Archbishop
Carlo Vigano issued another politically correct statement on Vatican Council
II. He interpreted the Council like the Times of Israel, New York Times and
Associated Press and of course the Congregation
for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican. It was also the interpretation
of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. The Deep State-approved version.
If
the editors of his book, Brian McCall and Maike Hickson, used the TWO COLUMN
approach to view Vatican Council II, they would cease to be Lefebvrists like
Vigano.
If
the interpreted Vatican Council II with the RATIONAL PREMISE, RATIONAL
INFERENCE AND TRADITIONAL CONCLUSION, they would emerge Feeneyites on extra
ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS), the Athanasius Creed( Feeneyite-with no
exceptions) and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX( Feeneyite-with no known
exceptions).
But
they have to follow Archbishop Carlo Vigano's approach to Vatican Council
II which is also that of Cardinal Claudio Hummes when he offers Holy Mass in
Brazil, in the language of the Amazonians, and he will interpret the Council,
with the fake premise to reject the First Commandment,’thou shalt have no other
God beside me’.
This
will also be the approach of Ralph Martin, Robert Fastiggi at the Sacred Heart
Major seminary, Detroit, USA and Scott Hahn and Alan Schreck at the Theology
Department of the University of Steubenville, USA.They will be at Mass in
Engish without the past exclusivist ecclesiology, since Vatican Council II is
interpreted with the fake premise, creating a New Theology, which says outside
the Church there is salvation, even among those who do not know or do not
believe in Jesus Christ.
Scott
Hahn, Alan Schreck, Robert Fastiggi and Ralph Martin have decided not to
discuss this issue since they are obliged to teach Vatican Council II
interpreted with the fake reasoning.
It’s
a political interpretation of the Council which creates schism with the past
Magisterium and the Tridentine ecclesiology of the Catholic Church.
Cardinal
Hummes, like Vigano, is not telling the Brazilian Catholics, that there is true
worship in only the Catholic Church when Vatican Council II is interpeted
rationally.
At
the Amazon Synod he interpreted Vatican Council II with the fake premise and
concluded that there is no exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.He
criticized the SSPX for beleiving that outside
the Church there is no salvation, since, he said, that they do not
accept Vatican Council II. He was referring to Vatican Council II interpreted
with the fake premise.
The
SSPX also interprets the Council with the fake premise, like Cardinal Hummes, but
then rejects the non traditional conclusion. Archbishop Lefebvre did the same.
So
the FSSP, at Dijon, France, made of the same cloth will not affirm Vatican
Council II with the rational premise, inference and traditional conclusion and
tell Bishop Minnerath, that he is wrong in his writings to support a ‘theology
of religious pluralism’ . Since there is no known salvation outside the Church
according to Vatican Council II. There are no personally known non Catholics
saved outside the Catholic Church in 1965-2021.Practically also, we cannot meet
any such person.So how can the bishop propose a theology of religions when
there is no known salvation outside the Church to contradit Feeneyite EENS ?
The theology of religions which is the subject of some of his books was
condemned by Pope John Paul II ( Notification, CDF, Fr. Jacques Dupuis sj,
2001).
Archbishop Vigano and the SSPX supporters have never responded to so many reports on this blog over a long time, which refers to them. Well, what are they going to say? That they interpret Vatican Council II without the false premise, unlike Archbishop Lefebvre, Roberto dei Mattei and Michael Davies ?
The Times of Israel will object.-Lionel Andrades
No comments:
Post a Comment