When Pope Benedict cites Vatican Council II authoritatively we could remind ourself that there are factual mistakes in the Council text.So we are not obliged to accept these mistakes of the Council Fathers.
MISTAKES IN THE TEXT
MISTAKES IN THE TEXT
1.It was a mistake to assume that the baptism of desire (BOD) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) were physically explicit. They are not.Vatican Council II infers this( AG 7, LG 14).
2.It was a mistake to assume hypothetical cases are not hypothetical.Vatican Council II makes this mistake.
These are some of the mistakes in the text of Vatican Council II.
It is a mistake in Vatican Council II to have omitted directly and specifically mentioning the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS), the Feeneyite interpretation.Since it was wrongly assumed that BOD and I.I are explicit and so are exceptions.
MISTAKES IN THE INTERPRETATION
MISTAKES IN THE INTERPRETATION
3.Aside from the mistakes in the text of Vatican Council II there are mistakes also in the interpretation of Vatican Council II.
It is a mistake in the interpretation of Vatican Council II to assume that the Syllabus of Errors is wrong or obsolete.1
The mistake is there because of the theology of Cushingism. So there emerge exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) and the old ecclesiology. This then would contradict the Syllabus of Errors.The conclusion would be Vatican Council II contradicts the Syllabus when the fault is there only with the theology.If Feeneyite EENS is not contradicted, the Syllabus is not contradicted.If Feeneyism is the theology then the Syllabus of Errors is not contradicted.
4.A mistake emerges in the interpretation of Vatican Council II, when Pope Benedict, does not affirm the old ecclesiology, the 'triumphalistic ecclesiology'.Since he does not state that Vatican Council II (AG 7, LG 14) states all need faith and baptism for salvation and 'the Church is the new people of God'(NA 4), Catholics are the new Chosen People, they are the Elect.Vatican Council II (AG 7, LG 14, NA 4) is saying outside the Church there is no salvation.It is affirming the 'triumphalistic ecclesiology', the old ecclesiology.This is the Vatican Council II that Pope Benedict does not seem aware of.
So with these objective and factual mistakes in the text of Vatican Council II and in its interpretation any Catholic could be tempted to reject Vatican Council II and fall back on the trusted Council of Trent.
I CHOOSE FEENEYITE THEOLOGY
I CHOOSE FEENEYITE THEOLOGY
I do not reject Vatican Council II since I interpret it completely with Feeneyism. The superflous reference to BOD and I.I for me , are references to what is implicit and invisible.So they cannot contradict EENS.
UR 3, NA 2, LG 8, LG 16 etc also refer to hypothetical cases for me.So they do not contradict the old ecclesiology based on Feeneyite EENS.(Note there is a Feeneyite EENS and a Cushingite EENS.The Cushingite EENS interprets the original EENS with BOD being explicit and being an exception.).
If this is not clear,it could still be asked what are the factual mistakes, why do you call them factual?
Why do I call them factual?
It is a fact of life that we do not know any one in the present times saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance, with or without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.There is no such case. There cannot be any such case for us human beings.So these persons do not and cannot exist for us in 2016 or in the past.It is a fact of life that they these persons are not objective.
So why are these irrelevant cases mentioned in Vatican Council II?
So why are these irrelevant cases mentioned in Vatican Council II?
They are mentioned in Vatican Council II since the Council Fathers considered them objective, explicit, existing in real life.This is a factual mistake.It is a fact of life that these cases are not objective.If someone is saved with the baptism of desire and without the baptism of water he would be in Heaven and we would not know about it.It cannot be a person physically visible.Also if someone on earth is to be saved without the baptism of water, no human being could know about it.
So this is the objective mistake in the text of Vatican Council II.
When it is known, when Catholics are aware of the factual error in Vatican Council II the religious communities, for example, can re-interpret the Council.
The Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) could continue to reject a Vatican Council II with the factual mistake due to the Cushingite theology.They can re-interpret and accept the Council with the Feeneyite theology.
They could ask the Vatican and especially Pope Benedict to do the same.
Similarly the Franciscans of the Immaculate or any of the thousands of religious communities, could announce that they accept Vatican Council II.They interpret it with the Feeneyite theology and reject the Cushingite influence. So they endorse Vatican Council II in harmony with the Syllabus of Errors and extra ecclesiam nulla salus, according to the 16th century missionaries.
-Lionel Andrades
1Article 1: The War Against Being: Science and The Philosophy of Deceit
The War Against Being
Science and the Philosophy of Deceit -Jamses Larson
__________________________________________
June 22, 2016
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment