There are so many passages that contradict traditional teaching that I would argue that it is of the greatest importance to entirely reject the II Vatican Council -Prof. John Dudley
If Bishop Michael Olson, the Bishop of Fort Worth has objections to the appointment of Dr.Dudley at the Fischer More College for reportedly rejecting Vatican Council II it would be a misunderstanding on both sides, the college and the Bishop's office.
Firstly, Dr.Dudley can remove the misunderstanding and specify that the passages he was referring to (LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2, AG 11 etc) refer to invisible cases on earth, not visible to the naked eye. So they do not contradict Tradition.
He could then ask Bishop Michael Olson to clarify if he accepts that these passages are implicit for us and do not refer to explicit cases in the present times.
So Dr.Dudley would be saying that he could accept Vatican Council II if these passages are refer to cases considered invisible for us. If they are considered explicit for us , then he would be rejecting Vatican Council II (with the false premise).
He is affirming Vatican Council II without the false premise of LG 16 (being saved in invincible ignorance) etc being explicit, objective, visible in the flesh and defacto known in the present times.
-Lionel Andrades
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment