Sunday, June 14, 2015

The issue is identifying the Marchetti objective error.Even Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Michael Davis and others were not aware of it.



Patrick Archbald:
Any fair-minded person must admit that the Society’s positions on the topics of ecumenism, religious liberty, and collegiality at any time prior to 1960 were completely humdrum and uncontroversial restatements of obvious Catholic teaching.
Lionel:
False.
Archbishop Lefebvre like the other traditionalists accepted the irrationality of the Marchetti Letter(1949). The traditionalists were not aware that the same irrational premise and inference was used to interpret Vatican Council II.
Without the Marchetti mistake Vatican Council II is Feeneyite.
Patrick Archbold must identify the Marchetti error. Then ask himself if it is being used in Vatican Council II. Then  further ask himself if it can be avoided in the interpretation of Vatican Council II. When it is avoided is Vatican Council II a break with the rigorist interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus? And if there are no exceptions to the traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, then would not the Council's teachings on ecumenism and  religious liberty still be the same as before 1949 ?
Would it also mean that Patrick Archbald is using Marchetti's inference in interpretating Vatican Council II, so the Council emerges as a break with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus?
He has to think this through.
_________________________


 Is it possible a humdrum and uncontroversial statement of immutable teaching in 1960 is now controversial and even heretical in 1970 or 2015?
Lionel:
Vatican Council II emerges heretical since a false premise is used in the interpretation. The result is a break with Tradition. It is the premise which decides the interpretation. Patrick Archbald has  only to check it out for himself.
__________________________

 How can we promote a hermeneutic of continuity on the one hand and on the other say that a formerly fine presentation of Catholic teaching (within living memory of many) should now be forbidden and considered harmful or even heretical?
Lionel:
This can be done by identifying the false premise and avoiding it. It is as simple as this.For a moment put aside all that you have read about Vatican Council II. Think is it possible that there can be just one simple fact which decides if the Council is break or continuity with Tradition. This could be difficult because of all the 'programming' on this issue since the 1940's.
___________________________

It seems to me that you cannot have it both ways. 
Lionel:
 You can!!
__________________________

You cannot truly accept a hermeneutic of continuity and consider such views as harmful or heretical.
Lionel:
With a hermeneutic of continuity LG 16, LG 8, NA 2, UR 3 etc refer to invisible for us cases, objectively not seen in the present times.
With a hermeneutic of discontinuity LG 16 etc refer to visible for us cases, objectively seen on earth in the present times even though they are Heaven.This was Cardinal Francesco Marchetti Selvaggiani's original mistake in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949. The error was carried over into Vatican Council ( which can be interpreted both ways, rationally and irrationally) and then the Catechism of the Catholic Church ( again which can be interpreted rationally or irrationally).
____________________________

 It also suggests that the doctrinal problems that currently prevent canonical recognition are not entirely on the side of the society.
Lionel:
Without Marchetti's Mistake Vatican Council II is traditional. Doctrinally Vatican Council II supports the Society of St.Pius X(SSPX).Vatican Council II without the irrational premise, I repeat, doctrinally supports the SSPX.
Without Marchetti's Mistake Vatican Council II opposes the Vatican Curia, and the contemporary magisterium. 
___________________________

 Clearly, the Church needs to work through some issues herself.
Lionel:
Patrick Archbald needs to idenfify the Marchetti Mistake, which is a precise mistake.Then he can suggest that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith comment on it.
___________________________

None of this minimizes the seriousness of the canonical situation of the Society or seeks to justify every statement or action of the SSPX. Yet, I think it makes clear that truth is not served by referring to the SSPX as heretical and thus obviously in schism, for to do so is to embrace a hermeneutic of rupture.
Lionel:
This is not the issue.
The issue is identifying the Marchetti objective error.Even Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Michael Davis and others were not aware of it.
-Lionel Andrades

http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/1783-the-sspx-and-the-hermeneutic-of-continuity

No comments: