There is a Most Holy Family Monastery report on Pope John XXIII whom they accuse of being a Freemason and making Vatican Council II a liberal document based on Freemason principles, especially on other religions and Christian communities. Then there are personal judgements of the actions of this pope, which could also be interpreted in a different way by me.
Basically we can see Vatican Council II and Pope John XXII being interpreted with the Cushing heresy of the 1940's, the same factual error is being made by Peter and Michael Dimond in the interpretation of Vatican Council II. They have accepted the liberal interpretation of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 and extended it to other Church documents , in which it is assumed that we can see the dead saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire. These 'ghosts' are assumed to be exceptions to the traditional teaching on salvation.The Letter of the Holy Office can also be interpreted traditionally if we realize that implicit desire and being saved in invincible ignorance, mentioned in the Letter, are not exceptions to 'the dogma' and the'infallible teaching' also mentioned in the Letter.
Once this error of Cushingism is removed we have Pope John XXIII and Vatican Council II as traditional.
It has been in the interest of the Freemasons and other enemies of the church that we interpret Vatican Council II using an irrational premise.This is being done by the MHFM. Their entire apologetics is based on extra ecclesiam nulla salus and visible-to- us baptism of desire. So on this shaky edifice they reject a Cushing's Vatican Council II and refer to the only,one true Church of Jesus, as a Vatican Council II sect.
The fault is not with Pope John XXIII or Vatican Council II but with their use of the false premise in interpreting magisterial texts. Until today, they are unable to cite any magisterial text which says (1)that the baptism of desire is visible to us or (2) is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.They also refuse to deal with this issue on their E-Exchanges and videos.
In Ad Gentes 7 Vatican Council II contradicts most of what the MHFM says on Pope John XXIII with respect to other religions and Christian communities and churches. AG 7 and LG 14 state all need faith and baptism for salvation. Could the Council be clearer than this?
AG 7 is listed in the Catechism of the Catholic Church under the title Outside the Church No Salvation. Could it be more clearer and direct than this? CCC 846 also says all need to enter the church 'as through a door'. This was the phrase used by the Church Fathers for Outside the Church there is no salvation.
Jesus asks us to love all people- heretics, communists, non Catholics...This is expressed in our friendly relations with them.We can be kind to them in inter religious dialogue and ecumenism which is a part of mission, when we can speak the truth with charity.
Even if Pope John XXIII was a Freemason as is alleged, Vatican Council II is traditional on the subject of other religions, ecumenism and religous liberty.
-Lionel Andrades
13. The Scandals and Heresies of John XXIII
http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/13_JohnXXIII.pdf
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment