Saturday, August 26, 2017

Pope Paul VI made a mistake in Vatican Council II : error repeated in Amoris Laetitia

Image result for Photo Pope Paul VI at Vatican Council II first Mass
As Pope Francis assumes in Amoris Laetitia that we humans can judge who among those in manifest mortal sin are not going to Hell and can be given the Eucharist in the same way Pope Paul VI at Vatican Council II assumed that we humans can judge who will be saved or who are saved with invisible for us baptism of desire(BOD),baptism of blood(BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I) and so were visible exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).Both made a mistake.
Image result for Photo Pope Francis and Amoris Laetitia
Only God would know if there are any exceptions to the rule.
Someone who is living in adultery is living in sin and someone who is outside the Catholic Church is living with Original Sin and mortal sin committed in that State with no access to the Sacraments of the Church and its moral and faith teachings.
Image result for Photo Pope Paul VI at Vatican Council II first Mass
Pope Paul VI made a mistake in Vatican Council II when he allowed orthodox passages, supporting EENS, to be followed with passages affirming BOD,BOB and I.I as if they were relevant to EENS, being visible exceptions.
This is a subtle error in the Council text.

THERE IS KNOWN SALVATION OUTSIDE THE CHURCH FOR FERNANDES
It is because of this objective mistake in Vatican Council II and the Letter of the Holy Office 1949, that Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernandes 1 has stated that there is salvation outside the Church. It is because he, like Pope Paul VI, wrongly assumed that invisible for us BOD, BOB, I.I are visible exceptions to EENS. So BOD,BOB and I.I became examples of salvation outside the Church and a rupture with the Feeneyite interpretation of EENS.
Image result for Photo Cardinal Walter Kasper
SALVATION THEOLOGY HAS BEEN CHANGED SO WHY NOT MORAL THEOLOGY TOO?
So Cardinal Walter Kasper has said that if the ecclesiology of the Church can be changed at Vatican Council II then why cannot the divorced and re-married be given the Eucharist.As soon as he was made a cardinal, in his first interview in the magazine 30 giorni he said, that he does not believe in the dogma EENS and neither do others.He means there is salvation outside the Church and it can be judged in individual cases.There are exceptions in the traditional teachings on faith and salvation(based on the irrationality) so there can also be the same for him in morals.
WE CANNOT JUDGE IF SOMEONE IN MANIFEST MORTAL SIN IS AN EXCEPTION
We can speculate and theorize that a person could be saved with invisible for us BOD,BOB and I.I and we can speculate that there could be a couple living like sister and brother and could be exceptions to the moral teaching, but we humans cannot say that we know of any particular case.There really are no practical exceptions to the dogma EENS nor to the teachings on mortal sins like adultery, cohabitation etc.

THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS TO FEENEYITE EENS IN MYSTICI CORPORIS AND THE CATECHISMS
There were no exceptions to Feeneyite EENS in Mystici Corporis,Quanta Cura, the Catechisms of Trent and Baltimore with BOD, BOB and I.I. Since they refer to a hypothetical case; the unknown case of the catechuman or the invisible case of someone saved in invincible ignorance.They never ever were exceptions to the dogma EENS as the liberals claimed in the 1940's.
So when Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre stated 2 souls can be saved in religions other than the Catholic religion he was referring to a hypothetical case.He was speculating with good will.The SSPX bishops however mistook this hypothetical case as being a practical exception to the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma EENS.This was the mistake in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 during the pontificate of Pope Pius XII.So the SSPX does not see this error in their reasoning with reference to EENS and Vatican Council II as it is clear for them with Amoris Laeitia.

CORRECT THE MISTAKE AND THE INTERPRETATION OF VATICAN COUNCIL II CHANGES
Once they acknowledge this mistake and correct it the other interpretation of Vatican Council II changes for them.LG 18, LG 8, LG 14, UR 3, NA 2,GS 22, AG 7, AG 11 etc all refer to hypothetical cases and they are not a rupture with EENS or the Syllabus of Errors, Vatican Council II supports the old ecclesiology and is traditional.So there can only be an ecumenism of return and there is no known salvation outside the Church among non Catholics and non Christians.Vatican Council II is in harmony with the missionaries of the 16th century.There is no development.With the dogma EENS un-changed by Vatican Council, the priority, to save souls, is the proclamation of the Social Reign of Christ the King and the non separation of Church and State, similar to the papal states  when religious liberty was granted with conditions, to non Catholics.

SSPX CONFUSES WHAT IS INVISIBLE AS BEING VISIBLE AS DID POPE PAUL VI
When the SSPX sees the error of confusing what is invisible as being visible, hypothetical as being concrete,theoretical as being practically known,implicit as being explicit and what is subjective as being objective, they can then re-interpret Vatican Council II  in harmony with EENS and Tradition.They could also corret the confusion in Wikipedia entries on extra ecclesiam nulla salus, Vatican Council II, Dominus Iesus, subsistit it etc.Most supporters of the SSPX have not noticed it.Louie Verrecchio has seen the error clearly in Amoris Laetitia but has not seen the same reasoning in Vatican Council II 3.

For Verrecchio, Fernandes and Pope Francis Vatican Council II is a rupture with Tradition.


ASK ROME TO INTERPRET VATICAN COUNCIL II WITHOUT THE PREMISE AND  IN CONTINUITY WITH  EENS AND THE SYLLABUS 
Vatican Council II  interpreted without the irrational reasoning would no more be controversial for the SSPX and the sedevacantists.The SSPX can accept Vatican Council II and ask for canonical status.Also important, is 'asking Rome to come back to the Faith' by interpreting Vatican Council II without the error of Pope Paul VI and with the hermeneutic of continuity with the dogma EENS and the Syllabus of Errors.-Lionel Andrades

1.
AUGUST 23, 2017
Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernandes full of holes in salvation and moral theology
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/08/archbishop-victor-manuel-fernandes-full.html

2.

Evidently,certain distinctions must be made. Souls can be saved in a religion other than the Catholic religion (Protestantism, Islam, Buddhism,etc.), but not by this religion. There may be souls who, not knowing Our Lord, have by the grace of the good Lord, good interior dispositions,who submit to God...But some of these persons make an act of love which implicitly is equivalent to baptism of desire.-Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre  ("Against the Heresies",p.216) 


3.
AUGUST 25, 2017
Archbishop Fernandes and Louie Verrechio interpret Vatican Council II with the false premise : lesson for the SSPX and possible canonical status
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/08/archbishop-fernandes-and-louie.html