Saturday, March 19, 2016

The mistakes in Vatican Council II

Related image








Physically we cannot see any one saved in invincible ignorance.There would have to be a physical case of someone saved in invincible ignorance(I.I)  without the baptism of water and only then it would be a concrete exception to the teaching on extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS),the need for all to be baptised with water to avoid the fires of Hell.So when there are no known cases up front of a person saved without the baptism of water, there can be no known exception, to the teaching on all needing the baptism of water in the Catholic Church for salvation.
So mentioning being saved in I.I was a mistake in Vatican Council II.
Related image
I.I had no connection with the dogma EENS.
It is a theoretical case and would only be known to God if it existed.
So if a pope or cardinal in the past mentioned being saved in I.I with reference to EENS it was a mistake.
Being saved in I.I is related to EENs according to the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1992). It was an exception to all needing to be baptised, for the CDF.So Pope Benedict as expected concluded that the Church, his magisterium,  no more teaches that all unbaptised persons need to convert into the Church to avoid Hell.
Related image
 'Zero cases of something are not exceptions  to the dogma EENS', says the apologist John Martignoni.
I.I is a zero case.
It is superflous.It should not have been mentioned in Vatican Council II.It is flotsam and dead wood.
In 2016 I do not know of any one saved in I.I and neither does Pope Benedict or Pope Francis.
Related image
Similarly  it was wrong for Vatican Council II to mention being saved with the baptism of desire(BOD).
Catechumens who, moved by the Holy Spirit, seek with explicit intention to be incorporated into the Church are by that very intention joined with her. With love and solicitude Mother Church already embraces them as her own.-Lumen Gentium 14.
 This is a zero case in our reality.
It cannot be relevant to the earlier passage in LG 14 which says all need faith and baptism.
 Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism(124) and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church.-Lumen Gentium 14
It cannot be relevant to EENS which says all need the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.This too was a mistake in Vatican Council II.
 The mistake was originally made in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 and the Baltimore Catechism.
FOR ME
I can affirm EENS without claiming to know of any exception.So the mistake is not something fixed.
Yet this is a fundamental error in Vatican Council II. Hypothetical cases were placed in the text as if they were concrete and explicit.
Who knows of someone saved in imperfect communion with the Church?(UR 3).
Who knows of someone saved with seeds of the Word (AG 11)  or 'elements of sanctification and truth'(LG 8) ?
No one.
So why are they mentioned in Vatican Council II?
 This was a mistake.
How can the Holy Spirit mention hypothetical cases and suggest they are living, physically seen exceptions, to all needing to be baptised in the Church, to avoid Hell?
 The Holy Spirit cannot make an error.
It is these mistakes in Vatican Council II which Pope Benedict has accepted.Now he says the Church no more teaches like the 16th century missionaries that the un-baptised are going to Hell.
Related imageRelated imageRelated image
Pope Benedict changed the Good Friday Prayer for the Conversion of the Jews.It no more says Jews need to convert in the present times.He is now suggesting that there are physically mentioned exceptions in Vatican Council II to the dogma EENS.
 He calls this non-sense a development of doctrine. The doctrine has developed so much  for him that he admits in public that the original dogmatic teaching on the un-baptised does not exist any more.
Related imageRelated image
John Henry Newman said that a doctrine could develop before it was made a dogma and not after.There is no such limitation for Pope Benedict.For him the dogma of the faith, on EENS, has been lost.Was this what Our Lady  refered to at Fatima?
Lumen Gentium 14 is an objective error in Vatican Council II.1 It is a result of wrong reasoning by people who wanted to do aware with the teaching on exclusive salvation in the Church.
Related image
These are objective errors all over Vatican Council II i.e placing of hypothetical cases in such a way, that the passages seem relevant or exceptions to the traditional interpretation of EENS.They also suggest that we can physically see people in Heaven saved in I.I etc.
For some this could be sufficient reason to reject the Council.
Well,what do we do now? I think we must be aware of LG 14, LG 16, LG 8, UR 3,NA 2 etc as being hypothetical and so irrelevant  to EENS, as it was known to the 16th century missionaries.
Related image
A factual mistake was made in Vatican Council II but we can by pass it. It is these mistakes that the Vatican Curia is placing in front of your face, as an exception to EENS.
Related image
Archbishop Augustine di Noia when asked about EENS  told Edward Pentin that Vatican Council II mentions there being 'elements of sanctification and truth' (LG 8) in other religions.
Related image
 Cardinal Gerhard Muller also rejected EENS and referred to LG 14 , when Pentin asked him about it in an interview for the National Catholic Register.
 So you see the pattern? It is the mistakes, the hypothetical cases, which are presented as objective exceptions to the dogma EENS.
Related image
The Jesuits and the Archbishop of Boston made a mistake in the Fr.Leonard Feeney case and that mistake is all over Vatican Council II.It is as if the Council was called to implement the 'visible-dead' error of the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office.The cardinal who issued that Letter seemed not to know that the baptism of desire was a hypothetical case and so was irrelevant to EENS.
So when the political Left now uses Vatican Council II as a slogan, you must affirm the 16th century interpretation of EENS. Since there are no exceptions mentioned in the mistakes of Vatican Council II .
-Lionel Andrades

1.

14. This Sacred Council wishes to turn its attention firstly to the Catholic faithful. Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism(124) and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church. Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved...Catechumens who, moved by the Holy Spirit, seek with explicit intention to be incorporated into the Church are by that very intention joined with her. With love and solicitude Mother Church already embraces them as her own.-Lumen Gentium 14

No comments: