Maike Hickson writes,'So, here we are. We have a pope who changes the heretofore unchangeable. From all that we gather so far – and in addition to the most scandalous part about the “remarried” divorcees – there are far too many points in Amoris Laetitia that are against the continuous (i.e., irreformable) teaching of the Catholic Church to make it still worth while to try to preserve that document, much less to defend it as a whole. For example: the inversion of the ends of marriage, as described by Professor Roberto de Mattei; the undermining of the father as the head of the family; and, finally, the description of the Sacrament of Marriage as an ideal, and an unrealistic and therefore often destructive ideal...'What about our prelates? As John-Henry Westen discussed on 25 April, many high-ranking cardinals in Rome now prefer to stay silent..
http://www.onepeterfive.com/we-do-not-need-clarifications-rescind-the-document/
Maike Hickson however does not comment on the statement of Cardinal Raymond Burke and Prof. Joseph Shaw theologically and doctrinally supporting the document.
This is an important point she left out.
Even Steve Skojec is not sure of himself.He writes ,'To the average person — or the willing priest or bishop — it doesn’t matter that the exhortation didn’t change doctrine. If they’re given permission to ignore doctrine through “pastoral” justifications, they will.'.
Joseph Shaw says this is '..not as a case of a Pope teaching heresy'.There is no comment here from Maike Hickson.Nor does she comment on Shaw's statement saying 'Cardinal Burke lays great stress on interpreting Church documents in light of the whole tradition of the Church...'
The LMS Chairmans writes 'To reiterate what I've said a few times, Traditional Catholics, or at least those of us trying to engage with the hierarchy, magisterial documents, and the currently 'officially approved' theology, have become very used to this situation. '
Joseph Shaw confirms here what I have been saying for years and no one wants to comment on it while others do not understand what I am saying.Since they have been so conditioned into thinking that the magisterium cannot be wrong.Then they ask how can every body else be wrong and only you be correct.
I have been saying that there is an error in the officially approved theology, there is a factual error. Shaw refers to the 'officially approved theology' but he does discuss if there is an error or not. Never. Neither does Maike Hickson want to comment here on an otherwise good report.They are unaware of what the mainstream liberal theologians have accepted all these years i.e the error .
So accept for me ( said in all humiity) there is no one identifying the error in the official theology used by Cardinal Burke, Joseph Shaw and the two popes.
How can you ask the cardinals and bishops to protest against Amoris Laeititia when AL is based on knowing exceptions to traditional moral theology, as if this is humanly possible.The error of knowing exceptions to traditional salvation theology is also common.It is mainstream and generally accepted by traditionalists and sedevacantists.
So how can they protest against AL's theology when it is also their irrational theology and they are not aware of it?
So how can they protest against AL's theology when it is also their irrational theology and they are not aware of it?
Cardinal Burke has said there is nothing contrary to Catholic doctrine in AL and Shaw has said it represents the official and mainstream theology. This is what Shaw teaches at Oxford University. John Lamont and Thomas Pink who speak at traditionalist forums, also teach this new theology in which hypothetical, subjective and theoretical cases are considered objective and personally known.
-Lionel Andrades____________________________________________
'To the average person — or the willing priest or bishop — it doesn’t matter that the exhortation didn’t change doctrine. If they’re given permission to ignore doctrine through “pastoral” justifications, they will.-Steve Skojec
Lionel:
Amoris Laetitia is using the new moral theology of the Catechism of the Catholic Church which suggests that there are known exceptions to traditional moral theology( mortal sin) and salvation theology( extra ecclesiam nulla salus).
So Pope Francis, Pope Benedict and Cardinal Burke assume they are following the traditional moral teachings of the Catholic Church which you also accept in
the Catechism(1992).
the Catechism(1992).
So doctrine has been changed. Pope Benedict confirmed it last month in a statement given to Avvenire on extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
He said there were exceptions and so EENS was no more like in the 16th century. Now we have Amoris Laetitiae which says there are exceptions to
acouple living in mortal sin ( irregular situation).He indicates the concept of
mortal sin held in the 16th century is there no more.
He said there were exceptions and so EENS was no more like in the 16th century. Now we have Amoris Laetitiae which says there are exceptions to
acouple living in mortal sin ( irregular situation).He indicates the concept of
mortal sin held in the 16th century is there no more.
So why do you say there is no change in doctrine ?
Cardinal Raymond Burke ignores the new moral theology upon which Amoris Laetitia is based since he and Pope Benedict use the same irrational theology.
_________________________________________________________________
Extracts from the blog LMS Chairman :Skojec and Burke on the significance of Amoris Laetitia
...not as a case of a Pope teaching heresy...- Joseph Shaw
Cardinal Burke lays great stress on interpreting Church documents in light of the whole tradition of the Church...
To reiterate what I've said a few times, Traditional Catholics, or at least those of us trying to engage with the hierarchy, magisterial documents, and the currently 'officially approved' theology, have become very used to this situation.
We are deeply interested in setting out our case in way which is comprehensible to mainstream Catholic theologians and people in the Roman Curia...
They also include the precise theological and canonical assertions a document is and is not making, and the light shed on the issues by the Church's whole teaching and tradition.
...not as a case of a Pope teaching heresy...- Joseph Shaw
Lionel: The new theology is heretical since it uses an irrationality to reject the old theology.The new theology,with the irrationality is used to the interpret Vatican Council II as a break with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
It assumes there are known exceptions to the dogma EENS.It wrongly assumes hypothetical cases are known exceptions to the exclusivist ecclesiology in the Church.
The irrationality of known exceptions is also used to change the Church's moral teaching. So there is a new moral theology based upon known exceptions to the teaching on mortal sin etc.
Pope Francis has used this moral theology in Amoris Laetitia.This is heresy.
The same new theology is used by Joseph Shaw to teach theology at Oxford University.He uses Cushingism ( there are known exceptions to EENS) to interpret the dogma EENS. He also uses Cushingism to interpret Vatican Council II.
Feeneyism ( there are no known exceptions to EENS) is an option. Joseph Shaw could interpret Vatican Council II and EENS with Feeneyism but he does not do it. Since he will lose his mandatum to teach theology.The English bishops are Cushingites.
So he will teach theology with a lie, heresy and a break with doctrine associated with the Traditional Latin Mass.
____________________________________Cardinal Burke lays great stress on interpreting Church documents in light of the whole tradition of the Church...
Lionel: Cushingism is not part of the whole Tradition of the Church. Cardinal Burke interprets Vatican Council II and the dogma EENS with Cushingism.
He also uses the moral theology of the Catechism of the Catholic Church which suggests there are known exceptions to the traditional understanding of mortal sin etc.
Amoris Laetitia is based on the new moral theology, the heretical theology.
If we omit the irrationality, the theology of AL changes.
Ask youself whom does the pope know who is living in adultery and who will still go to Heaven ? No one.
So there are no known exceptions to the traditional teaching on mortal sin, concubinage, adultery etc.
_______________________________________To reiterate what I've said a few times, Traditional Catholics, or at least those of us trying to engage with the hierarchy, magisterial documents, and the currently 'officially approved' theology, have become very used to this situation.
Lionel: The currently 'officially approved' theology is Cushingism. It is heretical. It is irrational and non traditional. It is approved by Cardinal Burke.
_______________________________________
We are deeply interested in setting out our case in way which is comprehensible to mainstream Catholic theologians and people in the Roman Curia...
Lionel: FIUV and Joseph Shaw promote irrational Cushingism as a theology.This is the official theology.It is also the only interpretation of Vatican Council II and EENS understood by Catholic theologians.
________________________________________They also include the precise theological and canonical assertions a document is and is not making, and the light shed on the issues by the Church's whole teaching and tradition.
Lionel: The present document is based on liberal moral theology approved in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1992).
___________________________________________________________________________
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment