Always in the interpretation of Vatican Council II we have to be aware of the Cushing-Jesuit Factual Error

Always in the interpretation of Vatican Council II we have to be aware of the Cushing-Jesuit Factual Error.

What is the Cushing-Jesuit Factual Error?

It is assuming that all references to 'salvation' in Vatican Council II are  physically visible to us on earth and since these cases are allegedly seen objectively, they are known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the traditional teaching on other religions and Christian communities.

Also called the Richard Cushing Error it does not make the distinction between the concepts objective-subjective, explicit-implicit, defacto-dejure etc.Instead it implies that what is invisible for us in real life is actually visible.

This is a factual error. We cannot see the deceased now saved in Heaven. There are no explicit exceptions on earth to the traditional teaching on all needing to convert into the Church.This is an objective error. Objectively we cannot name any one in 2014 who is an exception to all needing to convert into the Church for salvation.

 

In the text of Vatican Council II we see so many statements which are salvation-possibilities but not exceptions to the dogma. They are known only to God. With the Cushing-Jesuit Error what is only a hypothetical possibility for us and known only to God is  made to appear relevant to the dogma on salvation and the traditional teaching on other religions and Christian communities.

These dead wood statements, flotsam and jetsam statements, are found in Ad Gentes 7 of Vatican Council II. They refer to what is implicit, invisible for us and not objectively known. So they are not exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus or Ad Gentes 7 ( all need faith and baptism). They are not exceptions since the text of Vatican Council II does not state that they are exceptions to the dogma and in real life they are not explicit for us.

Once this distinction is made Vatican Council II no where contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was interpreted by the saints Robert Bellarmine, Francis of Assisi, Maximillian Kolbe and, Fr. Leonard Feeney, who held the traditional interpretation of the dogma on salvation.

Here are examples of ther Cushing-Jesuit Factual Error in Vatican Council II.
1.

Meeting God in Friend and Stranger Nostra Aetate

..there are elements of truth and holiness in other religions and acknowledges that the Holy Spirit is at work in them. Other religions contain ‘seeds of the Word’ and ‘a ray of the one Truth’. God’s good plan, and the promise of eternal life, applies to every human being. At the same time, Christ is the only one through whom it is possible to come to this eternal life. What is true and holy in other religions does not replace the Good News of Chris-tianity, but can create a fertile environment for it.
http://www.cbcew.org.uk/CBCEW-Home/Departments/Dialogue-and-Unity/Other-Religions/Bishops-Document

Other religions contain ‘seeds of the Word’ and ‘a ray of the one Truth’. God’s good plan, and the promise of eternal life, applies to every human being
Is the Conference of Catholic Bishops of England and Wales assuming here that non Catholics saved with the 'seeds of the Word' and 'a ray of the one Truth' are known to us in 2014 ?
Since they are  allegedly known to us they are explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus?
What is a possibility for salvation is a known exception to the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church?
Is this is a new doctrine with implicit for us cases being assumed to be explicit for us ?

2.

Having said all this, we must recognize that this doctrine is not as far reaching as some imagine it to be. People will sometimes ask, "Does this means non-Catholics are going to hell?" Not necessarily.

Why not necessarily? Since in 2014 there are known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus?

Invincibly Ignorant

The Church recognizes that God does not condemn those who are innocently ignorant of the truth about his offer of salvation. Regarding the doctrine in question, the Catechism of the Catholic Church (quoting Vatican II document Lumen Gentium, 16) states:... http://www.catholic.com/magazine/articles/what-no-salvation-outside-the-church-means

'The Church recognizes that God does not condemn those who are innocently ignorant of the truth about his offer of salvation'...'

What has this to do with the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ?  How is this statement relevant ? Is the writer implying that these cases are objective for us and so an exception to the dogmatic teaching on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church? 

 

In both cases here (1& 2)  they are implying that there are known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus mentioned in Vatican Council II.They are making the Cushing-Jesuit Factual Error.

-Lionel Andrades 

Cardinal Cushing and the Jesuits made a factual error in the text of Vatican Council II ?

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/03/message-incomplete-cardinal-cushing-and.html#links