eucharistandmission: Jul 19, 2022

Tuesday, July 19, 2022

Reports do not say that the Judicial Vicar in New Hampshire would be affirming Feeneyite EENS without the False Premise which he uses to interpret Vatican Council II and so escapes the Decree of Prohibitions he places upon Catholics

REPORTS DO NOT SAY THAT THE JUDICIAL VICAR IN NEW HAMPSHIRE WOULD BE AFFIRMING FEENEYITE EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS (EENS) WITHOUT THE FALSE PREMISE HE USES TO INTERPRET VATICAN COUNCIL II : ESCAPES DECREE OF PROHIBITIONS.

Mark Hayward, in The New Hampshire Union Leader, Manchester, USA has a report (June 2022)1 in which he calls the St. Benedict Center, Richmond, New Hampshire, ‘ a sect’. The report does not state that the SBC affirms all the teachings of the Church.It interprets Vatican Council II with a Rational Premise.So Vatican Council II (rational) is in harmony with the dogma extra ecclesiamnullasalus (EENS).It is Archbishop Augustine Di Noia, Assistant Secretary, CDF and Fr. Georges de Laire Judicial Vicar of the Diocese of Manchester,NH, who choose the False Premise.In this way they avoid being called Feeneyite.This is unethical. It is dishonest.

If Fr. De Lairehad chosen the Rational Premise.to interpret Vatican Council II,the Decree of Prohibitions, which he issued, against Brother Andre Marie MICM, would also apply to him.

The Catholic News Agency (CNA) also had a report titled Vatican upholds prohibitions placed on Feeneyite group ( Feb.4,2021).The CAN report did not state that Fr.Georges de Laire and the CDF do not use a Rational Premise to interpret Vatican Council II, as does Brother Andre Marie MICM, Prior of the St. Benedict Center, New Hampshire.

Also Christopher White in the National Catholic Reporter (NCR) report, Church Militant Founder may face legal reckoning for defamation (April 30,2021) does not state that Fr. Georges de Laire and theCDF ecclesiastics did not use the Rational Premise to interpret Vatican Council II as does Brother Andre Marie MICM.

The report also did not state that if all the Catholic religious communities in New Hampshire would interpret Vatican Council II with the Rational Premise they would be affirming EENS like Brother Andre Marie. Since there would not be any practical exception for EENS mentioned in the Council-text. LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, GS 22, NA 22 etc. in Vatican Council II, would be only theoretical and speculative cases, when interpreted rationally. So they would not contradict Ad Gentes 7 which says all need faith and baptism for salvation (invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire being hypothetical only).

Without the False Premise in the interpretation of Vatican Council II, Fr. Georges de Laire would be interpreting EENS like the SBC.Laire and Di Noia placed prohibitions, against the religious community in New Hampshire for saying in Heaven there are only Catholics (Ad Gentes 7, CCC 846 etc).

So the CDF and Fr.George de Laire interpret Vatican Council II and EENS with an Irrational Premise and have placed restrictions on the St. Benedict Center, NH for interpreting EENS and VC II with the Rational Premise- and avoid restrictions on the Curia in New Hampshire.

I repeat that in the NCR report by Christopher White it was not mentioned that without the False Premise in the interpretation of Vatican Council II, Fr. Georges de Laire would be interpreting EENS like the SBC in NH.

Similarly in the interview given by Fr.Georges de Laire to Michael Warren Davis for the Catholic Herald, U.K, Laire did not say ( or know) that without the False Premise he would be affirming Feeneyite EENS like the St. Benedict Center, Richmond, NH. This point was not mentioned by the Catholic Herald U.K.

The use of the Fake Premise to interpret the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance is unethical. It was an objective mistake in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston. It was referenced in Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

Catholics today can interpret Vatican Council II not like the political Left but the past Magisterium which only used the Rational Premise.

For years Reuters, Associated Press, Crux etc have been churning out Fake News on Vatican Council II. They have been interpreting the Council with an Irrational and not Rational Premise for political-Left reasons and then refer to ‘the reforms’ and ‘revolution’ of the Council.-Lionel Andrades

Judge poised to add confidential source/author to priest’s defamation suit (June 8,2022) Mark Hayward, The New Hampshire Union Leader, Manchester

JULY 19, 2022

What is the False Premise ? Could you spell it out

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2022/07/what-is-false-premise-could-you-spell.html

What is the False Premise ? Could you spell it out.

The False Premise is the action and result of confusing what is invisible as being visible, unknown as being known. So with reference to Vatican Council II, if LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc refer to visible non Catholics saved outside the Church in 2022 then this is the False Premise. With the False Premise comes the False Inference.

So the False Premise is confusing hypothetical and invisible cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc as being objective and personally known non Catholics saved outside the Church in 1965-2022, without faith and baptism . They are saved in invincible ignorance(LG 16) etc.

FALSE INFERENCE

So the premise decides the inference. If LG 16 etc refer to visible and known people saved outside the Catholic Church without faith and the baptism of water then Cardinal Ratzinger could infer that there are practical exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nullas salus.It is obsolete

FALSE CONCLUSION

So with the False Inference comes the False Conclusion. When LG 16 etc are practical exceptions for EENS etc then it could be concluded that Vatican Council II is a break with the past ecclesiology and the rest of Tradition.There is a break with the past Magisterium.

So the Conclusion is False since invisible people cannot be visible exceptions for EENS, the Syllabus of Errors and the Athanasius Creed. This Creed says all need to be members of the Catholic Church for salvation.We cannot see people in Heaven and on earth at the same time.

So with the False Premise we have the False Conclusion which says Vatican Council II is a break with the Syllabus of Errors etc. It is False since LG 16 etc can only be invisible and theoretical for us human beings. If someone was saved as such it would be known only to God.