If the baptism of desire and blood and being saved in invincible ignorance and the 'seeds of the Word' are considered implicit for us instead of explicit in the flesh, then the interpretation of Vatican Council II completely changes.This is the view of many Catholics.This presents us with a new concept of Vatican Councl II and it shows that most of our constructs of Vatican Council II were wrong.They were structured on personally known, seen in the flesh cases of non Catholics saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church. So there was a rupture with the foundational dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, on which the old ecclesiology and general Tradition was situated.Now this simple and rational way of seeing Vatican Council II will come as a surprise to liberals and conservatives.It puts to rest the way the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) interpreted Vatican Council II.Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre their founder, was a Cushingite.Cushingites interpret EENS and Vatican Council II with the pillars of physically known baptism of desire(BOD) etc.Cushingites,like Richard Cushing, the Archbishop of Boston assume hypothetical cases are not hypothetical in real life.This is the error which has de-railed Catholic theology. A new premise( known cases of BOD) and conclusion( known exceptions to traditional EENS) has taken the contemporary Church in a new direction, which the mainstream media calls 'revolutionary'.So Archbishop Lefebvre was correct in saying that the Council was a rupture with Tradition but he did not know of the specific cause which was responsible for this rupture.
Now with this small but important correction in theology, the Church is going back to the teachings of the Church Fathers, the saints and many founders of religious communities, like St. Francis of Assisi, St. Dominic and St.Ignatius of Loyola.
It also means new opportunities are open for the reconciliation of the SSPX and the Vatican, which were not there a few years back.
Once the SSPX and even the sedevacantists make the transition to implicit for us baptism of desire(LG 14),invisible for us being saved in invincible ignorance( LG 16), known only to God 'seeds of the Word'(AG 11), hypothetical 'elements of sanctification and truth'(LG 8), theoretical 'imperfect communion with the Church'(UR 3) and explicit only for God 'a ray of that truth which enlightens all people'(NA 2)- they do not deny any text in Vatican Council II.They simply change the perspective.Where before they thought hypothetical cases were visibly known in 2016, they correct themself and admit that these superflous references to hypothetical cases are not known in reality, in 2016.
This in a sense has already been done in public.The SSPX's General Chapter Statement(2012) affirms extra ecclesiam nulla salus with no exceptions.There were no explicit exceptions to EENS, in Vatican Council II for that General Chapter meeting.So the transition has been made. It is for the Vatican Curia to acknowledge that the traditional Catholic doctrine on salvation,can be accepted without being tinted with irrational and innovative theology.-Lionel Andrades
July 25, 2016
July 25, 2016