All the USCCB bishops interpret Vatican Council II with the Boston Heresy of Pope Pius XII and Cardinal Cushing, the archbishop of Boston.The Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary in Richmond, New Hampshire avoid it.

 

All the USCCB bishops interpret Vatican Council II with the Boston Heresy of Pope Pius XII and Cardinal Cushing, the archbishop of Boston.The Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary in Richmond, New Hampshire avoid it.

So we have two interpretations of Vatican Council II 1) that of the USCCB bishops and 2) that of the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, NH.

The sedevacantists Michael and Peter Dimond like the SSPX and the CMRI also interpret Vatican Council II irrationally. So they produce exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. They blame the Council. The problem lies with their false premise. They assumed LG 8, 14, 16, UR 3, GS 22 etc refer to visible examples of salvation in the present times (1965-2023). For me they are invisible cases. So they are not exceptions for the dogma EENS.

Those who intentionally use the false premise to interpret Vatican Council II irrationally are unethical.

It seems as if some groups are intentionally interpreting Vatican Council II irrationally to please the Jewish Left (ADL etc).

Today for Easter we recited the Apostles Creed at Mass in Italian. This Creed has two meanings. It would be different for the Italian bishops and for others who do not use the false premise and inference.

The Boston Heresy of Pope Pius XII and Cardinal Richard Cushing is an objective error which can be verified in public. The Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary in Richmond, NH avoid it. They interpret Vatican Council II rationally while the bishop in Manchester in New Hampshire, Peter Libasci, interprets Vatican Council II irrationally like Cardinal Luiz Ladaria sj, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican. - Lionel Andrades