Sunday, June 16, 2013

No priest or supporter of the SSPX has...

 Until today no priest or supporter of the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) here, can point out to me any ambiguity in Vatican Council II with respect to other religions and ecumenism, unless he is using the Richard Cushing Error.(1)
 
I have  spoken with them on this issue (can we see the dead who could be exceptions to Tradition)  and asked them where is the confusion in Vatican Council II with respect to other religions and Christian communities.




They say that we cannot see the dead and there are no known exceptions to the defined dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.This is commonsense.
 
However they do not respond when I ask if there are any exceptions mentioned in Vatican Council to the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
 
If they did assume there were exceptions of course they would be making the Richard Cushing Error  They would be assuming there is ambiguity in Vatican Council II (Richard Cushing Confusion) and that  LG 16 ,LG 14,AG 7,LG 8 etc have dual statements. The Council is full of confusion, the Richard  Cushing Confusion(2).The Deadwood Statements (3) can be read clearly in Ad Gentes and Lumen Gentium.
 
I usually begin our conversation by asking them my Two Questions.
 
1.Do we personally know the dead saved in invincible ignorance or a good conscience (LG 16)? ( i.e can we personally know them, physically see them)
 
2.Since we do not know any of these cases there are no known exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ? (the dogma says all need to convert into the Church, all need to be visible members of the Church for salvation).
-Lionel Andrades

(1)
 Richard Cushing Error is assuming that we can physically see the dead now saved in Heaven and then further assuming that these cases visible to us and known personally to us, are known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus or Ad Gentes 7 (all need faith and baptism for salvation).
(2)
Richard Cushing Confusion is the general  interpretation of Vatican Council II with the Richard Cushing Error.It is the use of an irrelevant statement, to the main text or passage in a Council text,which causes ambiguity. It is mixing up a possibility with a known reality.This leads to confusion in Council texts with dual statements.
(3)
Deadwood Statements are used in Vatican Council II to cause the Richard Cushing Confusion. They mix up what is implicit, dejure and theoretical. with a statement referring to something, which is explicit, de facto and practical.Usually hypotehetical statements  are assumed to be known cases in the present times.

Richard Cushing Confusion is all over Vatican Council II : when identified the Council is as traditional as the SSPX
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2013/06/richard-cushing-confusion-is-all-over.html#links

 

 




 

Cardinal Walter Kaspar has drawn upon the Richard Cushing Confusion

Cardinal Walter Kaspar has drawn upon the Richard Cushing Confusion and traditionalists have accepted it hook,line and sinker.The liberal cardinal says Vatican Council II is ambigous. Yes it is, but  only, if one reads it with the Richard Cushing Confusion. This results in  dual meanings. He interprets the  Council with the Richard Cushing Error, which is,the dead who are saved are personally known and visible to us.

One has to be aware of this basic error of Cardinal Richard Cushing, the Archbishop of Boston.He helped insert sentences in  Vatican Council II which are irrelevant deadwood and can cause confusion.


The dead wood are statements or references, which are an irrelevancy to the main point  being made in a Council text.


For example Ad Gentes 7 says 'all'  need 'faith and  baptism' for salvation. This is the main point. The dead wood is ' those men cannot be saved, who though aware that God, through Jesus Christ founded the Church as something necessary, still do not wish to enter into it, or to persevere in it". This is meaningful at the dejure, in principle level. At the defacto ( in reality) level it is meaningless. It is relevant theoretically. Practically, personally, we do not know any such case.So it is irrelevant.


Similarly we do not know any one saved  'inculpably ignorant of the Gospel'(AG 7) In reality we do not know any such case. So it does not contradict  the main point. In reality every one needs faith and baptism for salvation.


Cardinal Kaspar interprets Vatican Councl II as having a dual meaning.In other words the dead-saved are physically visible (Richard Cushing Error) and so Ad Gentes 7 and Lumen Gentium 14 contradict itself.(Richard Cushing Confusion).Vatican Council II becomes confusing and ambigous.


So when a Catholic asks 'Why must the Gospel be annonced in the  whole world if salvation is also possible outside the Church?', this is  a question based on the Richard Cushing Error.The questioner assumes that there are known exceptions. These irrational cases, of the dead being saved and visible, are  'exceptions'  for the Gospel to be proclaimed to every one with no exception in the present times'


Cardinal Daneels, Cardinal Kurt Koch, Fr.Hans Kung, the late Fr.Karl Rahner S.J and others have interpreted the Council ambigously with the Richard Cushing Confusion.

The  Gospel must be announced in the the whole world since if  salvation is also possible outside the Church we do not know of any case in reality.
-Lionel Andrades

Richard Cushing Confusion is all over Vatican Council II : when identified the Council is as traditional as the SSPX

The Richard Cushing Confusion is all over Vatican Council II.Once the Cushing Error is identified Vatican Council II is as traditional as the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX).

The Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Richard Cushing who was active at Vatican Council II assumed wrongly that being saved with the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance were physically visible exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.This was how he interpreted the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.

So along with the liberal Jesuits they kept inserting lines in Vatican Council II like 'those men cannot be saved, who though aware that God, through Jesus Christ founded the Church as something necessary, still do not wish to enter into it, or to persevere in it' and 'God in ways known to Himself can lead those inculpably ignorant of the Gospel to find that faith without which it is impossible to please Him' and all must be converted to Him ' made known by the Church's preaching' (Ad Gentes 7).

For the Archbishop of Boston and the liberals at the Council this was all rational even though it was rational at the theoretical, in-principle level and not at the level of reality, where we can know and meet people in real life.

No one at the Council objected successfully and told the Archbishop and Jesuits that we physically cannot see or personally know any one 'saved, who though aware that God, through Jesus Christ founded the Church as something necessary, still do not wish to enter into it, or to persevere in it' and persons saved who were 'inculpably ignorant of the Gospel to find that faith without which it is impossible to please Him' and saved or condemned after being 'made known by the Church's preaching' (Ad Gentes 7). So these lines are irrelevant to every one needing 'faith and baptism' for salvation (AG 7).

Instead they allowed the Richard Cushing Confusion in Vatican Council II. This was caused by the Richard Cushing Error (assuming the dead-saved are visible). So for a person who does not discern, Vatican Council II comes across as ambigous, with a dual interpretation in Ad Gentes , Lumen Gentium etc.

Once the Cushing Error is identified we know there are no known exceptions to Ad Gentes 7 'all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church's preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door.'

Vatican Council II is traditional on other religions (all need faith and baptism) and on Christian communities and churches (they need Catholic Faith for salvation; the beliefs and Sacraments).

Identify the Richard Cushing Confusion caused by the Richard Cushing Error and Vatican Council II is traditional, rational and non ambigous.
-Lionel Andrades