Yves Congar and the progressive group at Vatican Council II did not know that the Council was being interpreted with a false premise.1 Without this premise the Council would still have the old ecclesiology, an ecumenism of return and the traditional exclusive salvation theology.
Even Cardinal Ottaviani, the Head of the Holy Office(CDF), interpreted extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) and the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and invincible ignorance (I.I) with the false premise. They referred to visible instead of visible people.
This error was repeated at Vatican Council II. Pope Paul VI then interpreted Vatican Council II with the false premise i.e LG 8, LG 16,GS 22 referred to personally known non Catholics saved outside the Church. This was irrational.
The mistake comes from the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 which was referenced at Vatican Council.
So the same progressive players whom Bishop Barron refersd to maintained the false interpretation of the Council. Even Cardinal Ratzinger as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith did not interpret the Council without the false premise. The result was a schism with the past popes on EENS, the past ecclesiology, ecumenism, mission etc.2
Pope John Paul II and Cardinal Ratzinger did not tell Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and the SSPX bishops that they could interpret the Council II without the false premise. Until today the SSPX bishops interpret the Council with the false premise. So they reject or reinterpret other magisterial documents, in a rupture with the past.
So Congar's 'spirit of Vatican Council II' is based upon false philosophy and theology which is not Catholic. It really is deception. Even today people say LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc are exceptions to the dogmaextra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) when they really should be saying that they are not exceptions.3
However the bottom line is that even though the progressivists whom Bishop Barron mention were there at the Council, Vatican Council II can be interpreted with the false premise or without it; with Cushingism or with Feeneyism and the conclusion is different.
So we are no more limited to Conger's understanding of the Council, which was irrational and heretical. It was a schism with the popes over the centuries.
It can be corrected easily now.-Lionel Andrades
1
Their false premise is:-
1. Invisible people are visible.
2.Unknown case of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance are personally known.
3.The unknown case of the catechumen who desired the baptism of water but dies before he received it and is saved, is a personally known person.
4.There is known salvation outside the Catholic Church for us human beings.
5.We can see people in Heaven saved without the baptism of water.
6.We can physically see non Catholics in Heaven and on earth who are saved without 'faith and baptism'(AG 7).
7.There are non Catholics who are dead- men visible and walking who are saved outside the Church.
8.There are known people in invincible ignorance through no fault of their own, who are saved.
9.There are some Anglicans and Protestants whom we know who are going to Heaven even though they are outside the Catholic Church.
10.There are some non Catholics whom we know, who are dead, and now are in Heaven, even though they were not Catholic.
2
So with the false premise there are objective exceptions to EENS, Athanasius Creed, Nicene Creed, Apostles Creed etc:-
So with the false premise there are objective exceptions to EENS, Athanasius Creed, Nicene Creed, Apostles Creed etc:-
1. The Athanasius Creed which says outside the Church there is no salvation is contradicted.
2. The Nicene Creed in which we say, 'I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins' over the centuries referred to only one known baptism, the baptism of water.The baptism of desire etc cannot be given to someone like the baptism of water.But now the understanding is ' I believe in three or more known baptisms for the forgiveness of sins ( desire,blood and ignorance) and they exclude the baptism of water in the Catholic Church'.
3. The Apostles Creed says ' we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Holy Catholic Church'. Over the centuries it was understood that the Holy Spirit guided the Catholic Church and taught that there was no salvation outside the Church.Now unknown cases of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance, and LG 8, UR 3, NA2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II, are assumd to be objective examples of salvation outside the Church.
4.In the past three Church Councils defined the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) in the extraordinary Magisterium .It was an 'infallible teaching' for Pope Pius X( Letter of the Holy Offie 1949).Now it is obsolete with their being alleged known salvation outside the Church.
5.Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church are interpreted with the false premise so they become a rupture with EENS( Feeneyite), the Syllabus of Errors, Athanasius Creed etc.
5.Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church are interpreted with the false premise so they become a rupture with EENS( Feeneyite), the Syllabus of Errors, Athanasius Creed etc.
6.With the false premise the Catechism of Pope Pius X contradict itself. It affirms the strict interpretation of EENS while invincible invincible ignorance is intepreted as referring to personally known non Catholics saved outside the Chuch.Invincible ignorance is not seen as a hypothetical case only.
7.Redemptoris Missio, Dominus Iesus, Ecclesia in Asia, Balamand Declaration etc were all written upholding the false premise. They did not support exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. So in a subtle way they contradicted EENS(Feeneyite), the Athanasius Creed etc. They did not support the past ecclesiology and an ecumenism of return.They are Christological without the traditional ecclesiocentric ecclesiology. It's Christ without the necessity of membership in the Catholic Church for salvation.8. Traditional mission based upon exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church is rejected. Since with the false premise, there is salvation outside the Church.
9.Inter faith marriages which are not Sacraments are common held.It is no more adultery. Since the non Catholic spouse could be saved outside the Church it is assumed. A posibility which could only be known to God is assumed to be a practical exception to EENS and a literally known case of salvation outside the Church in a personal case.
10. There is a new heretical ecclesiology at Holy Mass in all the rites and liturgies. The Latin Mass today does not have the same exclusivist ecclesiology of the Tridentine Rite Mass of the missionaries in the 16th century.
3
People usually say that LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc are exceptions to the dogmaextra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) when they really should be saying that they are not exceptions.
People have been conditioned to see LG 8 etc as exceptions.
They have been conditioned to see LG 8 etc as objective people, known and visible. But there are no such cases.
The conditioning has come from the Letter of the Holy Office 1949(LOHO). The liberal theologians assumed the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance (I.I) were exceptions to EENS when they really should have said that they are not exceptions to EENS.
People have been conditioned to see BOD, BOB and I.I as exceptions.
They have been conditioned to see BOD,BOB and I.I as objective people, known and visible, but there are no such cases.
______________________________
AUGUST 28, 2019
SCHISM FROM THE LEFT CREATED WITH A FALSE PREMISE
FROM THE RIGHT HAND BAR/ CLICK TO ACCESS
- Vatican Council II affirms an ecumenism of return only (1)
- Vatican Council II( Cushingism) (1)
- Vatican Council II( premise free) (3)
- Vatican Council II(Cushingite). (7)
- Vatican Council II(Feeneyite) (16)
- Vatican Council II(premise free) (2)
- Vatican Council II(premise-free) (6)
- Vatican Council II) (1)
- Vatican Council II/Feeneyite) (1)
- VATICAN COUNCIL SAYS (1)
- Vatican Council II supports the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus (1)
- Vatican Council II which supports extra ecclesiam nulla salus (1)
- Vatican Council II with BOD (1)
- Vatican Council II with the false premise (12)
- Vatican Council II-ReReading it Rationally (1)
- Vatican Council II Reinterpreted (3)
- Vatican Council II Revolution (1)
- Vatican Council II riddled with philosphical error : the two popes in principle support an objective error in the Council-text (4)
- VATICAN COUNCIL II SAYS (6)
- Vatican Council II says extra ecclesiam nulla salus (2)
- Vatican Council II says there are specific people in Hell. (1)
- Vatican Council II simple trick.Try it!.Most Catholics don't know about it (1)
- Vatican Council II supports extra ecclesiam nulla salus (3)
- Vatican Council II supports Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus (3)
- Vatican Council II supports Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus. (3)
- Vatican Council II is not how Christopher Ferrara and Roberto dei Mattei interpret it (3)
- Vatican Council II is traditional (3)
- Vatican Council II Magisterial (1)
- Vatican Council II not a development with EENS according to the missionaries of the 16th century (1)
- Vatican Council II is in harmony with Pope Boniface VIII (1)
- Vatican Council II is not a rupture with an ecumenism of return (1)
- Vatican Council II is not a rupture with the teachings on the Social Reign of Christ the King over all political legislation (1)
- Vatican Council II is not a rupture with Tradition (5)
- Vatican Council II is not ambigous (2)
- Vatican Council II is not an exception to the dogma extra ecclesia nulla salus(EENS) as Fr. Leonard Feeney understood it. (1)
- Vatican Council (Feeneyite) (1)
- Vatican Council has passages which support EENS and no passages which contradict EENS (1)
- Vatican Council II (684)
- Vatican Council II -Apologetics (1)
- Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) (4)
- Vatican Council II ( premise-free) (1)
- Vatican Council II (AG 7) (1)
- Vatican Council II (Cushingite) (8)
- Vatican Council II (Feeneyism) (1)
- Vatican Council II (Feeneyite) (2)
- Vatican Council II (Feeneyite) in harmony with EENS(Feeneyite) (3)
- Vatican Council II (Feeneyite) with the Cushingite passages pruned (3)
- Vatican Council II (Graphics) (1)
- Vatican Council II (premise-free) (9)
- Vatican Council II agrees with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (3)
- Vatican Council II and EENS (2)
- Vatican Council II and other magisterial documents do not contradict Tradition (1)
- Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church indicate all non Catholics and non Christians who have died are in Hell. : no denial from the Vatican (1)
- Vatican Council II but interpreted with two different theologies (2)
- Vatican Council II Cushingite (4)
- Vatican Council II does not conradict the Syllabus of Errors (2)
- Vatican Council II does not contradict extra ecclesiam nulla salus irrespective of your opinion on Fr.Leonard Feeney (2)
- Vatican Council II Feeneyite (8)
- Vatican Council II Feeneyite or Cushingite is the real issue (1)
- Vatican Council II has passages which support EENS and no passage which contradicts EENS (Graphics) (1)
- Vatican Council II has to be read carefully.Be aware of the error in the text which has come from 1949-Boston. (1)
- Vatican Council II in harmony with EENS( Feeneyite) (1)
- Vatican Council II is dogmatic and not just pastoral. Franciscan Friar (1)
- Vatican Council II is Feeneyite (13)
- Vatican Council II is Feeneyite ( Graphics) (2)
- Vatican Council II is Feeneyite for me. (2)
- ____________________________________
No comments:
Post a Comment