Thursday, June 15, 2023
Argentine diocese to study weeping statue
The cardinals and bishops did not correct Pope Francis’ interpretation of Vatican Council II when he closed the seminarians in Argentina and Italy. They could not do so. Since they were making the same mistake on the Council as Pope Francis.
The cardinals and bishops did not
correct Pope Francis’ interpretation of Vatican Council II when he closed the
seminaries in Argentina and Italy. They could not do so. Since they were
making the same mistake on the Council as Pope Francis.
The cardinals and bishops are
interpreting Vatican Council II irrationally and not rationally. For me LG 8,
LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, refer to hypothetical cases – but, not for
them. For me LG 8 etc are not exceptions for EENS, but for them they are exceptions.They are
exceptions for EENS for them. For me the Council supports the strict
interpretation of EENS, for them, it does not.
For me there is no break with the past Magisterium on the Athanasius, Nicene and Apostles Creed-for them there is a rupture. For
me Vatican Council II has the hermeneutic of continuity with the Syllabus of
Errors – for then it does not have a continuity. The exceptions create the rupture.
NO CARDINAL SAID THAT POPE FRANCIS WAS IRRATIONAL.
Pope Francis issued Traditionis Custode,
Amoris Laetitia and the Abu Dhabi Declaration with LG 8, 14, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS
22 etc, being physically visible exceptions for the Athanasius Creed. There is
also a rupture with the Catechism of
Pope Pius X ( 24 Q,27 Q-other religions are not paths to salvation).This is
irrational. But no cardinal or bishop said this in public.
There was no correction of Pope Francis
from Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshall. Bishop Schneider said
there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire (LG 14) etc. Taylor Marshall
confirmed it. He said there are no explicit cases of St. Thomas Aquinas’
implicit baptism of desire. But neither of them would say that LG 8, LG 14, LG
16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, were only implicit cases and so Vatican Council II
has was not a rupture with Feeneyite EENS. Instead they chose to interpret Vatican
Council II as a break with the past ecclesiocentrism of the Church.Possibly
there was a threat for them. They could be accused of being Anti Semitic, rigid
etc.
In Rome priests who affirm the strict interpretation
of EENS are threatened with expulsion by the Rome Vicariate. It is the same for
priests under the USCCB bishops.
So when Pope Francis closed the
seminaries in Italy and Argentina and was interpreting Vatican Council II irrationally
and unethically, no cardinal or bishop spoke up.
CARDINAL BURKE CHOOSES THE SCHISMATIC INTERPRETATION OF VATICAN COUNCIL II
Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke also did not
comment. He has said that the SSPX is in schism for accepting
Vatican Council II. He means Vatican Council II (irrational). This is acceptable
for the ADL and the Jewish Left.They want the Council to be interpreted
irrationally. Then there is a break with EENS etc.
I interpret Vatican Council II
rationally and so there is no rupture with the Magisterium over the centuries
on EENS, the baptism of desire etc. There is no schism for me. But Cardinal
Raymond Burke cannot say the same. With Vatican Council II (irrational) there
is schism with, for example, the missionaries and Magisterium of 16th
century on EENS, at the Latin Mass.
It is Cardinal Burke who accepted the schismatic interpretation of Vatican Council II. This non traditional conclusion of Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally, is correctly rejected by the SSPX.Pope Francis now expects all the seminaries to interpret Vatican Council II schismatically. - Lionel Andrades
The liberal-traditionalist division has ended in the Catholic Church. The liberals can no more cite Vatican Council II. Since invisible cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, are not visible exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS). So the Council is no more a rupture with Tradition (Syllabus of Errors etc). We are back to the EENS of the missionaries of the 16th century.
The liberal-traditionalist division has
ended in the Catholic Church. The liberals can no more cite Vatican Council II.
Since invisible cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, are not
visible exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS). So the
Council is no more a rupture with Tradition (Syllabus of Errors etc). We are
back to the EENS of the missionaries of the 16th century.
SEMINARIES
When Pope Francis closed down the seminaries in Italy and Argentine he was interpreting Vatican Council II like the liberals. When he issued Traditionis Custode he was interpreting invisible cases of LG 8, 14, 16 etc being visible examples of salvation outside the Church, and are exceptions for the Athanasius Creed and EENS. Now we know. They are not exceptions. Vatican Council II does not contradict Feeneyite EENS.
The people know.
-Lionel Andrades
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
