There is no comment from the SSPX on last Saturday's report Official statement from SSPX awaited : Fr. Gleize and other theologians have got it wrong. 1
There is no denial or official statement yet. This is like a bad dream for them. They do not want to talk about it. It is a crisis. They do not know how to handle it. How can they say that they were wrong all along about Vatican Council II (Cushingite) and there is a Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) without the false premise. So the popes from John XXIII to Paul VI were not heretics since Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) is not heretical.
They are facing the same crisis as the sedevacantists.Bishop Donald Sanborn in a crisis
During the doctrinal talks with the Vatican Fr. Gleize made an objective error and so he could not see the doctrinal mistake of the Vatican side.
In the article he has written on the Remnant Newspaper website he has made errors. He has been repeating these Cushingite errors since 2009 and refuses to address this issue.There is no denial or explaination from him. He is repeating a standard error of the traditionalists and sedevacantists who are line with the Masons and liberals on these points. I repeat the four points here.
1. The religious liberty of Dignitatis Humanae and the positive secularism of Gaudium et Spes are condemned by Quanta Cura of Pius IX.-Fr.Jean Marie Gleize
Lionel: False. DH is not a rupture with the dogma EENS( Feeneyite).So it is not a break with the past ecclesiocentrism.Upon the old ecclesiology was based the non separation of Church and State and the proclamation of the Social Reign of Christ the King over all political legislation.
Since there is known salvation outside the Church for Fr.Gleize, as there is for Pope Benedict,Dignitatis Humanae has to be a rupture with EENS (Feeneyite) and the past ecclesiology of the Church.He is a liberal on this issue, without knowing it.It is his irrational theology which creates new doctrine. It is approved by the magisterium.
With Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) Gaudium et Spess 22 are not exceptions to the dogma EENS and the old ecclesiology of the Church. He interprets Vatican Council II with Cushingism. So there is a rupture with Tradition.
_____________________________________
2.The new ecumenical ecclesiology of Lumen Gentium is condemned by Pius XII in Mystici Corporis and Humani Generis because of the absolutely false principle which would like to establish a real distinction between the Church of Christ and the Catholic Church.
Lionel: With Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) Lumen Gentium 16,14 and 8 does not contradict Mystici Corporis etc. So there is no change in the ecclesiology of the Church before and after Vatican Council II.
Since Fr.Gleize only knows of Vatican Council II( Cushingite)there is a rupture with Tradition.
He refers to a 'false principle' but he does not know what is the false principle specifically He knows that Vatican Council II( Cushingite) is rupture with the past, and one can agree with him.However he has to switch to Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) which supports the old doctrines of the Church.
___________________________________
3. The ecumenism of Unitatis Redintegratio is condemned by Pius XI inMortalium Animos.
Lionel: No.It is not condemned with Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite).UR 3 is hypothetical and so it is not an explicit exception, or relevant, to the dogma EENS.
Fr.Gleize needs to explore Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) and then his perspective will change.
__________________________________
4.The collegiality of Lumen Gentium, in that it denies the unicity of the subject of the Primacy, falls under the condemnation of Vatican I.
Lionel: This is his Cushingite interpretation. If there is unity of doctrine and theology with Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite), collegiality is not a problem.There will only be unity when Vatican Council II and EENS is interpreted without invisible cases confused as being visible. 1
Lionel: False. DH is not a rupture with the dogma EENS( Feeneyite).So it is not a break with the past ecclesiocentrism.Upon the old ecclesiology was based the non separation of Church and State and the proclamation of the Social Reign of Christ the King over all political legislation.
Since there is known salvation outside the Church for Fr.Gleize, as there is for Pope Benedict,Dignitatis Humanae has to be a rupture with EENS (Feeneyite) and the past ecclesiology of the Church.He is a liberal on this issue, without knowing it.It is his irrational theology which creates new doctrine. It is approved by the magisterium.
With Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) Gaudium et Spess 22 are not exceptions to the dogma EENS and the old ecclesiology of the Church. He interprets Vatican Council II with Cushingism. So there is a rupture with Tradition.
_____________________________________
2.The new ecumenical ecclesiology of Lumen Gentium is condemned by Pius XII in Mystici Corporis and Humani Generis because of the absolutely false principle which would like to establish a real distinction between the Church of Christ and the Catholic Church.
Lionel: With Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) Lumen Gentium 16,14 and 8 does not contradict Mystici Corporis etc. So there is no change in the ecclesiology of the Church before and after Vatican Council II.
Since Fr.Gleize only knows of Vatican Council II( Cushingite)there is a rupture with Tradition.
He refers to a 'false principle' but he does not know what is the false principle specifically He knows that Vatican Council II( Cushingite) is rupture with the past, and one can agree with him.However he has to switch to Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) which supports the old doctrines of the Church.
___________________________________
3. The ecumenism of Unitatis Redintegratio is condemned by Pius XI inMortalium Animos.
Lionel: No.It is not condemned with Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite).UR 3 is hypothetical and so it is not an explicit exception, or relevant, to the dogma EENS.
Fr.Gleize needs to explore Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) and then his perspective will change.
__________________________________
4.The collegiality of Lumen Gentium, in that it denies the unicity of the subject of the Primacy, falls under the condemnation of Vatican I.
Lionel: This is his Cushingite interpretation. If there is unity of doctrine and theology with Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite), collegiality is not a problem.There will only be unity when Vatican Council II and EENS is interpreted without invisible cases confused as being visible. 1
Like the liberal Fr.Charles Morerod, Fr.Jean Marie Gleize was interpreting Vatican Council II in particular and all magisterial documents in general with irrational Cushingism philosophy and theology.Instead of using Feeneyite philosophy and theology and exposing the errors of Bishop Morerod, doctrinally, he remained 'on the other side'.He was a liberal.
Did Pope Benedict XVI permit Fr. Jean Marie Gleize to lead the SSPX side in doctrinal talks with the Vatican since he knew that he was a liberal who held there was known salvation outside the Church and so interpreted Vatican Council II with irrational Cushingism instead of the traditional Feeneyism, which the pope also rejected ? He had accepted the New Theology of Rahner and Ratzinger as did Archbishop Lefebvre.
The SSPX-Vatican doctrinal talks were a failure. Both sides were interpreting Vatican Council II with Cushingism. The Vatican would accept the non traditional conclusion and the SSPX would reject the rupture with Tradition, in particular the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).
So the talks became a simple formality. Neither of the two sides could say precisely what was the specific change in doctrine, other than it was visible that Vatican Council II( Cushngiite) was a rupture with EENS, the Syllabus of Errors etc.
Fr.Jean Marie Gleize who teaches Ecclesiology at Econe and was the leader of the SSPX group of theologians was 'Pope Benedict's man'.The talks were not going to get any where.
Since for Gleize too EENS was no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century since there was a 'development' with Vatican Council II ( Cushingite).Neither would Pope Benedict or Fr. Gleize would say in March 2016 that Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) however would not be a development with the dogma EENS as it was known to the magisterium in the 16th century.The pope through this interview in Avvenire publically announced the heresy and no one from the SSPX raised an objection.
The SSPX-Vatican doctrinal talks were a failure. Both sides were interpreting Vatican Council II with Cushingism. The Vatican would accept the non traditional conclusion and the SSPX would reject the rupture with Tradition, in particular the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).
So the talks became a simple formality. Neither of the two sides could say precisely what was the specific change in doctrine, other than it was visible that Vatican Council II( Cushngiite) was a rupture with EENS, the Syllabus of Errors etc.
Fr.Jean Marie Gleize who teaches Ecclesiology at Econe and was the leader of the SSPX group of theologians was 'Pope Benedict's man'.The talks were not going to get any where.
Since for Gleize too EENS was no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century since there was a 'development' with Vatican Council II ( Cushingite).Neither would Pope Benedict or Fr. Gleize would say in March 2016 that Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) however would not be a development with the dogma EENS as it was known to the magisterium in the 16th century.The pope through this interview in Avvenire publically announced the heresy and no one from the SSPX raised an objection.
No one is commenting even now.
Bishop Fellay knows there is something wrong.
The dogma "Outside the Church there is no salvation has been changed surreptitiously by confused ideas ( Letter to Friends and Benefactors No. 87).Bishop Fellay does not seem aware of the difference between Feeneyism and Cushingism in the interpretation of magisterial documents including Vatican Council II.May be Fr. Jean Marie Gleize too does not understand it.At the Remnant they are unable to do discuss this and no comments are allowed.
-Lionel Andrades
1
Official statement from SSPX awaited : Fr.Gleize and other theologians have got it wrong
https://gloria.tv/article/W3KdZ2up7V7h4zpXBGgYxhUn2
JUNE 24, 2017
Official statement from SSPX awaited : Fr.Gleize and other theologians have got it wrong
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/06/frjean-marie-gleize-needs-to-change-his.html
Official statement from SSPX awaited : Fr.Gleize and other theologians have got it wrong
http://catholicforum.forumotion.com/t1301-official-statement-from-sspx-awaited-fr-gleize-and-other-theologians-have-got-it-wrong#9867
2.
https://gloria.tv/article/W3KdZ2up7V7h4zpXBGgYxhUn2
3.
https://gloria.tv/article/4yrerVnfxg7w3xma16RJ7vfAs
Pope Benedict permitted Fr. Jean Marie Gleize to lead in doctrinal talks since he was a liberal ?
https://gloria.tv/article/CM73JiCZQycP3AoZoi8NVakT6
4.
https://www.gloria.tv/article/pch2Vt2rBNPA3wTDnK3JrRW2u
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment