Bishop Schneider expediently does not comment on the error in the Baltimore Catechism and its link to Vatican Council II http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/02/bishop-schneider-expediently-does-not.html
Bishop Athanasius Schneider who interprets Vatican Council II with an irrational premise and inference did not comment on the Vatican Document on Christian Jewish Dialogue 1 He was interviewed by Rorate Caeili. 2. He is politically correct with the Jewish Left and interprets Vatican Council II with the irrationality in the Baltimore Catechism.3He wants the SSPX to interpret Vatican Council II as he does, to get canonical status, which he has.
Here is the error in the Baltimore Catechism (653,654), responsible for his irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II. He will not comment upon it.
Q. 653. Is Baptism of desire or of blood sufficient to produce the effects of Baptism of water? A. Baptism of desire or of blood is sufficient to produce the effects of the Baptism of water, if it is impossible to receive the Baptism of water.
How did they know? Who saw or met someone saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church? They assume these are objective cases. They mix up what is invisible as being visible, hypothetical as being objectively seen.
Q.654.How do we know that the baptism of desire or of blood will save us when it is impossible to receive the baptism of water?
A. We know that baptism of desire or blood will save us when it is impossible to receive the baptism of water, from Holy Scripture which teaches that love of God and perfect contrition can secure the remission of sins; and also that Our Lord promises salvation to those who lay down their life for HIs sake or for his teaching.
Yes, theoretically, hypothetically, as a possibility known only to God.So why is it mentioned here with reference to all needing the baptism of water with no exceptions?
It is mentioned here since it is inferred that the baptism of desire refers to a known case.If there was no objectively known case there would be no exception to all needing the baptism of water for salvation.If there was no visible in the flesh case, the baptism of desire and blood ( without the baptism of water) could not be made relevant to all needing the baptism of water for salvation. So it was presumed that these were known cases even though they would be in Heaven.Then it was inferred that the baptism of desire was an exception( known) to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.So what was invisible was considered visible. This would be the new pattern of reasoning in the Church, the innovation. This irrational reasoning is used to interpret Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1992).
He does not realize that with these two points above from the Baltimore Catechism (653,654) the Church broke with Tradition, there was a rupture with the perennial magisterium.
There are so many of my reports on line on this issue but he will not comment upon this just as he would not comment on the Vatican theological document thrust on the Church by the Jewish Left.
He will not comment on my reports and agree that we cannot see or know any one in the present times saved with the baptism of desire and that there are no known cases of the baptism of desire having the same effect as the baptism of water and so there are no known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).If he did comment the Vatican Curia would explode.Similarly to protect his career and reputation he allows error to progress and does not comment on the Vatican Document on the Jews.
To retain his canonical status he does not say that the Baltimore Catechism is incorrect in the above two passages. He does not say that the Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston (1949) made an objective mistake when it assumed that being saved with the baptism of desire referred to explicit cases.So he and the magisterium continue to interpret Vatican Council II irrationally but politically correct with the Left.This is magisterial heresy, ecclesiastical heresy.
If he affirmed the truth about the faith, the Jewish Left would ask the Vatican to mete out the same treatment to him as Pope Benedict XVI gave out to Bishop Richard Williamson who committed no moral or faith sin.
So Bishop Schneider expediently does not comment on the error in the Baltimore Catechism and its link to Vatican Council II.
Here are excerpts from the interview of Bishop Athanasius Schneider with Rorate Caeili, with comments.
His Excellency Bishop Athansius Schneider :
.. those who don’t fully believe and profess the integrity of the Catholic faith frequently occupy strategic positions in the life of the Church, such as professors of theology, educators in seminaries, religious superiors, parish priests and even bishops and cardinals.
Lionel: Doctrinally neither does Bishop Schneider affirm the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus in agreement with Vatican Council II. ____________________
And these people with their defective faith profess themselves as being submitted to the Pope.
Lionel: It is an irrational and defective faith for him to assume there are known exceptions mentioned in Vatican Council II to the 'rigorist interpretation' of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. ___________________
A typical Catholic parish priest should know well the perennial sense of the Catholic faith, the perennial sense as well of the laws of the Catholic liturgy and, knowing this, he should have an interior sureness and firmness. He should always remember the Catholic principle of discernment: “Quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus”, i.e. “What has been always, everywhere and from all” believed and practiced. Lionel: In 'the perennial sense of the Catholic faith' before the Council of Trent no saint or pope alleged that the baptism of desire referred to known cases. The inference was made by liberal theologians, after the error in the Baltimore Catechism.They cited the error as a reference. ___________________________
The categories “always, everywhere, all” are not to be understood in an arithmetical, but in a moral sense. A concrete criterion for discernment is this: “Does this change in a doctrinal affirmation, in a pastoral or in a liturgical practice constitute a rupture with the centuries-old, or even with the millennial past? Lionel: The Baltimore Catechism error is an innovation.It has been accepted by Bishop Schneider. He uses the same irrational reasoning, mixing up what is invisible for being visible.With this reasoning he is politically correct in the interpretation of the Vatican Council II. ____________________________ And does this innovation really make the faith shine clearer and brighter? Lionel: He could comment on the innovation, even if it draws criticism from the Vatican.He expects the laity to affirm the Faith these days and make a sacrifice when he is not willing to do it. ____________________________
Those who have fear of the Priestly Society of St. Pius X ultimately have fear of the perennial Catholic truths and of its demands in the moral and the liturgical domain. Lionel: The bishop has a fear of the perennial Catholic truths himself. So he will not affirm the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus without the irrational premise and inference.Nor will he interpret Vatican Council II without the irrationality. If he did Vatican Council II would be in agrement with the old ecclesiology and he would be in trouble.'New Catholic' at Rorate Caeili, Dr.Joseph Shaw and other correspondents of Rorate Caeili all know this. ____________________________
However, to my knowledge, the healthier part corresponds to the major part of the SSPX and I consider their General Superior, His Excellency Monsignor Bernard Fellay, as an exemplarily and true Catholic bishop. There is some hope for a canonical recognition of the SPPX. Lionel: He means Bishop Fellay will have to interpret Vatican Council II with the irrationality and not without the irrationality, for canonical status and will probably do so. ___________________________
I wouldn’t affirm this in such a way. Indeed the very source of the current crisis in the Church, the crisis of marriage, of the family and of the morality in general is not the liturgical reform, but the defects in faith, the doctrinal relativism, from which flows the moral and liturgical relativism. Lionel: He is correct it is the doctrinal relativism. He does not realize the exact source is the Baltimore Catechism and then the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.Or if he does know it he does not want to make the issue public. ________________________ For, if I believe in a defective manner, I will live a defective moral life and I will worship in a defective, indifferent manner. Lionel: It would be 'defective' to deny the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, which is an infallible teaching, by citing a contradictory statement in a catechism (1891) and then an inter-office letter from one bishop to another (1949) which the liberal theologians placed in the Denzinger. ________________________ It is necessary first to restore the clearness and firmness of the doctrine of faith and of morals in all levels and, from there, start to improve the liturgy. Lionel: It could begin with him. ________________________
I think in a time in which a great part of the holders of the office of the Magisterium are negligent in their sacred duty, the Holy Spirit calls today, namely the faithful, to step into the breach and defend courageously with an authentic “sentire cum ecclesia” the Catholic faith. Lionel: Even he as a bishop could courageously defend the Faith on this issue.He could set an example for the laity. _______________________
The office of the successors of Peter does not consist in making known some new doctrine, but in guarding and faithfully expounding the deposit of faith transmitted by the apostles (cf. Constitutio dogmatica Pastor aeternus, cap. 4). Lionel: We have a new doctrine when a catechism is interpreted with an irrational premise and inference. We also have a new interpretation of Vatican Council II when LG 16, LG 8, UR 3 etc refer to visible and not invisible cases in the present times (2016). _______________________
Expressions like "development of doctrine" and "pastoral compassion" are in fact usually a pretext to change the teaching of Christ, and against its perennial sense and integrity, as the Apostles had transmitted it to the whole Church, and it was faithfully preserved through the Fathers of the Church, the dogmatic teachings of the Ecumenical Councils and of the Popes. Lionel:There could only be a development of doctrine, theologically, if something knew was added.The addition was made in the Baltimore Catechism.Bishop Athansius Schneider and the SSPX bishops accept the error. They do not identify the error and avoid it in the interpretation of Vatican Council II. _________________________ Ultimately, those clerics want another Church, and even another religion: A naturalistic religion, which is adapted to the spirit of the time. Such clerics are really wolves in sheep’s clothing, often flirting with the world. Not courageous shepherds – but rather cowardly rabbits. Lionel: Bishop Schneider could be that courageous shepherd and set an example for others. _______________________
The traditional and more than millennial-old rite of the Holy Mass, which not even the Council of Trent changed, because the Ordo Missae before and after that Council was almost identical, proclaims and powerfully evangelizes the Incarnation and the Epiphany of the ineffably saintly and immense God, who in the liturgy as “God with us,” as “Emmanuel,” becomes so little and so close to us. Lionel: The traditional Mass before and after the Council of Trent has been changed. Since ecclesiology has been changed. The theological change was made with the Baltimore Catechism. There was an official follow in the Boston Case (1949) and the superfluous additions were made in the text of Vatican Council II. ________________________ The traditional rite of the Mass is a highly artfully and, at the same time, a powerful proclamation of the Gospel, realizing the work of our salvation. Lionel: The present traditional Latin Mass acceptable to the Vatican Curia is with the new theology, the new ecclesiology. It says there are known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So there is known salvation outside the Church. So every one does not need to be a formal member of the Church for salvation.This is a big change.It means the Nicene Creed and the Athanasius Creed has been changed and the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1992) has to be interpreted with the irrationality which causes the change. ________________________
Perhaps such clerics have fear of the great power of the truth irradiating from the celebration of the traditional Mass. One can compare the traditional Mass with a lion: Let him free, and he will defend himself. Lionel: Before the Council of Trent the Traditional Latin Mass was offered with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. It was the rigorist interpretation of the dogma We could refer to it as the Feeneyite version. Today the Traditional Latin Mass and the Novus Ordo Mass is offered with a new version of the dogma. Call it the Cushingite version. _______________________
We have to pray that the Pope may soon consecrate explicitly Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, then She will win, as the Church prayed since the old times: “Rejoice O Virgin Mary, for thou alone have destroyed all heresies in the whole world” (Gaude, Maria Virgo, cunctas haereses sola interemisti in universo mundo). Lionel: At Fatima Our Lady said the dogma of the faith will be lost.The dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus has been lost. Bishop Schneider will not affirm the dogma in agreement with Vatican Council II since he assumes hypothetical cases of salvation mentioned in the Council text, refer to explicit, objectively seen cases in 2016-and if he does know that this is an error then for personal reasons, like other traditionalists, he is not going to make the issue public.-L.A