Cardinal Nicols new doctrine on Hell and salvation comes from the objective mistake in LOHO and Vatican Council II and not choosing to interpret the Council-text rationally

Cardinal Vince Nicols tells the BBC only ' if the person makes a final, deliberate and irrevocable approach, a decision to reject any notion of, or willingness  to be open to, God  then that is a definitive decision that separates him from God' and this new doctrine of his  could be based upon his irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II.

He draws his new doctrine from Lumen Gentium 14 which is based on the objective  error in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949(LOHO).

LOHO assumed unknown non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance were known exceptions to Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).

So for LOHO all did not need to enter the Catholic Church as members since invincible ignorance was a known exception.

So the new conclusion with this irrational premise was, only those who know, who are not in ignorance of Jesus and the Church, need to enter the Church to avoid Hell.

With this reasoning of their being known exceptions to the norm, Cardinal Nicols does not say that every one in general needs to enter the Church to avoid Hell.He says that those who knowingly and deliberately  choose to reject God will go to Hell (LG 14).So he agrees with Vatican Council II indicating that there is a Hell and a category of people will be damned.

Since he affirms the LOHO and Lumen Gentium 14, he has put aside the traditional interpretation of the dogma EENS.

He avoids Ad Gentes 7 which says all need faith and baptism for salvation.All.

The first part of LOHO is traditional and is reflected in Ad Gentes 7. It supports Feeneyite EENS.

The second part of LOHO is unorthodox, really heretical, suggesting that there are known exceptions to traditional EENS, and this is reflected in Lumen Gentium 14.

For the discerning Catholic , if there are exceptions it would only be known to God.So Lumen Gentium 14 is not really an exception to Ad Gentes 7 or the dogma EENS.

But for Cardinal Nicols, and for LOHO, those ' who do not know' refer to known non Catholics saved outside the Church.They know. It is not only known to God for them.

This is nonsense but this is his reasoning and it forms the New Theology supported by liberal theologians including the two popes and the Vatican Curia.

Their new reasoning says outside the Church there is known salvation even though this is irrational.

Only with 'known people', 'visible non Catholics' saved outside the Catholic Church in the present times, can there be exceptions to EENS.But where are these known people saved outside the Church in 2018? Who has seen them or met them? How can they be known to us human beings when only God can see and know who is in Heaven and how the person is saved?

So for Cardinal Nicols not every one in general needs to enter the Church as a member with no exception to avoid Hell but only those who knowingly and deliberately reject God.
Then he can judge a suicide case which is an exception.

So Cardinal Nicols new doctrine on Hell and salvation comes from the objective mistake in LOHO and Vatican Council II and not choosing to interpret the Council-text rationally.

-Lionel Andrades

MARCH 21, 2018

The Church supports the 'rigorist interpretation' of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. This is official. There are no known exceptions to EENS mentioned in Vatican Council II

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/03/the-church-supports-rigorist.html

MARCH 24, 2018

Bishop Fellay no more has to reject Vatican Council II and the popes since John XXIII : the Council is traditional without the LOHO reasoning

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/03/bishop-fellay-no-more-has-to-reject.html