Fr.Anthony Cekada did not affirm Vatican Council II ( Rational) and correctly rejected Vatican Council II ( Irrational) which cannot be Magisterial.However he interpreted the baptism of desire(BOD) and invincible ignorance(I.I) with the False Premise and so created a false rupture with Tradition including Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).So with the False Premise in the interpretation of BOD and I.I he projected them as exceptions to the traditional strict interpretation of EENS.
The deceased priest rejected EENS with no exceptions and he did not know about a Vatican Council II( rational) which did not have exceptions for Feeneyite EENS. He made the same mistake with other Magisterial documents and would probably not be aware of it.
Bishop Donald Sanborn will not comment upon Vatican Council II with LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3 referring to only hypothetical cases always.Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre wrongly interpreted them as being exceptions to Tradition ( Syllabus of Errors, Athanasius Creed etc).-Lionel Andrades
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment