Twitter prohibits conversations: no
permission for me when I discuss Vatican Council II ( Rational).
Before I was censored by them, so much of my time, went in trying to tell people that there two interpretations of Vatican Council II, one is rational and the other is irrational, one is with the Rational Premise and the other is with the Irrational Premise. The New York Times on Twitter did not know this.
Liberal, conservative and sedevacantist
Catholics did not know this. I had to use my time to inform them.
I ask people if they interpret Vatican Council
II with the Fake Premise and they do not know what I am talking about. They all
use the False Premise. It is like a theological epidemic in the Church.
Everyone has the virus. The problem is there from rank and file Catholics to
the pope. Even non Catholics interpret Vatican Council II with the False Premise.
They think it is Catholic. They quote Church Documents with this error in reasoning.
Vatican Council II is only one such document.
So, for example, the baptism of desire
(LG 14) and being saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16), would be seen as
objective cases. They would be seen as known people in the present times. It
would be said that there are known non Catholics, in other religions saved
outside the Catholic Church. They are in Heaven without Catholic faith and the
baptism of water. But who are these people on earth in the present times? Where
are they? What are their names? There is no such case. This is the False
Premise which has spread through the Catholic Church, as did the Arian heresy in
the past.
So Catholics on Twitter, with philosophy and theology-academic degrees, make this mistake. They still wrongly project the baptism of desire(LG 14), as a practical exception for the Athanasius Creed. Being saved in invincible ignorance(LG 16) would be an objective exception, according to them, for the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX ( ecumenism of return to the Catholic Church).So obviously there had to be a rupture with the Catechism of Pope Pius X ( 24Q,27Q) for the secular and Catholic media. But this is an error in reasoning among the cardinals and bishops too on social media.
There was no answer from Cardinal Vince Nicols. He knew what I was saying. There was no response from Cardinal Sarah. None was really expected. Bishop Joseph Strickland and Archbishop Salvatore Cordlileone and the Jesuits said nothing.
How can invisible cases in 2022 be
visible and known exceptions for the teaching on all needing to be members of
the Catholic Church ( Ad Gentes 7, Lumen Gentium 14) to avoid Hell ( for
salvation) ? No one answered.
I had to point out the philosophical and objective mistake when LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II are misinterpreted.They are wrongly seen as objective and known cases of people saved outside the Catholic Church without faith and the baptism of water.It is because of this small error in observation that many have gone into sedevacantism.So they do not challenge the liberal heretics and schismatics on this point.
Reuters, Associated Press, La Stampa, Il Mondo ( France) and the strong German secular and Catholic media, on Twitter assume that LG 8, LG 14 , LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, in Vatican Council II, refer to visible people in 1965-2022. They are seen as being physically known people in real life, saved with imperfect communion with the Church (UR 3). Or, they are seen as visible non Catholics saved outside the Catholic Church where the Church subsists (LG 8), or where elements of sanctification and truth are found outside the Church (LG 8) etc.Visible-invisible, this is important. Only by confusing what is invisible as being visible they could create practical exceptions for extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX. This was the mistake of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr. Leonard Feeney.
They were confusing what is invisible as
being visible and I was avoiding this error and Twitter was preventing the
conversation.
So when LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2,
GS 22 etc become practical exceptions for the dogma EENS etc, the secular and
Catholic media then say that Vatican Council II is a break with Tradition.
The SSPX does not accept this version of
the Council. So the media call them a sect or schismatic. Vatican Council II is
also a break with Tradition (EENS etc) for the present popes and the College of
Cardinals.So the SSPX is not asked to interpret Vatican Council II,
rationally, and receive canonical recognition.
The media wrongly refers to all this objective confusion as being magisterial.
But when a journalist presents what is
invisible as being visible, his reasoning is false. The premise is false. There
are no such visible cases. If anyone was saved outside the Church it would
only be known to God.
Being saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance are ‘zero cases’ in our reality said the American apologist John Martignoni. They are not exceptions confirmed Bishop Thomas E. Gullickson, the former Nuncio to Switzerland. This is also the common sense view of Fr.Stefano Visintin OSB, the former Rector and Dean of Theology of the Benedictine, University of St. Anselm Rome.
So Nicole Winfield and Phillip Pullela were writing reports on Vatican Council II and they did not know that there were two interpretations of the Council, one rational and the other irrational, one with the Rational Premise and the other with the Irrational Premise. I had to use my free-time to inform them.
I interpret Vatican Council II rationally but the popes from Paul VI to Francis made an objective error.
They still make an objective error at Il Timone, Maike Hickson and Life Site News, Hilary White and Remnant News, the Wanderer and the Hungarian Embassy at the Vatican.Sedevantists at Bishop Donald Sanborn's seminary in the USA and Raymond Arroyo at EWTN World Over did not know this.Fr.Gerald Murray and Diana Montagna did not get into a conversation.
I am not against any religion or people. I am affirming the Catholic Faith in Rome according to Vatican Council II interpreted rationally. But I have to pass through the Anti Christ controls, placed on Jesus and his Church, with political names like hate, racism, anti-Semitism etc.1) The Council in Ad Gentes 7 says all need faith and baptism for salvation ( John 3:5, Mark 16:16) and 2) LG 8,LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II refer to only hypothetical cases, for me.This will be opposed by the New World Order-people.
Vatican Council II is now 'political hate', 'right wing extremism' for the left wing extremists (according to their measure). It is proselytism, anti Semitism etc. They will not see Catholic teachings on salvation and mission with their familiar ‘tolerance’. They demand ‘tolerance’ for pro-Satanic values. They now enforce them with laws and fines. So on Vatican Council II, Twitter, is not ‘open’, ‘inclusive’ and ‘broad minded’. I come up against Leftist-hate and evil. The familiar extremism. –Lionel Andrades
Posts
