Bishop Peter Libasci and Fr. Georges de
Laire are interpreting Vatican Council II and extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS)
with a False Premise and so their conclusion is non traditional. If they used a
Rational Premise they would have to affirm the strict interpretation of EEN. It
will be the same as that of Fr. Leonard Feeney and the St. Benedict Center, New
Hampshire. Vatican Council II would not be a rupture with EENS.
Similarly the Judge Joseph A. Diclerico Jr., in New Hampshire, has to be asked if he considers invisible people as visible in 2021.Is this an acceptable premise in any discussion, secular or religious ?The False Premise is part of the public reasoning of Fr.Georges de Laire. So to enforce the Fake Premise he has issued a Decree of Prohibitions.This is coercion.The intent is bad.
The chapel was closed at the St.
Benedict Center chapel and lay Catholics had to go for Holy Mass elsewhere.They
have a right to demand that Fr. Georges de Laire interpret Vatican Council II
and extra ecclesiam nulla salus rationally.It has a brearing on his profession.
He needs to interpret Vatican Council II
and EENS rationally and ask all to do the same. So he would then be affirming
the strict interpretation of EENS according to Brother Andre Marie MICM, and
the religious community Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary in New
Hampshire.-Lionel Andrades
https://casetext.com/case/de-laire-v-voris?__cf_chl_jschl_tk__=pmd_cCtrRVY7y4qDnCZnnsaeE2oF0.TFVRiiKwH7ZeEha9E-1634131660-0-gqNtZGzNAlCjcnBszQi9
OCTOBER 13, 2021