Sunday, June 26, 2016

For the record: Msgr. Gherardini: "Vatican II must be debated"


Via Fr. Z on FB I learned of this book, a sequel to Gherardini's earlier The Ecumenical Council Vatican II: A Debate to be Opened (2009, Italian). The new book is called Vatican Council II: A Debate That Has Not Taken Place.

Fr. Z. shared the following article: "Vatican II must be debated: Gherardini" [Advisory: Rules ##7-9]. It's hardly news, given the date, but another significant voice in an ongoing discussion highly pertinent to current developments.


5 comments:








Catholic Mission

said...

THE ECCLESIOLOGY OF THE CONSTITUTION ON THE CHURCH, VATICAN II, ‘LUMEN GENTIUM’ IS FEENEYITE : FOR CARDINAL RATZINGER AND THE INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION IT IS CUSHINGITE.
The Holy SeeInternational Theological Commission

(For Msgr.Gherardini too Vatican Council II was Cushingite!)

The International Theological Commission(ITC) and Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger have put out theological position papers on Lumen Gentium and Ecclesiology.1
It no where states that Lumen Gentium (14) affirms the strict interpretation of the dogma extra eccclesiam nulla salus ( Feeneyite) when LG 14 states all need faith and baptism, as does Ad Gentes 7.With Lumen Gentium 14( faith and baptism are necessary) and Ad Gentes 7 (all need faith and baptism for salvation),LG 14 and AG 7 are Feeneyite.
Instead the ITC and Cardinal Ratzinger mention theoretical, hypothetical descriptions of a new concept of Church. This of course is the official, magisterial concept of the Church,approved by the Jews Left, including the liberal rabbis associated with Israel.
Catholic religious and lay persons are not being allowed to affirm Lumen Gentium ( Feeneyite) and instead have to see Lumen Gentium as being Cushingite.Hypothetical cases must be assumed to be objectively seen and known in the present times.Then they must be projected as contradicting the Feeneyite interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).So Vatican Council II( Cushingite) becomes a rupture with EENS ( Feeneyite).Instead we have an EENS(Cushingite).Since it is assumed that the baptism of desire etc,excludes the baptism of water and it refers to an objectively known case, even though there cannot be an objectively known baptism of desire.
Bishops and priests here know that all this is not rational, it is an innovation in the Church but they say it is a ' development', it is 'a sensitive' subject and they are not going to proclaim the truth and say that the magisterium is wrong, they made an objective mistake.
If I do quote a priest speaking the truth , saying there are no known exceptions in Vatican Council II( Feenyite) to the dogma EENS( Feeneyite),he will be asked to retract or deny the statement.Since the official position of the Church, the Vatican Curia and the Rome Vicariate, is that there are known exceptions in Vatican Council II (Cushingite) to the dogma EENS( Feeneyite) and Vatican Council II(Cushingite) is in harmony with EENS( Cushingite) with the baptism of desire also Cushingite( not implicit but explicit, not hypothetical but a practical exceptions to EENS).
For me there are no exceptions mentioned in Vatican Council II( Feeneyite) to the dogma EENS( Feeneyite) and the baptism of desire ( implicit -Feeneyite) is not an exception to EENS( Feeneyite).The baptism of desire refers to a hypothetical case and so it is not explicit for us,it is an impersonal reference and not someone personally known saved as such.
The International Theological Commission and Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger have put out theological position papers on Lumen Gentium and Ecclesiology is irrational, non traditional and heretical.For them there are exceptions mentioned in Vatican Council II( Cushingite) to the dogma EENS( Cushingite) and the baptism of desire ( explicit -Cushingite) is an exception to EENS( Feeneyite).The baptism of desire does not refer to a hypothetical case and so it is explicit for Cardinal Ratzinger and the International Theological Commission.It refers to someone personally known saved as such.-Lionel Andrades

CONTINUED
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/06/the-ecclesiology-of-constitution-on.html





Anonymous

said...



I wonder if someone will try to turn off turn Gherardini's microphone.





Amateur Brain Surgeon

said...

DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION ON THE CHURCH

LUMEN GENTIUM
SOLEMNLY PROMULGATED BY HIS HOLINESS
POPE PAUL VI

ON NOVEMBER 21, 1964

22. Just as in the Gospel, the Lord so disposing, St. Peter and the other apostles constitute one apostolic college, so in a similar way the Roman Pontiff, the successor of Peter, and the bishops, the successors of the apostles, are joined together. Indeed, the very ancient practice whereby bishops duly established in all parts of the world were in communion with one another and with the Bishop of Rome in a bond of unity, charity and peace,(23*) and also the councils assembled together,(24*) in which more profound issues were settled in common, (25*) the opinion of the many having been prudently considered,(26*) both of these factors are already an indication of the collegiate character and aspect of the Episcopal order; and the ecumenical councils held in the course of centuries are also manifest proof of that same character. And it is intimated also in the practice, introduced in ancient times, of summoning several bishops to take part in the elevation of the newly elected to the ministry of the high priesthood. Hence, one is constituted a member of the Episcopal body in virtue of sacramental consecration and hierarchical communion with the head and members of the body.

But the college or body of bishops has no authority unless it is understood together with the Roman Pontiff, the successor of Peter as its head. The pope's power of primacy over all, both pastors and faithful, remains whole and intact. In virtue of his office, that is Vicar of Christ and pastor of the whole Church, the Roman Pontiff has full, supreme and universal power over the Church. And he is always free to exercise this power. The order of bishops, which succeeds to the college of apostles and gives this apostolic body continued existence, is also the subject of supreme and full power over the universal Church,

Back in the day, in the Peimonte area of Vermont where Amateur Brain Surgeon was born, the old timers would have said about the claim -well, that doesn't make a damn bit of sense..

How'n'hell can an Ecumenical Council identify two different subjects as both being Supreme?

It realistically can't for such a claim is contradictory as two subjects can not both be supreme and, as such, this novel doctrine violates the principle of Non-Contradiction *

Only one subject can be supreme, unless we are talking about Diana Ross and the Supremes

But, remember, Papolatrist, we are putatively required to religiously submit to this contradiction.

O, and don't expect he who occupies the Holy See to settle this contradiction





Pertinacious Papist

said...

LOL





Catholic Mission

said...

On Amateur Brain Surgeons blog there was this link, along with one of his blog posts.

THE FIRST PRINCIPLES
http://www.catholicapologetics.info/catholicteaching/philosophy/princip.htm

So I posted the following report on my blog based on his First Principles.

JUNE 23, 2016
IT IS A METAPHYSICAL LAW THAT WE CANNOT SEE OR KNOW PERSONS SAVED OR ABOUT TO BE SAVED WITH THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE, WITH OR WITHOUT THE BAPTISM OF WATER? http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/06/o-it-is-metaphysical-law-that-we-cannot.html

He removed it and did not comment.

I recently wrote this report on my blog based on my comment on his First Principles.

Ann Barnhardt is a Catholic even though she violates the Principle of Non Contradiction
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/06/ann-barnhardt-is-catholic-even-though.html

It is interesting how Ann and ABS refer to the Principle of Non Contradiction.
-Lionel Andrades