Christopher White and Michael Sean Winters at the National Catholic Reporter are interpreting Vatican Council II with the false premise to avoid affirming the rigorous interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus,like the St. Benedict Center, New Hampshire, USA. -Lionel Andrades
JUNE 18, 2021
Fr.Georges de Laire, Judicial Vicar of the Diocese of Manchester, USA interprets Vatican Council II with the false premise, like Bishop Peter Libasci and the rest of the Curia.I have e-mailed him and the other members of the Curia. There is no denial from them.
Fr.Georges de Laire, Judicial Vicar of the Diocese of Manchester, USA interprets Vatican Council II with the false premise, like Bishop Peter Libasci and the rest of the Curia.I have e-mailed him and the other members of the Curia. There is no denial from them.
Officially, Fr. de Laire uses the false premise to interpret Magisterial documents , which is unethical and dishonest and he has issued a Decree of Prohibitions against the St. Benedict Center, New Hampshire on a doctrinal issue.He has also entered into litigation with Michael Voris and Church Militant TV. - Lionel Andrades
JUNE 18, 2021
The Archdiiocese of Detroit officially uses a fake premise to interpret Magisterial documents, including Vatican Council II, to create a false rupture with Tradition ( EENS etc) and their spokespersons would consider this official deception as being Catholic
The Archdiiocese of Detroit officially uses a fake premise to interpret Magisterial documents, including Vatican Council II, to create a false rupture with Tradition ( EENS etc) and their spokespersons would consider this official deception as being Catholic. -Lionel Andrades
JUNE 18, 2021
Christopher White and the Staff at the National Catholic Reporter know that Vatican Council II can be interpreted without the false premise. I have e-mailed them many times. Yet they continue to interpret the Council and extra ecclesiam nulla salus with the false premise, to create a false rupture with Tradition and so not be labelled 'extremists'
Christopher White and the Staff at the National Catholic Reporter know that Vatican Council II can be interpreted without the false premise. I have e-mailed them many times. Yet they continue to interpret the Council and extra ecclesiam nulla salus with the false premise, to create a false rupture with Tradition and so not be labelled 'extremists'. - Lionel Andrades
JUNE 17, 2021
Bishop Peter Libasci and Fr. Georges de Laire like the ecclesiastics at the CDF,Vatican are dishonest in public
It fell to de Laire as judicial vicar to reinforce a Vatican decree that the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary could not present themselves as Catholic. According to the lawsuit, this resulted in "several articles [at Church Militant] not only criticizing the Diocese's decision to issue the Decree, but defaming Father de Laire, personally."
https://www.ncronline.org/news/media/church-militant-founder-may-face-legal-reckoning-defamation_________________________
JUNE 11, 2021
Vatican Council II is dogmatic
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THE LIONEL ANDRADES INTERPRETATION OF VATICAN COUNCIL II
1.What's so special about the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II ?
It is the listing of the rational and irrational premise, inference and conclusion. It identifies two different premises with two different conclusions. So the rational premise produces a traditional conclusion and the Vatican Council II is in harmony with Tradition. It has a hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition even though Rahner, Congar, Rarzinger and Cushing were present at the Council in 1965.
Collegiality, ecumenism and religious liberty are no more an issue for the conservatives , when Vatican Council II is traditional.
Lumen Gentium 8, Lumen Gentium 14, Lumen Gentium 16 ecc. oin Vatican Council II refer to only physically invisible cases in 1965-2021.
12.Vatican Council II is dogmatic ?
Yes. Pope Paul VI and the liberals call Vatican Council II "pastoral" and not dogmatic. Since they do not want to affirm the rigorous interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).
Ad Gentes 7 (all need faith and baptism for salvation) supports the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) while the hypothetical cases mentioned in LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NS 2, GS 22 etc. cannot be objective exceptions to Ad Gentes 7 in 1965-2021. So there is nothing in the text of the Council that contradicts 16th century EENS or the Athanasius Creed or the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX on there being exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.
The Second Vatican Council affirms the dogma EENS with Ad Gentes 7 and Lumen Gentium 14 .While the Council does not contradict EENS or Ad Gentes 7 and Lumen Gentium 14, with LG 8, LG 16, UR 3, GS 22 etc. Since if someone was saved outside the Church, he would be known only to God. They are not part of our reality. They are invisible in 1965-2021.
When Pope Francis says that the Second Vatican Council is the Magisterium of the Church he must refer to a pro-EENS dogmatic Council with the hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition.
Without their false premise the Council is dogmatic. It supports the rigorous interpretation of EENS.This was EENS according to the missionaries and the Magisterium of the sixteenth century. LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NS 2, GS 22 etc., in the Second Vatican Council, if interpreted rationally, cannot be practical exceptions to EENS. Invisible cases in our reality cannot be objective exceptions to EENS. For example, to get on the bus you have to be present at the bus station. If you are not physically at the bus stop it is not possible to get on the bus.
Another example is, if there is an apple in a box of oranges, the apple is an exception since it is there in the box. If it was not there in that box it would not be an exception. Similarly LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3 etc.,refer only to hypothetical cases. We cannot meet or see anyone saved outside the Church, without faith and the baptism of water. So the Council is not referring to real people, known people in the present times.
Unknown and invisible cases of the baptism of desire (LG 14) and of being saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16) cannot be objective exceptions for EENS, the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX.There is no conflict.
So when Vatican Council II is interpreted rationally it is dogmatic. -Lionel Andrades
No comments:
Post a Comment