PSALM 91 (Gregorian chant)- Harpa Dei

Miracle of the sun : a few weeks back

Scroll down to the time 3:54

It depends upon how we approach Vatican Council II. There can be two interpretations. One is rational and the other is irrational. The conclusion of one is traditional and the other is nontraditional. Don Pietro Leone has chosen the common irrational approach

 

It depends upon how we approach Vatican Council II. There can be two interpretations. One is rational and the other is irrational. The conclusion of one is traditional and the other is nontraditional.

In this report 1 Don Leone has chosen the common irrational approach. It makes the Council a break with the dogma EENS, the past ecumenism of return and Tradition in general. In philosophy and theology there is an attack on Catholic Tradition and doctrines.This is the common superficial, and pontifical, way of reading the Council.

But again, because of the particular situation, this precise case, the Council can still be interpreted with a Rational Premise and it returns to Tradition in all aspects.

Since the tool, some of the Council Fathers (1965) had to use to change theology and also the doctrine, especially exclusive salvation in the Church, was the False Premise. The was with the handle of the False Premise that Rayner and Ratzinger could change theology. This was the handle used in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.It was a false approach. They projected  alleged practical exceptions for Feeneyite EENS.They projected practical and allegedly physically visible cases, of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance. Invisible cases were confused as being visible.

But if we interpret the baptism of desire(LG 14) and invincible ignorance(I.I) as being only – and always- hypothetical cases then they really are ike ‘null sets’ in Vatican Council II. 

The Council is still orthodox with invisible cases of LG 14 and LG 16 not being practical exceptions for AG 7. There suddenly are, we found, no practical exceptions mentioned in the Council for EENS and the Athanasius Creed. Other religions would not be paths to salvation. So the examples given by Don Leone, in this report would be, ‘zero cases’. The Council is still orthodox on other religions (AG 7 etc) and it has not mentioned any practical exceptions for Feeneyite EENS.

When Don Pietro Leone assumes unknown and invisible cases of being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire , in the present times, are objective and personally known exceptions for the dogma EENS and the rest of Tradition, he contradicts Principle of Non Contradiction. This is a misunderstanding of being.Someone saved with the baptism of desire cannot be visible on earth and in Heaven at the same time. No one saw a St. Emerentina in Heaven without the baptism of water. If any one is saved outside the Catholic Church it could only be known to God and so cannot be a pracical exception,for us humans, for the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church supported by Ad Gentes 7 ( all need faith and baptism for salvation) etc.

The Council and the Eclipse of God’ by Don Pietro Leone - Chapter 9 - part 2 -‘Being is Supernatural’ (regarding 25 instances of suppressed doctrine )

 

'Being is supernatural'

a)    Being is Supernatural

 

The silencing of the supernatural dimension of Being or, in other words, Naturalism (and the rationalism which accompanies it), is a feature of all the novel doctrines introduced by the Council, and of all the doctrines that it suppresses. (Only when the False Premies is choosen). We shall proceed to give no less than 25 instances of this process of silencing. (Only by confusing what is invisible as being visible and then accepting the non traditional conclusion ) The process consists either in treating the supernatural as natural or in elevating what is natural to some sort of pseudo-supernatural status, in other words, by:

 

i)   The Project of Naturalizing the Supernatural;

ii)  The Project of Supernaturalizing the Natural.

 

 

i) The Project of Naturalizing the Supernatural

 

This is seen in:

 

1. The Council’s reduction of Faith [1], and the other supernatural virtues, to the natural level;

2. Its reduction of Hope [2] to the emotion of hope: to a form of sentimental, Rousseauist optimism for the World and for the Church without reference to Hell, and to excessive trust in ‘men of good will’;

3.   Its reduction of Charity, that is supernatural love, to the emotion of love (- to Affekt for, or to sentimental love for, all men) particularly in the furtherance of Ecumenical or Indifferentist goals, or to carnal love within marriage;

4.   Its reduction of the Church to the natural level by silencing Church teaching on the Mystical Body of Christ and by eroding all Her supernatural properties: Her status as a hierarchy; Her being One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic; Her necessity for Salvation, Her superiority to the State;

5.   Its silencing of the supernatural final end of the Church [3];

6.     Its silencing of the supernatural final end of the State [4];

7.   Its allocation to the Church of a purely natural goal, thereby suggesting that the   Church belongs to the purely natural order [5];

8.      Its silencing of the supernatural dignity of man [6];

9.      Its secularization of the priesthood [7];

10.   Its desacralization of the consecrated life [8];

11. Its naturalization of baptism by placing it on the same level as ‘initiation’   ceremonies [9];

12.   Its devaluation of the Christological and sacramental dimensions of marriage [10];

13.   Its devaluation of the sacramental nature of the Holy Mass.

 

 

ii)   The Project of Supernaturalizing the Natural

 

This is seen in:

1. The indiscriminate attribution of ‘Truth’ and ‘Holiness’ to the non-Catholic Christian confessions [11];(when the False Premise)

2. The indiscriminate attribution of ‘Truth’ and ‘Holiness’ (sancta), ‘seeds of the word’, ‘light of the word’, and the recommendation of ‘reverence’ to the other religions [12];(This is true only when the False Premise is used to interpret LG 8,NA 2 etc)  

3.The conciliatory appeal to Hindu ‘asceticism and mysticism’;

4. The conciliatory appeal to the Buddhist search for ‘liberation and illumination’;

5. The conciliatory appeal to the Moslem belief in, and subjection to, the One God, as well as their moral life;

6. The conciliatory appeal to the Jews’ possession of the Old Testament and the alleged adequacy of the Old Covenant for salvation [13];(Many of the Council Fathers had accepted the error of the False Premise in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949. It was not corrected by the popes from Pius XII)

7.   The situation of man’s dignity tout court in his purely natural vocation to union   with God [14];

8.  The situation of man’s union with Christ in human nature elevated by the   Incarnation [15];

9.  The situation of man’s salvation in human nature redeemed by the Death and   Resurrection of Christ [16];

10.  The effective abolition of Original Sin [17];

11.  The attribution to the World of a purely supernatural goal, thereby insinuating that   the World belongs to the supernatural order [18];

12.  The elevation of marriage to the status of a ‘vocation’ [19]....

1

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2022/07/it-depends-upon-how-we-approach-vatican.html

WE HAVE TWO INTERPRETATIONS OF 

VATICAN COUNCIL II 

Lionel Andrades

Catholic lay man in Rome. Writer on the discovery of the two interpretations of Vatican Council II, one is rational and the other is irrational, one is interpreted with the false premise and the other without it. One is Magisterial and the other, the common one, is non Magisterial.How can the Holy Spirit make an objective mistake ? So it is human error and not the Magisterium.

 Vatican Council II is dogmatic and not only pastoral.

It is the same for the Creeds and Catechisms. There can be two interpretations.Catholics must choose the rational option.

Why should Catholics choose an irrational version which is heretical, nontraditional and schismatic, when a rational option is there which is traditional?

It is unethical to interpret Vatican Council II with the False and not Rational Premise.

Blog: Eucharist and Mission (eucharistandmission)

E-mail: lionelandrades10@gmail.com

https://twitter.com/LionelAndrades1/status/1522311748379942912/video/1    https://twitter.com/i/status/1522311748379942912

https://twitter.com/LionelAndrades1/status/1522311748379942912

Twitter : @LionelAndrades1

___________________