It does not have to be either the baptism of desire or extra ecclesiam nulla salus.Understand this line and then change your interpretation of Vatican Council II

It does not have to be either the baptism of desire or extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

It does not have to be either the baptism of desire or extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

It does not have to be either the baptism of desire or extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

This is the title of the last blog post and it needs repeating.

When it is understood that it does not have to be the baptism of desire or extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS), it is not either or, we can affirm the baptism of desire and also Feeneyite EENS, then we can turn around completely the interpretation of Vatican Council II.The Council dramatically changes before our eyes since our premise and conclusion has changed.

It does not have to be Lumen Gentium 16 or the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS. Since LG 16 is a hypothetical case and not a known person in our reality to be an exception to EENS.

It does not have to be  saved with 'the seeds of the Word'(AG 11) or the strict interpretation of Feeneyite EENS.Since there can be no personally known case of someone saved with seeds of the Word and without membership in the Catholic Church.

So we have the hermeneutic  of continuity when we are aware that hypothetical cases are not exceptions to EENS as it was known to the missionaries in the 16th century.

So keep repeating this  line and then review Vatican Council II.

It does not have to be either the baptism of desire or extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

It does not have to be either the baptism of desire or extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

It does not have to be either the baptism of desire or extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

-Lionel Andrades

THURSDAY, DECEMBER 21, 2017

It does not have to be either the baptism of desire or extra ecclesiam nulla salus

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/12/it-does-not-have-to-be-either-baptism.html