Tuesday, October 18, 2022
When Pope Francis and Pope Benedict interpret Vatican Council II with LG 8 etc being only hypothetical and speculative cases in 2022 they become traditionalists
SUBJECTIVE INTERPRETATION WITH VATICAN COUNCIL II-OBSOLETE
This 1 is another subjective interpretation of
Vatican Council II which is irrelevant since when the Council is interpreted
with the Rational Premise it is ecclesiocentric and orthodox. There is a
radical change.
I interpret the Council with the Rational Premise so LG 8,14,15 and 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II refer to hypothetical and invisible cases in 2022.This is the big difference between me and Rorate Caeili, Roberto dei Mattei and Peter Kwasniewski. For them LG 8 etc. contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Athanasius Creed and the rest of Tradition.
So they imply that LG 8 etc. are objective cases in the present times. They are known non Catholics saved outside the Church without Catholic faith and the baptism of water. So the Syllabus of Errors has become obsolete with Vatican Council II, with visible cases of LG 8 etc.
INVISIBLE PEOPLE CANNOT BE OBJECTIVE EXCEPTIONS FOR FEENEYITE EENS
They would have to be visible cases for them to be practical exceptions for Feeneyite EENS. Invisible people, who are not there on earth, cannot be known examples of salvation outside the Church this year.
So the correspondents of the website Rorate Caeili, like the popes from Paul VI to Francis, interpret LG 8 etc. as being physically visible examples of salvation outside the Church while for me they are only hypothetical cases. This is common knowledge. So there
are numerous people who agree with me. I have quoted some of the prominent ones on my blog. They say that there are no cases of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance etc. in our reality.
IRRELEVANT INTERPRETATION OF VATICAN COUNCIL II
So Rorate Caeili and Don Pietro Leone are producing this obsolete series on Vatican Council II. It is now irrelevant.Vatican Council II is traditional. This is the rational and ethical option.It is the only option for Pope Francis and Pope Benedict.
When they interpret Vatican Council II with LG 8 etc being only hypothetical and speculative cases in 2022 they become traditionalists. -Lionel Andrades
1
60 years of Vatican II - 'THE COUNCIL AND THE ECLIPSE OF GOD' by Don Pietro Leone - CHAPTER 10 - part 4 - 'THE CAUSES OF COUNCIL TEACHING: D. Psychology
Conclusion to Section I
We have investigated the source of the false principle of antirealist subjectivism in Modern Philosophy; in Modern Theology; in that religion which we have termed Gnosis; and finally in its ontological foundation in the psychology of Fallen Nature.
Reflection on this false principle shows us that the philosophy, theology, the religion and the ethics that they inform - first Gnosis and then all the other false religions that it was to engender - are in fact all impostures.
* For a philosophy to be antirealist, for it to doubt or to deny Being, means that it is not a philosophy at all, but an anti-philosophy;
- * For a theology to be antirealist, for it to doubt or to deny God, means that it is not a theology at all, but an anti-theology;
- * For a religion to be antirealist, for it to repudiate God, means that it is not a religion at all, but an anti-religion; for it to advocate egoism as its ethics means that it is does not comprise a system of morality but a system of anti-morality.
A philosopher that can tell us nothing about reality, a theologian that can tell us nothing about God, is like a geographer that can tell us nothing about the world or a chemist that can tell us nothing about chemicals; the proponent of a religion that can tell us nothing about God, about how to relate to Him, and how to live, is like a doctor that can tell us nothing about illness or health.
But these systems of thought and action are not only impostures but also mortiferous, since a philosophy and a morality that are not about reality, a theology and a religion that are not about God can offer us no guidance about how to live, but only darkness or false light that will make us lose the way or lead us astray. The proponents of such systems are like undertakers disguised as doctors working at the service not of life but of death [6].
https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2022/10/60-years-of-vatican-ii-council-and_18.html#mo
______________________________________________
OCTOBER 15, 2022
Rorate Caeili supports gnosis with their expedient interpretation of Vatican Council II irrationally
OCTOBER 14, 2022
 |
This is modernism with alleged traditionalists rejecting Tradition to be politically correct with the Left. Mattei and Rorate Caeili are supporting the globalists in exchange for approval from the Left
OCTOBER 14, 2022
OCTOBER 14, 2022
Roberto dei Mattei and Rorate Caeli do not interpret Vatican Council II with the Rational Premise since then it would be a threat to their media
OCTOBER 9, 2022
After reading this article on Rorate Caeili know that the Council is today being interpreted as a continuity with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors. This is possible without using the Irrational Premise of Don Pietro Leone and Rorate Caeili.
The excommunication of Archbishop Lefebvre and Fr.Leonard Feeney was political. They had to accept the False Premise in the interpretation of Church Documents
From the Vortex, CMTV
Schism hands down
For example, at the heart of every schism you will find a heresy — disguised, of course, but a heresy nonetheless. The same was true in the case of Abp. Marcel Lefebvre.
John Salza:
I can name a dozen, but one that just comes to mind is Abp. Lefebvre, in a 1991 letter, which is found on the Society website to this day, is he held that jurisdiction comes from the people. That is a heresy that's been condemned by Pope Leo XIII. In fact, Abp. Lefebvre's own patron, St. Pius X, if you read his catechism — I think it's question 48 — the question is, "Does jurisdiction come from the people?" in St. Pius X's Catechism, and the answer is "No," and to say it does is a heresy. Well, Lefebvre held that because he knew he wasn't getting his jurisdiction from the pope, and therefore he said because the people have the need of my ministry, they as a result confer jurisdiction on me, and hence I can ordain priests and consecrate bishops.
https://www.churchmilitant.com/video/episode/vortex-schism-hands-dow
Lionel: The popes and the CDF for political reasons had to interpret Vatican Council II with the Fake Premise to create a Fake Break with Tradition.So they could not grant jurisdiction to Archbishop Lefebvre who was rejecting this Fake Interpretation of Vatican Council II.
The excommunication of Archbishop Lefebvre and Fr.Leonard Feeney was political. They had to accept the False Premise in the interpretation of Church Documents.They refused to do this.-Lionel Andrades
John Salza, Michael Voris and Christine Niles will not respond
To this day, after multiple invitations, still no one — not a layman, not a cleric, no one — from the SSPX will debate Salza. They or their adherents will attack him, but they will not debate him. You will understand why when you listen to him.
https://www.churchmilitant.com/video/episode/vortex-schism-hands-down
Lionel: It is John Salza who will not respond in e-mail communications.It is the same with Michael Voris and Christine Niles.
I ask: is Pope Francis interpreting Vatican Council II with a False Premise, Inference and Conclusion ?
He will not answer.
The CDF will not answer too.
Even the popes and the CDF did not tell Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre that he could interpret Vatican Council II with the Rational Premise and the conclusion would be orthodox.The popes still will not say this to the SSPX. They want a heretical and schismatic break with Tradition which is politically correct with the Left. -Lionel Andrades
CMTV and John Salza choose official heresy and schism and want the SSPX to do the same
from the CMTV website with comments:
The Society of St. Pius X (SSPX)
Position on Canonical Status
The position of Church Militant concerning the SSPX is that of the Holy Father, Emeritus Pope Benedict XVI, as expressed in the motu proprio Ecclesiae Unitatem, issued July 2, 2009:
In the same spirit and with the same commitment to encouraging the resolution of all fractures and divisions in the Church and to healing a wound in the ecclesial fabric that was more and more painfully felt, I wished to remit the excommunication of the four Bishops illicitly ordained by Archbishop Lefebvre.
SSPX IS BEING FORCED TO ACCEPT AN IRRATIONAL VERSION OF THE COUNCIL
Lionel: The excommunication of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre was illicit. Pope John Paul II and Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger were interpreting Vatican Council II with the Irrational Premise, like Pope Paul VI, and were forcing this upon the Society of St.Pius X(SSPX).
LEFEBVRE CORRECTLY REJECTED THE SCHISMATIC VERSION OF VATICAN COUNCIL II
Archbishop Lefebvre correctly rejected this schismatic interpretation of Vatican Council II. The popes would still not set a good example and interpret the Council rationally. Vatican Council II would be in harmony with Tradition. There would be no practical exceptions mentioned in the Council-text for extra ecclesiam nulla salus, with no exceptions, as it was interpreted over the centuries.There is no denial from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,Vatican.They choose the Irrational Premise,False Inference and Non Traditional Conclusion to interpret Vatican Council II and other Magisterial Documents( Creeds and Catechisms).Church Militant TV does the same and expediently calls it magisterial.
_______________
Lionel: The onus for specifying the doctrinal difference or shortcoming of the SSPX is with the CDF.If they say the issue is Vatican Council II they could be precise.I accept Vatican Council II. I affirm it in public.I interpret it only with the Rational Premise. So the Council, for me, has a hermeneutic of continuity with the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX, the Catechism of Pope Pius X and the Catechism of the Catholic Church of Pope John Paul II.
________________________________________
The SSPX bishops were excommunicated and their illicit consecrations defined as schismatic in the motu proprio Ecclesia Dei issued July 2, 1988:
In itself, this act was one of disobedience to the Roman Pontiff in a very grave matter and of supreme importance for the unity of the Church, such as is the ordination of bishops whereby the apostolic succession is sacramentally perpetuated. Hence such disobedience — which implies in practice the rejection of the Roman primacy — constitutes a schismatic act. (emphasis added)
The excommunications have been lifted, but the canonical status of the SSPX remains unchanged.
There are two important points here:
1. The SSPX is not in full communion with the Church and is invited by the Church to rediscover this path.
POPES MUST CHOOSE A RATIONAL AND NOT IRRATIONAL INTERPRETATION OF VATICAN COUNCIL II TO BE IN COMMUNION WITH THE CHURCH
Lionel: The popes from Paul VI to Francis are not in communion with the Church when they choose an Irrational and not Rational Premise to interpret Vatican Council II as a break with Tradition. They are invited, with good will and humility, to rediscover this path of full communion. They must affirm the Athanasius Creed, the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors, in harmony with Vatican Council II interpreted rationally, with a Rational Premise.
___________________________
RELIGIOUS COMMUNITIES WHICH DO NOT INTEPRET VATICAN COUNCIL II RATIONALLY ARE GRANTED CANONICALY RECOGNITION.
2. The SSPX has no canonical status in the Church and its ministers cannot legitimately exercise any ministry.
Lionel: Only those religious communities have been granted canonical recognition by the present two popes, who do not accept Vatican Council II. They do not affirm Vatican Council II. The Council can only be interpreted rationally. This is the only ethical option there is for all Catholics.
__________________________
This has never been formally changed by the Holy See, in spite of Pope Francis' recent indults allowing the Society to witness marriages or hear confessions — a benefit provided explicitly for the good of the faithful in the Jubilee Year of Mercy, and extended indefinitely.
While SSPX loyalists love to cite Pope Francis' indult as "proof" the SSPX cannot be in schism, recall that the Orthodox Church also has faculties to witness marriages and hear confessions, yet no Catholic would claim the Orthodox Church is not in schism. This is simply not an argument that can be made.
Some mistakenly argue that Pope Benedict's 2009 lifting of the excommunications on four SSPX bishops ended the schism. Not true. Benedict's lifting of the excommunications did nothing to change the SSPX's objective state of schism, any more than Pope Paul VI's 1965 lifting of excommunications imposed on Orthodox bishops affected the Orthodox Church's state of schism.
CARDINAL LADARIA HAS SAID THAT THE SSPX IS PART OF THE CHURCH AND THE DIALOGUE CONTINUES
Lionel: The issue of schism comes from Vatican Council II. Bishop Bernard Fellay has said that the SSPX does not reject Vatican Council II, it accepts 90% of the Council. Archbishop Lefebvre was present at the Council and signed the documents. Recently Pope Francis met the Superior of the SSPX and Cardinal Ladaria said that the SSPX is a part of the Church and the dialogue continues.Ladaria did not prohibit Catholics from visiting SSPX chapels and attending Mass there.
POPES ARE STILL INTERPRETING VATICAN COUNCIL II UNETHICALLY AND REJECTING THE DOGMA EENS
But the issue of schism still exists.The popes like CMTV, John Salza,Michael Lofton and other liberals are interpreting Vatican Council II unethically and expect the SSPX to accept this for canonical recognition. If the SSPX did so they would be in schism with the past Magisterium on the Nicene and Apostles Creed which would have a variation. They would be in schism with the pre 1949 Magisterium on the Athanasius Creeds which is rejected outright by liberal Rome.The Catechisms would have a confused interpretation and the doctrinal chaos would not be corrected. Why must they accept all this innovation? They are free to interpret the Council rationally and expect Rome to do the same.
________________________
In the letter accompanying Traditionis Custodes, Pope Francis also refers to the SSPX as in schism:
The faculty — granted by the indult of the Congregation for Divine Worship in 1984[2] and confirmed by St. John Paul II in the Motu Proprio Ecclesia Dei in 1988[3] — was above all motivated by the desire to foster the healing of the schism with the movement of Abp. Lefebvre. (emphasis added)
CDF IS IN OFFICIAL SCHISM WITH NO DENIAL FOR POLITICAL REASONS.
Lionel: The onus for healing the official schism of the popes lies with the CDF. The innovation in Catholic doctrine with a False Premise, Inference and Conclusion is there in public. It can be read on the Internet.There are many reports over the years( not on CMTV) which call attention to this problem in the Church.It is like a theological epidemic.
______________________________
Cardinal Raymond Burke, former prefect of the Apostolic Signatura, has explicitly said the SSPX is in schism. He made the remarks at the Sacred Liturgy conference in Medford, Oregon in July 2017:
[T]he fact of the matter is that the Priestly Society of St. Pius X is in schism since the late Abp. Marcel Lefebvre ordained four bishops without the mandate of the Roman Pontiff. And so it is not legitimate to attend Mass or to receive the sacraments in a church that's under the direction of the Priestly Society of St. Pius X.
ARCHBISHOP LEFEBVRE CORRECTLY REFUSED TO ACCEPT THE POLITICAL VERSION OF VATICAN COUNCIL II
Lionel: Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre ordained four bishops, three of whom have been accepted by Pope Francis and the CDF. He ordained them because the basic problem was accepting Vatican Council II interpreted heretically and schismatically by Pope Paul VI.So Lefebvre correctly refused to accept this political version of the Council.
Pope Francis now has a choice. He can interpret Vatican Council II rationally and invite the whole Church, including the SSPX, to do the same.
I ask: why should I as a Catholic interpret Vatican Council II with the Irrational and not Rational Premise? Why must I be deceptive
__________________________
Cardinal Gerhard Müller, former prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, has also said the SSPX is in schism in comments made in 2013 to the Italian press:
The canonical excommunication of the bishops for their illegal ordinations was revoked, but a de facto sacramental excommunication remains for their schism; they put themselves out of communion with the Church. After that we are not closing the door and never will, but we are inviting them to be reconciled. But they too must change their attitude, accept the conditions of the Catholic Church, and the Supreme Pontiff as the definitive criterion for membership.
BISHOP ATHANASIUS SCHNEIDER INTERPRETS VATICAN COUNCIL II RATIONALLY. CMTV AND JOHN SALZA COULD DO THE SAME.
Lionel: Cardinal Gerhard Muller, (it has been pointed out often on social media) interprets Vatican Council II politically like Pope Benedict and Pope Francis. He can choose to interpret LG 8,14,15,16 etc as being only hypothetical cases.They are not examples of people whom we know in the present times saved outside the Church.He could clarify this point.Then he would be interpreting the Council rationally, like Bishop Athanasius Schneider .
Cardinal Muller too must say like Bishop Schnieder that there is salvation in only Jesus in only the Catholic Church. Bishop Schneider told Dr.Taylor Marshall that there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire( LG 14).So Bishop Schneider is not in schism with the Magisterium of the Church over the centuries. Cardinal Muller is in schism caused by the False Premise.It is the False Premise, Cushingism, which creates schism and heresy.
________________________
FULTON SHEEN INTERPRETED VATICAN COUNCIL II IRRATIONALLY
Even Ven. Abp. Fulton J. Sheen has said the SSPX is in schism. (We recommend this video by two former SSPX adherents on the Lefebvrite schism.)
Lionel: Archbishop Fulton Sheen whom I admire and whose books I read as a youth was also interpreting Vatican Council II with schismatic Cushingism. He never corrected his error.
________________________
CUSHINGISM CREATES HERESY AND SCHISM IRRESPECTIVE OF WHO USES IT
Communion with the Chair of Peter is a constitutive part of Roman Catholicism — something the SSPX accepts in principle but rejects in practice.
Lionel: The Chair of Peter because of Cushingism, is in a rupture with the one holy Catholic and apostolic Church. It can correct this error immediately, over night, by choosing the Rational Premise and inviting the whole Church to do the same.Cushingism is the infiltration in the Catholic Church.
_________________________
THE SSPX MUST ASK CARDINAL LADARIA TO COME BACK TO TRADITION BY INTERPRETING VATICAN COUNCIL II RATIONALLY.
As Pope Benedict said, the SSPX has "no canonical status," "no legitimate ministry," is "invited to rediscover the path to full communion," has no faculties from any bishop, is not part of the divinely ordained hierarchical structure of the Church and all its priests are suspended a divinis.
Lionel: Cardinal Ladaria re-evaluated this position and said that the SSPX are part of the Church and the dialogue continues. The SSPX must ask Cardinal Ladaria to come back to Tradition by interpreting Vatican Council II and the Creeds and Catechisms rationally.Last Sunday I went for the 10 a.m Mass in Italian at the church of the Augustinian Recollects in Rome where I received the Eucharist.Then I went for the morning Mass in Latin at the SSPX St.Catherine of Siena chapel,Rome.I did not receive the Eucharist there.The homilies of the SSPX priests are refreshing.I miss them at Mass in Italian.
_____________________
THE SSPX MUST NOT INTERPRET ACCEPT VATICAN COUNCIL II INTERPRETED WITH HERETICAL AND SCHISMATIC CUSHINGISM
We are well aware of ongoing dialogue between the SSPX and Rome. It is to be fervently hoped that this dialogue results in a return of the SSPX to full communion with the Church, granting its bishops and clergy canonical status and the authority to exercise ministry. Reconciliation of the SSPX with the Church would be a great blessing for the Church but most especially for the SSPX.
Lionel : The SSPX must not accept Vatican Council II interpreted with heretical and schismatic Cushingism.This is the compromise of CMTV, John Salza and others whose priorities are not the Catholic faith but their worldly priorities.
The SSPX must insist that Pope Francis and Cardinal Ladaria accept Vatican Council II.The Council can only be interpreted with a Rational Premise.This is a given.
___________________________
The SSPX has consistently refused the most generous and magnanimous invitations from the Church to reconcile and place itself under the authority of the Vicar of Christ, rejecting his dogmatically defined "full power of shepherding, ruling and governing the universal Church," a power "ordinary and immediate over all the churches and over each and every member of the faithful" ("The Pope Exercises Supreme Jurisdiction" [Original Italian here]).
Lionel: Pope Francis like the CMTV, John Salza and Michael Lofton rejects the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. This dogma has been defined by three Church Councils which did not mention any exceptions. This is public heresy and schism. This is: not being in communion with the Mystical Body of the Church.This is a mortal sin of faith.For political-left reasons CMTV, John Salza and other liberals are going along with it. There condition is so bad that they will not deny what I say here.They pretend that these mortal sins of faith are inspired by the Holy Spirit and are magisterial.
____________________________
Perhaps the SSPX fears it will be crushed by an unsympathetic hierarchy and pope.
Lionel: CMTV, John Salza, Michael Lofton, liberals and leftists, have compromised. Even traditionalists have compromised to protect their media and other interests from being attacked by the Left. The popes too are not accepting Vatican Council II.
____________________
Perhaps it is justified in such fearful apprehensions. But there is precedent in the history of the Church — in the lives of the saints, in the life of Our Lord Himself — for risking or allowing oneself to be crushed by obedience.
Lionel: St.Maximillian Kolbe says that one should not be obedient to a superior if he teaches heresy.His error should be rejected.Common sense!
The popes must set an example and affirm the Catholic faith ;the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and also Vatican Council II interpreted rationally.
______________________
Until such time as the SSPX chooses to reconcile with the Church, Church Militant must support the judgment of the Holy Father and the Church concerning its status.
Lionel: Until Church Militant, John Salza, Michael Lofton and others, have to survive in an hostile environment they will choose not to accept Vatican Council II interpreted rationally, with the hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition.- Lionel Andrades
https://www.churchmilitant.com/main/generic/sspx
The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican must accept Vatican Council II and affirm it in public. The Council can only be interpreted with the Rational Premise.The CDF does not accept the Council
The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican must accept Vatican Council II and affirm it in public. The Council can only be interpreted with the Rational Premise.The CDF does not accept the Council.It interprets it politically. The traditionalists do the same.With the False Premise there is a break with Tradition which is approved by the political Left.This is not Catholic.The two popes are unethical on Vatican Council II and must accept the Council rationally.- Lionel Andrades
Posts
