The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) made an error in
public in 1949 and then repeated it in 1965 and now they want Archbishop Vigano
to accept the mistake. Those who do not accept the error in public will be
considered schismatic by the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF/ Holy
Office).
CDF/HOLY OFFICE PUBLIC MISTAKES
1. In the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston
invisible cases of the baptism of desire etc were considered visible exceptions
for traditional extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).
2. Then at Vatican Council II, Pope Paul VI, Cardinal Ottaviani and Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre interpreted LG 8,14,15,16 etc as being visible examples of salvation outside the Catholic Church. So alleged practical exceptions emerged for the dogma EENS and the past ecclesiocentric. Vatican Council II became a break with Tradition.
THEY HAD A CHOICE
But they could have interpreted LG
8,14,15,16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, as being invisible cases. So they are not
objective examples of salvation outside the Church. They are not exceptions for
Tradition. Vatican Council II then, for them, would not be a break with Tradition
as it is today for Pope Francis and Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernandez.
VIGANO HAS TO ACCEPT THE MISTAKE
Now they are asking Archbishop Carlo Vigano to accept Vatican Council II
interpreted irrationally, with the false premise i.e. confusing what is invisible
as being visible.
Cardinal Vigano, like the SSPX bishops is already doing this ( using the false premise), but he reject the non traditional conclusion, unlike Pope Francis who accepts it.
FERNANDEZ IS IN SCHISM
When Vatican Council II is interpreted rationally, then there is no
break with Tradition, then Pope Francis and the liberals are in schism. Their
liberalism is foreign for the Church.
Archbishop Vigano must announce that he accepts Vatican Council II
but only rationally and he will accept Pope Francis when he accepts the Council
rationally and so becomes a traditionalist.
Archbishop Vigano is a traditionalist so why must he reject Vatican Council II rational ? He must ask, why should Catholics in general interpret Vatican Council II irrationally like Pope Francis and Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernandez ?-Lionel Andrades
JUNE 23, 2024
But if Vigano and Fernandez choose the rational premise they both return to Tradition immediately.Anyone who uses the rational premise to interpret Vatican Council II immediately returns to Tradition, irrespective if otherwise he is a liberal or conservative.
Photo adapted from LifeSite News
Pope Paul VI used the false premise to interpret Vatican Council II and create liberalism which was a break with the Magisterium over the centuries. Many lost their vocation. He could have interpreted Vatican Council II with the rational premise.
The 1949 Letter of the Holy Office (CDF/ Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican) interpreted the baptism of desire with the false premise. So a false break was created with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the rest of Tradition. The 1949 LOHO was a public mistake of the CDF ( Holy Office/Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith).
The CDF also made a public mistake when Archbishop Augustine di Noia, Secretary of the CDF asked Brother Andre Marie micm, to accept invisible cases of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance ( CCC 847-848) as being practical exceptions for CCC 845-846 Outside the Church no salvation) and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, of the Council of Florence 1442.
The 1949 LOHO, Vatican Council II and the CDF Letter to the St.Benedict Center which is posted on the website of the Diocese of Manchester in New Hampshire are public mistakes.
So now Archbishop Vigano is being asked to accept the error of the 1949 LOHO and Vatican Council II (1965) and so support the new liberalism based upon the fake premise.
But if Vigano and Fernandez choose the rational premise they both return to Tradition immediately.Anyone who uses the rational premise to interpret Vatican Council II immediately returns to Tradition, irrespective if otherwise he is a liberal or conservative.
-Lionel Andrades
No comments:
Post a Comment