Clicks127
Lionel L. Andrades
4

Pope Benedict permitted Fr. Jean Marie Gleize to lead in doctrinal talks since he was a liberal ?

Comment: Division: SSPX’s French District Argues Against Agreement
He(Fr.Gleize) is part of the problem.
He represented the SSPX in doctrinal talks with the Vatican which was approved by Cardinal Ratzinger.He was interpreting Vatican Council II and other documents with Cushingism and so was the Vatican side. He did not seem to have a clue to it.

____________________________

DOCTRINALLY: THE POPE'S MAN
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?
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.
Fr.Gleize and Pope Benedict were both liberals, knowing or unknowingly, I do not know.

Gleize had a golden moment to put things correct at the time of the doctrinal talks during the pontificate of Pope Benedict.

DOCTRINAL ANNOUNCEMENT NEEDED FROM THE SSPX
He could have called a press conference and announced :
1.Vatican Council II can be interpreted with Cushingism or Feeneyism and the Vatican Curia is using irrational Cushingism and so the conclusion is a rupture with Tradition.This is unacceptable.Rome must come back to the Faith.,
2.The SSPX chooses to interpret Vatican Council II with Feeneyism and so there is no 'development' with reference to the dogma EENS as it was known to the missionaries in the 16th century.
3.The CDF/Ecclesia Dei is interpreting all the Catechisms with irrational Cushingism and this is unacceptable.
4.The SSPX chooses to interpret the Catechism of the Council of Trent, Catechism of Pope Pius X, Baltimore Catechism and the Cathechism of the Catholic Church with rational Feeneyite philosophy and theology.
5.The references to invincible ignorance and the catechumen who dies before he received the baptism of water which he sought and is yet saved, refers to physically invisible cases, hypothetical cases, people not personally known.So there is nothing in Mystici Corporis , Quanta Cura etc to contradict the 'rigorist interpretation' of the dogma EENS.
6.There is no doctrinal change in the pre and post Vatican Council II ecclesiology which is in harmony with the interpretation of the dogma EENS according to the missionaries in the 16th century. This must be accepted by all Catholics in including the CDF/Ecclesia Dei.There is continuity with EENS(Feeneyite), Vatican Council II( Feeneyite), Catechisms interpreted with Feeneyism.
-Lionel Andrades

June 24, 2017


Official statement from SSPX awaited : Fr.Gleize and other theologians have got it wrong
eucharistandmission.blogspot.ro/…/frjean-marie-gl…
Lionel L. Andrades
proofs

SEPTEMBER 3, 2013

Fr.Jean Marie Gleize makes a doctrinal error in a book published by the SSPX
eucharistandmission.blogspot.ro/…/frjean-marie-gl…
Lionel L. Andrades
PROOFS:

SEPTEMBER 4, 2013

Gleize makes another mistake
eucharistandmission.blogspot.ro/…/gleize-makes-an…
One more comment from Lionel L. Andrades
Lionel L. Andrades
PROOFS:
Here is the latest.It is from the Remnant Newspaper. The same report was there on a French publication it is reported.
In his article for the Remant Newspaper he makes the following errors.


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 …More
PROOFS:
Here is the latest.It is from the Remnant Newspaper. The same report was there on a French publication it is reported.
In his article for the Remant Newspaper he makes the following errors.


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-Lionel Andrades

eucharistandmission.blogspot.ro/…/doctrinal-talks…
Rafał_Ovile
What evidence in writing proofs Fr. Gleize's liberalism?