Thursday, March 10, 2022
The German Synodal Way has its theological foundation based upon a Fake Premise. So all their meetings and programs are in vain.
The
German Synodal Way has its theological foundation upon a Fake Premise. So
all their meetings and programs are in vain. When Cardinal Marx cites Vatican
Council II as the inspiration for the Synodal Way it is a legal issue. Since he uses a
Fake Premise to interpret the Council and only in this way he can reject the Syllabus of Errors of
Pope Pius IX and the rest of Catholic Tradition. This impacts Germans in education, employment, religious vocations etc.
Now German and international students have to follow the same deception to obtain an educational scholarshop from the German government.Without the use of the Fake Premise,they will not, for example, be able to do post doctoral studies at the FSCIRE, the Bologna School of Alberto Melloni in Italy. Without the Fake Premise they would be affirming the Syllabus of Errors and Vatican Council II interpreted with the Rational Premise.
So
the use of the Fake Premise has an influence on Germans and so the deception is
a legal issue. Now vocations to the religious life in Germany have to interpret
Vatican Council II irrationally, as does Cardinal Marx.
This deception is being maintained by Cardinal Jean-Claude Hollerich, president of the European bishops’ conferences (COMECE), Bishop Georg Bätzing, president of the German bishops’ conference, Cardinal Reinhardt Marx, former president of the German Bishops' Conference, Thomas Sternberg, president of the Central Committee of German Catholics (ZdK), Irme Stetter-Karp and Bishop Franz-Josef Bode, Vice Presidents, ZdK.
They
are all using the Fake Premise to interpret the baptism of desire, baptism of
blood and being saved in invincible ignorance. Then with the Fake Premise they
interpret BOD, BOB and I.I as being practical exceptions for the traditional
exclusivist interpretation of EENS. This is official and public.
With
the same Fake Premise they re-interpret LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22
etc in Vatican Council II, when a rational option is available. This is
illegal, considering that it affects employment, scholarship and education and
admittance in seminaries and religious congregations.
With
the False Premise they interpret the Catechism of the Catholic Church (847-848
etc), the Catechism of the Council of Trent (baptism and the desiretheorof), the
Catechism of Pope Pius X (29Q-invincible ignorance), Nicene Creed (I believe in
three or more baptisms for the forgiveness of sins, they are the baptism of desire,
blood and ignorance and they exclude the baptism of water and so are practical
exceptions for the Syllabus of Errors. EENS etc).
How can Bishop Georg Bätzing, Cardinal Reinhardt
Marx, Thomas Sternberg, Irme Stetter-Karp and Bishop Franz-Josef Bode, interpret the baptism of desire (LG14) for example, differently and irrationally? It means, at least, their and my reality is not the same. Their reality is not the same. Their is also not the same with the other Germans.
For
them the baptism of desire refers to physically visible persons in the present times
(1949-2022) and for me they are invisible.
For
them LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc refer to explicit and objective
cases and for me they are implicit and subjective references to hypothetical
cases.
For
them, supporters of the Synodal Way, Vatican Council II, implicit and
hypothetical cases of LG 14 etc contradict Feeneyite EENS or EENS according to
the missionaries and Magisterium of the 16 century. For me implicit and
hypothetical cases do not contradict EENS according to the past Magisterium.
Invisible cases are invisible and not visible for me.
For
them there are explicit exceptions for the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus
of Errors etc. since the German Synodal Way depends upon the False Premise ( invisible
cases are physically visible, LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc refer to physically
visible cases in 2022 for them to be objective exceptions for the past
exclusivist ecclesiology of the Catholic Church).For me there are no explicit exceptions.LG 8 etc are always implicit, subjective, invisible and hypothetical.
How can Bishop Georg Bätzing, Cardinal Reinhardt
Marx, Thomas Sternberg, Irme Stetter-Karp
and Bishop Franz-Josef Bode legally hold their office since their reality,
physically, is different from the norm, or they are telling a lie.
In Germany the religious communities could ask their bishops and the leaders of the Synodal Way, to only interpret Vatican Council II with the Rational Premise. They must do the same with all Magisterial Documents; otherwise it will be official deception. It would be unethical and not Catholic.-Lionel Andrades
MARCH 9, 2022
With the Rational Premise in the interpretation of Vatican Council II even Massimo Faggioli, like Pope Francis, would not find any exceptions for the past theological ecclesiocentrism
How Synodale Weg came to be is also illustrative. It emerged out of the increasingly diverging trajectories between the progressive Catholic Church in Germany (bishops, theologians, and laypeople alike) and the Vatican, especially under John Paul II.
The progressive Catholic Church in Germany and Pope John Paul II were using the False Premise to interpret Vatican Council II as a break with Tradition (Syllabus of Errors etc) and this was supported by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the German Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. It is the same with Pope Francis and there is divergence.
Additionally, the German synod expresses a Catholic culture that relies on academic theology and on institutional systems of representation of the laity; it is rooted in Vatican II but without the qualms about the compatibility between modernity and Christian faith.
With the Rational Premise in the interpretation of Vatican Council II even Massimo Faggioli, like Pope Francis, would not find any exceptions for the past theological ecclesiocentrism.-Lionel Andrades
Where German Catholics & Pope Francis Diverge
Germany’s ‘synodal way’ charts its own course to reform.
February 28, 2022
https://www.commonwealmagazine.org/where-german-catholics-pope-francis-diverge
________________________________
MARCH 7, 2022
Massimo Faggioli notices?
Massimo Faggioli seems to have finally realized that Pope Benedict made a mistake with his interpretation of Vatican Council II and his New Theology is now straw. It’s foundation was a False Premise.
It reminds me of the fake scientific proof, upon which Teilhard de Chardin erected this theology, supporting re-incarnation.-Lionel Andrades
MARCH 4, 2022
Pope Benedict’s December 22, 2005 Address to the Roman Curia is heretical and schismatic on Vatican Council II.He uses the False Premise to produce a hermeneutic of rupture with Magisterial Documents
Pope Benedict’s December 22, 2005 Address to the Roman Curia is heretical and schismatic on Vatican Council II.He is officially supporting mortal sins of faith and this would be automatic excommunication for an ecclesiastic. He is using the False Premise as usual, to create the hermeneutic of discontinuity with Tradition (EENS, Syllabus of Errors with no known exceptions etc), and calls it ‘the reforms’ of Vatican Council II.
Anyone who uses the False Premise-pope or lay man creates heresy and schism. Since the False Premise (invisible cases of LG 16 etc are physically visible examples of salvation outside the Church, in the present times) creates exceptions for Tradition, He assumes that there are practical exceptions for the past exclusivist ecclesiology. It is then wrongly inferred by him that there are practical exceptions of the baptism of desire (LG 14) and being saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16) for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS), the Athanasius Creed etc.So they become obsolete. There is a New Theology which says outside the Church there is known salvation. So it is possible based upon the New Theology created with the False Premise, to have a New Ecumenism, New Ecclesiology, New Evangelisation etc.
The premise ( invisible cases of personally known non Catholics being saved outside the church) is false. But if there are no known persons, physically visible people, they cannot be practical exceptions for EENS, the Syllabus of Errors etc.So he needs to confused what is invisible as being visible to produce a new theology and exceptions for Tradition.
So what is implicit (LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3) he assumes is explicit and calls it 'a development of doctrine' with Vatican Council II ( irrational).Then there are new liberal doctrines on salvation, mission, Roman Missal, liturgy etc.
He has stated in public in an interview in Avvenire that EENS today is no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century. He said that there was a developmen of doctrine with Vatican Council II. He meant Vatican Council II, interpreted with the False Premise by him has exceptions.
His New Theology which supports the hermenutic of rupture with Tradition is false since there are no practical exceptions to EENS etc in our reality. Being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire can only be known to God. There are no physically visible cases in 1965-2022.We cannot say that there were 25 cases of the baptism of desire last year or 20 cases of being saved in invincible ignorance the previous year.We cannot meet a Christian saved in 'imperfect communion with the Church'. We cannot meet a non Christian saved with elements of sanctification in other religions(LG 8) or where the Church subsists outside its visible boundaries (LG 8).
If Pope Benedict had used the Rational Premise ( invisible cases of LG 14, LG 16 are invisible in 2022, they are hypothetical and speculative only ), there would be no practical exception mentioned in the entire text of Vatican Council II, for the past ecclesiocentrism of the Catholic Church, inspired by the Holy Spirit.
Now the whole Church is following his error as he supports a vague and liberal 'spirit of Vatican Council II' based upon an irrational interpretation of the baptism of desire, invincible ignorance and the baptism of blood. The Council then contradicts the Athanasius Creed, the Catechism of Pope Pius X, 24Q,27Q etc.
There are two interpretations of Magisterial Documents(Council of Trent etc) the traditional interpretation with the Rational Premise and the new political interpretation with the False Premise.
The changes in faith and morals in the German Synodal Path with Vatican Council II cited as a reference by Cardinal Maex, comes from the same Fake Premise,which is used by the Society of St. Pius X and the liberals in Germany and which can be seen in this 2005 address.-Lionel Andrades
_____________________________________________
MARCH 3, 2022
The hermeneutic of reforms of Pope Benedict supported the 'spirit of Vatican Council II' of the liberals
What is at the heart of the progressivist attacks on the Traditional Latin Mass and the accusations that people who want it are “against Vatican II”? Here’s what it is.
...here is the important address Benedict XVI gave to the Roman Curia before Christmas in 2005, his talk about how to interpret the Second Vatican Council. Benedict identified an interpretive approach or hermeneutic of continuity against a hermeneutic of discontinuity and rupture.
Here’s some of that talk with my emphases:
The question arises: Why has the implementation of the Council, in large parts of the Church, thus far been so difficult?
Well, it all depends on the correct interpretation of the Council or – as we would say today – on its proper hermeneutics, the correct key to its interpretation and application. The problems in its implementation arose from the fact that two contrary hermeneutics came face to face and quarrelled with each other. One caused confusion, the other, silently but more and more visibly, bore and is bearing fruit.
Lionel : 'The proper hermeneutics, the correct key to its interpretation and application', depends upon the use of the Rational Premise and the rejection of the False Premise.Pope Benedict has used the False Premise, the irrationality, to interpret the Council and create a fake break with Tradition, and then calls it 'the spirit of the Council '.
On the one hand, there is an interpretation that I would call “a hermeneutic of discontinuity and rupture”; it has frequently availed itself of the sympathies of the mass media, and also one trend of modern theology. On the other, there is the “hermeneutic of reform”, of renewal in the continuity of the one subject-Church which the Lord has given to us. She is a subject which increases in time and develops, yet always remaining the same, the one subject of the journeying People of God.
Lionel: The 'hermeneutic of discontinuity and rupture' of the mass media and the popes since Paul VI, comes with the False Premise which creates exceptions for the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX and traditional ecclesiocentrism.This exclusivist ecclesiology is obsolete for Pope Benedict since there are supposedly 'practical exceptions, when the Council is interpreted with the False Premise, by him.
In an interview with Avvenire a few years back he has said that extra ecclesiam nulla salus today is no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century. He means there is a rupture, a discontinuity. He called it 'a development of doctrine' with Vatican Council II.He refers to Vatican Council II, which he interprets only, irrationally.
The hermeneutic of discontinuity risks ending in a split between the pre-conciliar Church and the post-conciliar Church. It asserts that the texts of the Council as such do not yet express the true spirit of the Council. It claims that they are the result of compromises in which, to reach unanimity, it was found necessary to keep and reconfirm many old things that are now pointless. However, the true spirit of the Council is not to be found in these compromises but instead in the impulses toward the new that are contained in the texts.
Lionel: The False Premise creates the split between the pre-conciliar Church and the post-conciliar Church. The False Premise creates the hermeneutic of discontinuity.
The hermeneutic of discontinuity is the result and not the cause. The cause of the hermeneutic of discontinuity is obviously the False Premise( invisible cases of being saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16) are visible in 2022).
These innovations alone were supposed to represent the true spirit of the Council, and starting from and in conformity with them, it would be possible to move ahead. Precisely because the texts would only imperfectly reflect the true spirit of the Council and its newness, it would be necessary to go courageously beyond the texts and make room for the newness in which the Council’s deepest intention would be expressed, even if it were still vague.
Lionel: He is a liberal here and supports 'the spirit of Vatican Council II' which depends upon the False Premise. With the Rational Premise he would have to return to Catholic orthodoxy and the past exclusivist ecclesiology.
There could not be any innovation when Vatican Council II is interpreted with the Rational Premise. Since then there would be no practical exceptions in the text of the Council, for the past ecclesiocentrism of the Church. -Lionel Andrades
In a word: it would be necessary not to follow the texts of the Council but its spirit. In this way, obviously, a vast margin was left open for the question on how this spirit should subsequently be defined and room was consequently made for every whim.
The nature of a Council as such is therefore basically misunderstood. In this way, it is considered as a sort of constituent that eliminates an old constitution and creates a new one.
https://wdtprs.com/2022/02/what-is-at-the-heart-of-the-progressivist-attacks-on-the-traditional-latin-mass-and-the-accusations-that-people-who-want-it-are-against-vatican-ii-heres-what-it-is/
MARCH 3, 2022
The FSSP deletes the reference to the 'hermeneutic of reforms' of Pope Benedict which was mentioned in the original communique.
The FSSP deletes the reference to the 'hermeneutic of reforms' of Pope Benedict which was mentioned in the original communique. -Lionel Andrades
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2022/03/the-fssp-deletes-reference-to.html
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2022/03/the-hermeneutic-of-reforms-of-pope.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
