Why must we interpret Vatican Council II irrationally like Gavin Ashden and Mark Lambert? In their conversation the other day, they both used an Irrational Premise, Inference an Conclusion.They did not seem to know about it.
They supported the liberal Catholic Church and were politically correct.They chose an irrationality to create liberalism.I avoid it.So now it is the same Council but with two different conclusions.
I can create the hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition any time. I know the secret. I do not have to depend upon the Irrational Premise. I simply avoid it. They did not know this. For me they were going around in circles. They were trying to reconcile what cannot be reconciled.
How could the liberal 'Meaning of Vatican Council II', as they put, ( interpreted irrationally) be bridged with 'the spirit of Vatican Council II', seen with its uncontrolled liberalism?.It cannot.
There is no static and fixed 'meaning of Vatican Council II'.There is not just one meaning.Since with the premise there is a radical change.
We first have to end the liberalism with the Rational Premise. Then 'the Meaning of the Council' changes.It is the same Council before us but it turns orthodox. Then the spirit of Vatican Council II can only be ecclesiocentric and traditional. There is no theological possibility for liberalism.
Anyone can check it out. The information is there is public. Ashden and Lambert interpret Lumen Gentium 8,14 and 16, for example, as being physically visible cases of non Catholics saved outside the Church.It is only in this way the popes and cardinals can create objective exceptions for Feeneyite EENS.
I interpret LG 8,14& 16 and UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc as being hypothetical cases only. They cannot be anything else for us human beings. So everyone agrees with me when I say that they are not objective people in 2022. They are not practical exceptions for Feeneyite EENS for me.This is common sense. They do not contradict the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX and the Catechism of Pope Pius X.We are back to Tradition with the Council.
So the Ashden-Lambert talk had its foundation on a theological fault line. Lambert's five years of studying Catholic theology and a liberal Vatican Council II shows.
They interpret the Council like the sedevacantists.Even the main line Novus Ordo church runs in the same circles.But now we have a new discovery.We have found the Missing Link. We have a choice now.We can always create the hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition. It is good bye to theological liberalism.
Sedevcantism is obsolete. We can interpret Vatican Council II in harmony with Tradition.Even the interpretation of Vatican Council II by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and the SSPX is obsolete. Dr.Joseph Shaw Chairman of the Latin Mass Society, England, wants Catholics to interpret the Creeds irrationally.Since this would be politically correct for him in the U.K.It is the same with Roberto dei Mattei and Peter Kwasniewksi.
Why must we choose the irrational premise of Pope Pius XII to interpret Vatican Council II as a break with Tradition ? We have a rational and traditional choice.Why go back to the mistake of Pope Paul VI ?
If we interpret Vatican Council II rationally we are no more frozen in the year 1949 of the Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston.It chose the False Premise to interpret the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance.
If we do not interpret Vatican Council II rationally we change the lex orandi at the Latin Mass too.
The affect of Pope Pius XII is now there at even the Latin Mass.This pope was a Cushingite and not a Feeneyite.He accepted the 1949 Letter so when he issued Mystici Corporis it was not Feeneyite.
Vatican Council II is really dogmatic and supports Feeneyite EENS.So it was not correct for Ashden and Lambert to say that the Council was only pastoral.
The martyrs held the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus which is not contradicted by Vatican Council II interpreted rationally.For me we are back to Tradition and Vatican Council II supports us. We are back to the ecclesiology of the martyrs of the Catholic Church.
This is the Vatican II they had to discuss.-Lionel Andrades
Podcast 27: The Spirit and Meaning of Vatican II with Mark Lambert
In the 27th episode of Merely Catholic, the podcast series for The Catholic Herald, Dr Gavin Ashenden reflects on the gulf between the so-called “spirit of Vatican II” and the contents of the documentation agreed by the participating Church fathers.
He is joined by Catholic commentator Mark Lambert, author of a popular blog called De Omnibus Dubitandum Est and a regular with Dr Ashenden on the Catholic Unscripted YouTube channel, and together they try to “shed some light” on the spirit of the Second Vatican Council and what was actually intended by the documents emanating from the council itself. They consider whether the Second Vatican Council, convened 60 years ago last month, was a call to holiness and evangelisation or simply to conformity with the Zeitgeist, or the passing and quickly dated spirit of the age.
https://catholicherald.co.uk/podcast-27-the-spirit-and-meaning-of-vatican-ii-with-mark-lambert/
Podcast
https://audioboom.com/posts/8201942-the-spirit-and-meaning-of-vatican-ii
Posts
