Pope Paul VI was not Magisterial on Vatican Council II since he used the false premise instead of the rational option.Pope Francis can correct the error.
Pope Paul VI's choice was heretical, schismatic and non traditional.He made an objective error. It was a bad choice and he mislead the whole Church.
If he interpreted LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc without the false premise, they would only be hypothetical, speculative, theoretical and not personally known non Catholics.They would not be examples of salvation outside the Church in the present times.So Pope Paul VI would not interpret LG 8 etc as being practical exceptions to traditional exclusive salvation the Church.His premise would be rational, i.e physically invisible cases are just invisible.
But with the false premise, he mixed up what is invisible as being visible and made the Athanasius Creed( outside the Church no salvation) obsolete with alleged exceptions.The rejection of a Creed is first class heresy in the hierarchy of truths of Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict ( Ad Tuendem Fidem).
Catholics are not obliged to interpret Vatican Council II with the irrational premise, inference and non traditional conclusion.
At Vatican Council II(1965) Cushing, Ratzinger and Rahner also made an objective mistake when they approved the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr. Leonard Feeney(LOHO).
The LOHO brought in a new doctrine in the Church when it states that not every one needs to be a member of the Church, contradicting the Catechism of the Council of Trent etc.LOHO projected unknown cases of the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance as known and visible exceptions to Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus. This is the notorious New Theology.
LOHO was irrational but the error was overlooked by Pope Pius XII and Pope John XXIII.So Paul VI was not even Magisterial on EENS. He was projecting an EENS with exceptions.He approved the false premise in the interperetation of Vatican Council II,EENS, Athanasius Creed,Catechisms, Creeds( Apostles and Nicene).He began reading all Magisterial documents with the New Theology.So his interpretaton of Church documents and mine would be different. Pope Paul VI was a Cushingite( he used the irrational premise) and I am a Feeneyite( I avoid the false premise).
So now there are two Professions of Faith really recited at Holy Mass-that of the Cushingite priest and mine.
The Oath Against Modernism is meaningless since interpreting Magisterial documents with a false premise, makes them modernist.
Pope Francis needs to correct the error and announce tht Magisterial documents ( Creeds, Catechisms, Vatican Council II, EENS etc)must be interpreted with the rational premise, inference and conclusion.Pope Paul VI's interpretation of Vatican CouncilI was unethical and deceptive.It is not binding on Catholics.-Lionel Andrades
________________________________
BAPTISM OF DESIRE, BAPTISM OF BLOOD AND INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE
Fake premise
The Baptism of Desire, Baptism of Blood and Invincible Ignorance refer to physically visible cases in 1949-2021.
Fake inference
They are objective examples of salvation outside the Church.They are examples of known non Catholics saved without Catholic faith and the baptism of water.
Fake conclusion
So they contradict the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).The Athanasius Creed(outside the Church there is no salvation) and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX ( ecumenism of return) were made obsolete.
Pope Pius XII and the Holy Office(CDF) made an objective mistake.
BAPTISM OF DESIRE, BAPTISM OF BLOOD AND INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE
Rational Premise
The Baptism of Desire, Baptism of Blood and Invincible Ignorance refer to physically invisible cases in 1949-2021
They are only hypothetical and theoretical. They exist only in our mind and are not solid bodies at Newton's level of time, space and matter.
Rational Inference
They are not objective examples of salvation outside the Church for us human beings.They are not examples of known non Catholics saved without Catholic faith and the baptism of water.
Rational Conclusion
They do not contradict EENS as it was interpreted by the Jesuits in the Middle Ages.They do not contradict the strict interpretation of EENS of St. Thomas Aquinas( saved in invincible ignorance is invisible), St. Augustine and Fr. Leonard Feeney of Boston.
The Letter of the Holy Office(Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) 1949 made an objective mistake.
__________
VATICAN COUNCIL II
Fake premise
Unitatis Redintigratio 3, Lumen Gentium 14(Baptism of Desire), Lumen Gentium 16 (Invincible ignorance) etc in Vatican Council II refer to physically visible cases in 1965-2021.
Fake inference
They are objective examples of salvation outside the Church.
Fake conclusion
Vatican Council II contradicts the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).The Athanasius Creed(outside the Church there is no salvation) and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX ( ecumenism of return) were made obsolete.
Pope Paul VI and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican, made an objective error.
VATICAN COUNCIL II
Rational Premise
Unitatis Redintigratio 3, Lumen Gentium 14 and Lumen Gentium 16 in Vatican Council II refer to physically invisible cases in 1965-2021.They are only hypothetical and theoretical. They exist only in our mind and are not solid bodies at Newton's level of time, space and matter.
Rational Inference
They are not objective examples of salvation outside the Church for us human beings.
Rational Conclusion
Vatican Council II does not contradict EENS as it was interpreted by the Jesuits in the Middle Ages.It does not contradict the strict interpretation of EENS of St. Thomas Aquinas( saved in invincible ignorance is invisible), St. Augustine and Fr. Leonard Feeney of Boston.
The Letter of the Holy Office(Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) 1949 made an objective mistake.-L.A
Lionel Andrades,
Promoter of Vatican Council II interpreted without the false premise,
Catholic lay man in Rome,
Writer on the two interpretations of Vatican Council II, the Creeds, Catechisms and extra ecclesiam nulla salus.One is rational and the other irrational, one has the false premise and the other is without it,
blog: Eucharist and Mission
____________________________________
MAY 20, 2021
Pope Paul VI also used the false premise to interpret Vatican Council II and so is not Magisterial on the Council. : Massimo Faggioli still interprets Vatican Council II with a fake premise.This is unethical
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/05/pope-paul-vi-also-used-false-premise-to.html
When Pope Francis says that every one needs to accept Vatican Council II, it can not be with his interpretation which is non Magisterial with a fake premise.The only rational interpretation of the Council is the LA interpretation
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/05/when-pope-francis-says-that-every-one.html
Posts
