Summorum
Pontificum did not say that the Latin Mass was to be offered with the new
ecclesiology of the New Missal and with Vatican Council II interpreted rationally. However it was understood for Pope Benedict, that Vatican Council II had to be interpreted irrationally
and accepted. Then there would be a rupture with the ecclesiology of the 16th
century Roman Missal. So the ecclesiology at the Latin Mass would be the same
as that of the Novus Ordo Mass.
The SSPX
did not accept Vatican Council II and there was confusion with the FSSP which
accepts Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally.So, for the FSSP and Pope
Benedict, the Council contradicts the past ecclesiocentrism of the Catholic
Church and Tradition in general.
Pope
Benedict offered the Novus Ordo Mass
with the new ecclesiology. This was produced by his acceptance of
Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally. For him the Athanasius Creed, the
Syllabus of Errors and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ( EENS) were
obsolete with Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally. He said that EENS
today was no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th
century.There was 'a development' with Vatican Council II.
So Summorum
Pontificum also wanted the Latin Mass to be offered with ‘the development of
doctrine’ of Vatican Council II ( irrational).
With
Vatican Council II ( irrational ) Pope Benedict was rejecting the old
ecclesiology of the 12th to 16th century.
The SSPX rejects the old ecclesiology when it interprets Vatican Council II
irrationally and not rationally.The SSPX contributes to the division in the
Church.
Bishop
Athanasius Schneider in an interview with Dr. Taylor Marshall has said that
there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire in the present times.
Marshall also said that there were no explicit cases of St. Thomas Aquinas’
implicit baptism of desire.They both were interpreting the baptism of desire
and Vatican Council II ( LG 14) rationally, unlike the SSPX.
However, for
some reason they did not announce that there were no literal cases of LG 8,14
and 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in the present times. In this way they would be
saying that Vatican Council II is not a rupture with Tradition. It has a
continuity with the dogma EENS, the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors
of Pope Pius IX. The Council would be traditional with LG 14 AG 7, supporting Feeneyite EENS. Meanwhile LG 8, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc would not contradict the past ecclesiocentrism of the Catholic Church. -Lionel Andrades
_______________________________________________
FEBRUARY 17, 2021
If the French Bishops are shown that the Council can be accepted and interpreted without their irrationality, Vatican Council II would no more be an issue. It is Una Voce which would be able to appeal to the French bishops to affirm Vatican Council II
Statement of the FIUV on the Response of the French Bishops to the CDF
FOEDERATIO INTERNATIONALIS UNA VOCE:STATEMENT ON THE REPORT OF THE FRENCH BISHOPS’ CONFERENCE (CEF) ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM
The FIUV has become aware of a document, in the public domain, containing a summary of the responses made by French bishops to the questionnaire sent to them by the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, on the subject of the implementation of the Apostolic Letter Summorum Pontificum. Although this document does not appear to have been intended for publication, its authenticity has not been denied, and a reaction to it seems necessary.
We note first that the document adopts a consistently hostile tone towards the ancient Latin liturgical tradition, to the priests who celebrate it, and to the faithful who attend it. This has understandably caused considerable hurt among French Catholics attached to this tradition. The document does not speak, on behalf of the bishops of France, about these sons and daughters of the Church with the words of a shepherd and father. In the words of Una Voce France, we do not find
… the slightest trace of empathy, cordiality, or ‘heart’ in them as they say in one place. Instead, we find contempt, at best indifference, towards those narrow-minded beings, without theology, without charity, that are the faithful to the ancient Latin Mass. A Mass that so many generations followed, and from which they nourished their faith ... which is ours today.[1]
Lionel: When Vatican Council II interpreted without a false premise is referred to by Una Voce then the French Bishops will realize that their theology is suddenly 'pre Vatican Council II' like those of the traditionalists. Una Voce needs to discuss this issue.
________________________
Nevertheless, the impression of hostility made by this document masks many positive features of the reception of Summorum Pontificum in France. The document acknowledges these phenomena with a singular lack of grace, or without noting even that they are good things. It refers, for example, to ‘large families’ requesting the EF; to ‘weak’ young people seeking out celebrations and finding in them a supportive spiritual environment; of seminarians learning to celebrate the EF in their own time, without the assistance of their formators; and to this younger, more traditionally-inclined generation of priests, celebrating the Ordinary Form with greater reverence and fidelity.
In this context the words of Fr Claude Barthe, Chaplain of the Summorum Pontificum Pilgrimage in Rome, are apposite:
One is left speechless by the conclusion that the EF is not missionary when we know that the parish Masses are always more deserted, while traditional Masses are full of young people and a not insignificant number of converts.[2]
We should like to observe that the authority of the bishops of France, like bishops all over the world, remains unimpaired by Summorum Pontificum, as Pope Benedict XVI emphasised in the Letter to Bishops which accompanied the Apostolic Letter:
Nothing is taken away, then, from the authority of the Bishop, whose role remains that of being watchful that all is done in peace and serenity.
Lionel: The French bishops have mentioned Vatican Council II. They want the traditionalists to interpret the Council like them and to accept the Council.
This issue has to be addressed.
If the French Bishops are shown that the Council can be accepted and interpreted without their irrationality, Vatican Council II would no more be an issue. It is Una Voce which would be able to appeal to the French bishops to affirm Vatican Council II.
_________________
Indeed, while this document of the CEF makes harsh criticisms of those priests who celebrate the EF, it was the bishops themselves, or their immediate predecessors, who in nearly all cases invited them into their dioceses, and presumably did so for good reasons.
Lionel: The bishops criticize the priests who offer the EF since they believe Vatican Council II with the false premise is a new revelation in the Catholic Church and it has made Tradition officially obsolete. The French bishops have to be shown how it is necessary for the Church, and the French bishops, to officially interpret Vatican Council II without the false premise. Since this is the only ethical and rational possibility which exists.
_________________
In a different way, the document laments the small number of diocesan clergy who celebrate the EF, in relation to the number of priests of the Traditional Institutes, while it is entirely in the power of the bishops to ensure that their seminarians are proficient in Latin, and to encourage them to learn how to celebrate the EF.
Taking the document as a whole, despite its many harsh, and sometimes inaccurate and unjust, statements, it reflects the fact that the ancient Mass is now an indisputably permanent feature of the French Church. To quote Fr Barth again:
it is clear that the public existence of the traditional Mass is now a given [un fait acquis] in France. It is a given that many bishops would like to confine or reduce, but that they no longer dispute.
The FIUV would like to appeal to the bishops of France, and to those functionaries of the CEF responsible for this document, to consider the consequences of even the appearance of an unwelcoming attitude towards Catholics who feel the attraction of the ancient liturgical tradition. As we have already quoted Pope Benedict, it is the munus of the bishops to ensure that the Apostolic Letter is implemented with ‘peace and serenity’. Peace and serenity are maximised by an open and welcoming attitude, and this is also what is necessary to building up the trust and mutual understanding which this document claims are currently lacking. If traditional Catholics are feeling marginalised, it is in large part because of the contrary attitude, displayed by this document, which appears to see them as a nuisance rather than as sons and daughters of their bishops.
Lionel: They are being marginalised since they still do not know that Vatican Council II can be interpreted without a false premise and the whole Church comes back to Tradition, including the French Bishops. Una Voce is not telling them about it.
How can the traditionalists be marginalised if the Council is Traditional and supports the strict interpretation of EENS, the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors ? This would be a problem for the liberal French bishops who do not want to change and adapt and not the traditionalists.- Lionel Andrades
https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2021/02/statement-of-fiuv-on-response-of-french.html#more
FEBRUARY 17, 2021
Cardinal Raymond Burke and Archbishop Carlo Vigano still interpret Vatican Council II with the false premise and so they support the traditionalist-progressivist division in the Church. This was seen in the recent statement of the French Bishops on the traditionalists not following Vatican Council II
SATURDAY, MARCH 8, 2014
CANONICALLY HERESY
It is not known if the Fischer More College intends to file a Canonical petition with Ecclesia Dei (1)REJECTING THE NICENE CREED
When one assumes that the baptism of desire is visible for us and not invisible for us then it is a contradiction of the Nicene Creed. When we pray 'I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sin' , instead of meaning there is one known baptism, we are really saying there are three known to us baptisms. The Nicene Creed refers to the baptism of water.Three known baptisms would be the baptism of water, desire and blood.The baptism of desire and blood are known only to God. These persons are visible and known only to Him.
2.
REJECTION OF THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
When one assumes that being saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16) or imperfect communion with the Church (UR 3) are visible to us in the flesh and that they are really not invisible and unknown for us, then it is a rejection of Vatican Council II (AG 7,LG 16 etc). When we assume that LG 16, UR 3 etc contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus we are implying that there are known, visible to us exceptions to the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.
3.
-Lionel Andrades
1.
http://www.cfnews.org/page88/files/img012.jpg
2.
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/03/summorum-pontificum-does-not-say-if.html#links
DECEMBER 15, 2018
Summorum Pontificum was bait for the SSPX : they had to accept Vatican Council II with there being known salvation outside the Church
He was also still telling us that every one had to interpret Vatican Council II as saying there is salvation outside the Church, even if this is the precise cause, of what he calls, 'the hermeneutic of rupture' with the past.
However the traditionalists at the St. Benedict Center(SBC), and FSSP, caved in, in exchange for official recognition.
All the bishops in New England say there is salvation outside the Church even if they there are no such cases in real life and they know of no practical exceptions to EENS.
So the Latin Mass today is not the Tridentine Latin Mass of the 16th century.
Fr.John Zuhlsdorf projects the vestments and rubrics of the Latin Mass but will not support the strict interpretation of EENS.He interprets Vatican Council II like the liberal Bologna School, with BOD, BOB and I.I being exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.
Rorate Caeli, Angelus Press, Michael Matt, Chris Ferrara and others project the Latin Mass as if today it is the same Mass as in the 16th century. So in BOD, BOB and I.I there are practical exceptions to EENS for them, as it was for Archbishop Lefebvre when he offered the Mass in Latin and as it is for Pope Benedict when he offers Mass in Italian.- Lionel Andrades
FEBRUARY 20, 2021
This will be a surprise for the French bishops
When the French bishops criticize those who offer and attend the Latin Mass it is because no one has told them that Vatican Council II without the false premise is not against Tradition but it supports it. It is they, the bishops, who must affirm the traditional teachings on faith and morals, of the Church, which were associated with the Traditional Latin Mass.
This will be a surprise for the French bishops.- Lionel Andrades
FEBRUARY 19, 2021
If the French bishops interpret Vatican Council II without the false premise, theologically, they would be traditionalists, affirming the past ecclesiocentrism of the Catholic Chruch.
If the French bishops interpret Vatican Council II without the false premise, theologically, they would be traditionalists, affirming the past ecclesiocentrism of the Catholic Chruch.
The French bishops were critical of the priests of who offer Mass in Latin(EF), since the Latin Mass is associated with traditional faith and morals, which they have rejected with their liberal interpretation of Vatican Council .Their liberal interpretation is based upon the false premise and inference
FEBRUARY 18, 2021
Una Voce and Dr. Joseph Shaw, Prof. Roberto dei Mattei and the weblog Rorate Caeili cannot tell the French bishops to interpret Vatican Council II without the false premise and so end the liberal-traditionalist divide.Since Shaw, Mattei and New Catholic at Rorate Caeili, would have to do the same.They would have to interpret the Council without the fake premise. They would also have to affirm Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus
Una Voce and Dr. Joseph Shaw, Prof. Roberto dei Mattei and the weblog Rorate Caeili cannot tell the French bishops to interpret Vatican Council II without the false premise and so end the liberal-traditionalist divide.Since Shaw, Mattei and New Catholic at Rorate Caeili, would have to do the same.They would have to interpret the Council without the fake premise. They would also have to affirm Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus.- Lionel Andrades
FEBRUARY 17, 2021
If the French Bishops are
shown that the Council can be accepted and interpreted without their
irrationality, Vatican Council II would no more be an issue. It is Una Voce
which would be able to appeal to the French bishops to affirm Vatican Council
II
Statement of the FIUV on the Response of the French Bishops to the CDF
FOEDERATIO INTERNATIONALIS UNA VOCE:STATEMENT ON THE REPORT OF THE FRENCH BISHOPS’ CONFERENCE (CEF) ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM
The FIUV has become aware of a document, in the public domain, containing a summary of the responses made by French bishops to the questionnaire sent to them by the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, on the subject of the implementation of the Apostolic Letter Summorum Pontificum. Although this document does not appear to have been intended for publication, its authenticity has not been denied, and a reaction to it seems necessary.
We note first that the document adopts a consistently hostile tone towards the ancient Latin liturgical tradition, to the priests who celebrate it, and to the faithful who attend it. This has understandably caused considerable hurt among French Catholics attached to this tradition. The document does not speak, on behalf of the bishops of France, about these sons and daughters of the Church with the words of a shepherd and father. In the words of Una Voce France, we do not find
… the slightest trace of empathy, cordiality, or ‘heart’ in them as they say in one place. Instead, we find contempt, at best indifference, towards those narrow-minded beings, without theology, without charity, that are the faithful to the ancient Latin Mass. A Mass that so many generations followed, and from which they nourished their faith ... which is ours today.[1]
Lionel: When Vatican Council II interpreted without a false premise is referred to by Una Voce then the French Bishops will realize that their theology is suddenly 'pre Vatican Council II' like those of the traditionalists. Una Voce needs to discuss this issue.
________________________
Nevertheless, the impression of hostility made by this document masks many positive features of the reception of Summorum Pontificum in France. The document acknowledges these phenomena with a singular lack of grace, or without noting even that they are good things. It refers, for example, to ‘large families’ requesting the EF; to ‘weak’ young people seeking out celebrations and finding in them a supportive spiritual environment; of seminarians learning to celebrate the EF in their own time, without the assistance of their formators; and to this younger, more traditionally-inclined generation of priests, celebrating the Ordinary Form with greater reverence and fidelity.
In this context the words of Fr Claude Barthe, Chaplain of the Summorum Pontificum Pilgrimage in Rome, are apposite:
One is left speechless by the conclusion that the EF is not missionary when we know that the parish Masses are always more deserted, while traditional Masses are full of young people and a not insignificant number of converts.[2]
We should like to observe that the authority of the bishops of France, like bishops all over the world, remains unimpaired by Summorum Pontificum, as Pope Benedict XVI emphasised in the Letter to Bishops which accompanied the Apostolic Letter:
Nothing is taken away, then, from the authority of the Bishop, whose role remains that of being watchful that all is done in peace and serenity.
Lionel: The French bishops have mentioned Vatican Council II. They want the traditionalists to interpret the Council like them and to accept the Council.
This issue has to be addressed.
If the French Bishops are shown that the Council can be accepted and interpreted without their irrationality, Vatican Council II would no more be an issue. It is Una Voce which would be able to appeal to the French bishops to affirm Vatican Council II.
_________________
Indeed, while this document of the CEF makes harsh criticisms of those priests who celebrate the EF, it was the bishops themselves, or their immediate predecessors, who in nearly all cases invited them into their dioceses, and presumably did so for good reasons.
Lionel: The bishops criticize the priests who offer the EF since they believe Vatican Council II with the false premise is a new revelation in the Catholic Church and it has made Tradition officially obsolete. The French bishops have to be shown how it is necessary for the Church, and the French bishops, to officially interpret Vatican Council II without the false premise. Since this is the only ethical and rational possibility which exists.
_________________
In a different way, the document laments the small number of diocesan clergy who celebrate the EF, in relation to the number of priests of the Traditional Institutes, while it is entirely in the power of the bishops to ensure that their seminarians are proficient in Latin, and to encourage them to learn how to celebrate the EF.
Taking the document as a whole, despite its many harsh, and sometimes inaccurate and unjust, statements, it reflects the fact that the ancient Mass is now an indisputably permanent feature of the French Church. To quote Fr Barth again:
it is clear that the public existence of the traditional Mass is now a given [un fait acquis] in France. It is a given that many bishops would like to confine or reduce, but that they no longer dispute.
The FIUV would like to appeal to the bishops of France, and to those functionaries of the CEF responsible for this document, to consider the consequences of even the appearance of an unwelcoming attitude towards Catholics who feel the attraction of the ancient liturgical tradition. As we have already quoted Pope Benedict, it is the munus of the bishops to ensure that the Apostolic Letter is implemented with ‘peace and serenity’. Peace and serenity are maximised by an open and welcoming attitude, and this is also what is necessary to building up the trust and mutual understanding which this document claims are currently lacking. If traditional Catholics are feeling marginalised, it is in large part because of the contrary attitude, displayed by this document, which appears to see them as a nuisance rather than as sons and daughters of their bishops.
Lionel: They are being marginalised since they still do not know that Vatican Council II can be interpreted without a false premise and the whole Church comes back to Tradition, including the French Bishops. Una Voce is not telling them about it.
How can the traditionalists be marginalised if the Council is Traditional and supports the strict interpretation of EENS, the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors ? This would be a problem for the liberal French bishops who do not want to change and adapt and not the traditionalists.- Lionel Andrades
https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2021/02/statement-of-fiuv-on-response-of-french.html#more
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment