At (8:13) of this video Taylor Marshall realizes that there are ambiguities in Vatican Council II. This is obvious.He also does not seem to know what is the precise cause of these ambiguities.Neither does Timothy Gordon, I assume.
They have not discovered the precise missing link, what causes the rupture with Tradition.They focus on the effects, the conclusions and inferences.
They do not know about the false premise. They can see the results of the false premise, the inference and conclusion which is a rupture with Tradition.
They cannot understand how a small premise can change the interpretation of the Council and how even if we interpret the Council today without the small premise there is a continuity with the past exclusivist ecclesiology and an ecumenism of return. Probably this would be unbelievable for them. After 50 years of interpreting Vatican Council II unknowingly with an false premise they would have to see through the invisble-visible mix up and then learn to re-interpret the Council without this artificial confusion.
Presently, with all humility, I would have to say that I am the only person who has discovered this false premise and has been interpreted the Council with the hermeneutic of continuity with the past and am writing about it.
Marshall and Gordon need to keep an open mind and explore what I am saying. They will see how simple it is and how there is no theological and philosophical basis for the theories of the Working Paper of the Amazon Synod.
-Lionel Andradeshttps://taylormarshall.com/2019/09/306-vatican-2-rupture-continuity-podcast.html#respond
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment