It's unfortunate the preamble sees fit to deal only in vague generalities about continuity without going into any of the doctrinal specifics regarding collegiality, religious liberty, ecclesiology and the like.
:applause: :applause: :applause:
...Even though this may not be the whole thing,
even though this is not confirmed as authentic,
no matter -- if the real thing is anything like this, what you say, Nishant2011, is true.
Vague generalities, "continuity," nothing doctrinal; no mention of collegiality, religious
liberty, or ecumenism.
But properly stated those things would be the hierarchy of the Church, false religious
liberty and false ecumenism. But that's not going to happen until the EXORCISM takes
place, to kick ol' Scratch out of the building.
What makes this a "doctrinal" preamble then, I wonder.
We should all be wondering that, my dear!
Seems to me it's just another lie: It's called a doctrinal preamble
, and that's a half
truth, for it's no doubt a preamble in truth, but it's not doctrinal in any way, shape
or form, so the term doctrinal preamble is a half truth, and a half truth is a whole
lie, therefore, it's a lie, plain and simple. Isn't logic nice when it's properly applied?!?!
Remember, these are the same men who, during the "negotiations," said in
response to the SSPX's accusation of "errors of Vatican II," that an oecumenical
council of the Church is infallible, and therefore cannot contain error, so then
Vatican II contains no error.
If you believe that, we have a problem, Houston.
But I know you don't, Nishant2011; so we don't have a problem, Houston.
I just found an old SG Letter to Friends and Benefactors
that deserves its own thread........................... TBC ..........................