The Vatican needs to issue a statement
on the books written on Vatican Council II.Even secular and non Catholic sources recognise the mistake in all these books. The present books interpret the
Council as a break with Tradition when they view LG 8, 14, 15, 16. UR 3, NA 2,
GS 22 etc as being physically visible examples of salvation outside the
Catholic Church in 1965-2023.This is irrational. I interpret them as being only
hypothetical cases. For me they refer to invisible people in our human reality. If they exist they can only be known to God.There are no physically visible cases of someone saved with the baptism of desire etc in 2023.We cannot say that there were 20 cases of non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance last year.
For example, organizations like Catholic Answers, Catholics United for the Faith and the Jesuits have produced books, talks, on line articles and apologetics with Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally. They interpret LG 8, 14, 15, 16 etc are being visible exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.So they reject this dogma of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) etc.It did not mention any exceptions.
Trent Horn in this video can be seen interpreting Lumen Gentium 15 irrationally and then projecting exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, as affirmed by Brother Peter Dimond.
The Vatican allows these un-necessary
debates to continue as all these years, they did not correct the same mistake
in the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston. That Letter
took it for granted that invisible cases of the baptism of desire and being
saved in invincible ignorance were visible exceptions for Feeneyite EENS.
The Vatican websites have an error when
they interpret LG 8,14,15,16 etc as referring to physically visible non
Catholics saved outside the Catholic Church, without faith and the baptism of
water, in 1965-2023.
Jimmy Akins at Catholic Answers has written
books in which he has interpreted LG 8, 14, 15, 16 etc irrationally. In this way he projects the
Council as a rupture and not a continuity with the dogma EENS of the Council of
Florence (1442). Since the interpretation of Vatican Council II is related to
the Creeds Jimmy Akins version of the Nicene, Apostles and Athanasius Creed is as
heretical as that of the popes from Paul VI to Francis.
Jimmy Akins rejects the past
ecclesiocentrism of the Catholic Church only by re-interpreting the baptism of
desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance, with the
false premise, inference and non-traditional conclusion. In this way he rejects
Feeneyite EENS and is politically correct with the Left and the Vatican.
The Catholic Answers apologetics is
appreciated on many other subjects in which this error is not there. However
they interpret the salvation dogma with an objective error which can even be recognized
by secular and non Catholic sources.
On the internet there are reports of
Catholic Answers claiming that they have rebutted someone, while CA interprets
the Creeds heretically and re-interprets Vatican Council II irrationally and
does not comment upon this or deny it.
The Dicastery for the Doctrine of the
Faith, Vatican, is also interpreting Vatican Council II irrationally and
contributing to this confusion. The DDF/ CDF made a mistake in the 1949 Letter
to the Archbishop of Boston.The DDF must announce that new books on Vatican Council II must only interpret the Council rationally.
This mistake is there in many books of
the Angelus Press of the SSPX. Since even Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and the SSPX
bishops did not interpret Vatican Council II, rationally. They repeated the error of Rahner, Ratzinger, Congar, Balthazar, Bea, Ottaviani... -Lionel Andrades
ULY 6, 2020
Ignatius Press and Angelus Press books on Vatican Council II are interpeted with a false premise
JULY 5, 2020
We know that there is a hermeneutic of discontinuity with Vatican Council II and the pope is still trying to defend the Council interpreted with the false premise,inference and conclusion. He is not disclosing the secret for the discontinuity, the precise cause
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2020/07/we-all-know-that-there-is-hermeneutic.html
JULY 5, 2020
Archbishop Vigano can go back to the Catechism of Pope Pius X only when he avoids the common false premise
JULY 5, 2020
This is big news.The entire Church made a mistake in Vatican Council II and they can correct the error taking the Church back to the 1930's theology and doctrine on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.
JULY 4, 2020
Protecting the false premise : Catholic News Agency, Vigano, Schneider, Negri, Mattei and Weston, they do not want to mention it
JULY 1, 2020
Doctrinal confusion still remains at Ferrara.
FEBRUARY 11, 2020
Rome Life Forum 2020 speakers use an irrational premise, inference and conclusion to interpret the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1994) to create a rupture with Tradition ( EENS, Syllabus of Errors of Pius IX, Catechism of Pope Pius X etc).
FEBRUARY 9, 2020
IRRATIONAL PREMISE, INFERENCE AND CONCLUSION OF THE CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH (1994) (Graphics)
JULY 2, 2020
All the books on Vatican Council II in general are written with a false premise, inference and conclusion and so are the books by the Lefebvrists, Bishop Athanasius Schneider, Dr. Taylor Marshall, Chris Ferrara, the last Fr. Nicholas Gruner, Roberto dei Mattei, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.They all have an error.
_________________________________
FEBRUARY 12, 2020
50 years of Vatican Council II - drama is over : the Council, EENS, Creeds, Catechisms and BOD, BOB and I.I can be interpreted rationally
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment