedict XVI, the Catholic Bishops of Massachusetts instructed diocesan Catholic Charities to stop facilitating the adoption of children by homosexual couples, another unethical journalist, Mike Barnicle, who had been fired by the Globe for plagiarism, came on Richardson’s program to call the Papal inspired defense of Christian morality “stupid, moronic, ignorant and bigoted.”

Richardson failed to disclose to her viewers, however, that a prominent member of the so-called WCVB family had a personal interest in this controversy. Former WCVB TV News Anchor Brian Leary was one of seven members of the board of Catholic Charities of Boston who resigned in protest over the Bishops’ decision. Leary called the ban on homosexual adoptions “morally repugnant and intellectually dishonest.”

Richardson’s most vituperative attacks however, were directed against the Saint Benedict Center and the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, and their founder, the late Reverend Leonard Feeney.

III. Targeting Father Feeney In the first of two Chronicle episodes slandering the reputation of Father Feeney, Richardson brought on to her program a vehement critic of Feeney from Boston College, who performed a grotesque caricature of the priest, mimicking his voice, while shouting anti-Semitic epithets.

No independent verification of the impersonator’s claims was either offered or sought, nor was any date or details of the alleged incident provided. No one who knew Father Feeney ever heard him utter such slurs, and Richardson did not bother to interview any still living witnesses to Feeney’s preaching who might rebut these defamatory charges.

In a second episode on Father Feeney, whom Richardson now called “The Hate Priest,” which aired in October of 2007, Chronicle broadcast an audio visual collage, presenting an unflattering image of Feeney, with a voiceover from the impersonator.

A viewer watching the program would would assume, naturally, that it was Father Feeney’s actual voice, and would, accordingly, conclude that the priest was a noxious bigot.

No broadcaster, with any integrity, would perpetrate such an unscrupulous deception, for such a malevolent purpose, on their own audience. What Richardson did was unjust, unethical and unprofessional. In any other circumstance, it would have been a firing offense.

For the American media oligarchy however, Father Feeney was beyond the boundaries of respectability, so even minimal norms of decency did not apply.

IV. Conforming Catholics in the Media It would be mistake, for the orthodox, to regard nominal Catholics in the media as philosophical adversaries, or to take seriously the strictly conventional views of their elite class on moral issues.

They are not ideologues or fanatics, just timeservers and social climbers. Conformity, not conviction, is what drives them. They do not have passion in their hearts, just a well placed finger in the wind. Talleyrand, not Robespierre, is their model.

It is not that they set out to reject Catholic beliefs, they just find it necessary to comply with the value system of their profession. They are less interested in saving their souls, as they are in keeping their pensions.

One of the mythologies of the media is that journalists comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. Nothing could be further from the truth. They are bullies to the weak and sycophants to the strong.

Pro-life advocates, pro-family activists and a priest who has been dead for four decades, can be insulted and derided with impunity. The Father Feeney treatment would never be extended, however, to a fellow media celebrity, to an attorney from a white shoe law firm, or to the Chairman of the State Street Bank and Trust Company.

It is easy to dismiss media personalities as combative people of modest intelligence. They are, however, careful calculators of power. They know who they can libel or slander without consequence, and they know who can injure their careers. They are judicious in their choice of targets.

Born Mary Claire Creehan, Mary Richardson was married to her third husband at the time of her death. Born in 1945, Mary Richardson was, like Jimmy Breslin, Martin Nolan and David Nyhan, pre-conciliar in her formation as a Catholic.

C. Joseph Doyle is the Executive Director of the Catholic Action League of Massachusetts, and the Director of Communications for the Friends of Saint Benedict Center.