According to Canon Law, all cardinals, bishops,
rectors, parish priests and religious superiors have to be Catholic and they
must affirm the teachings of the Catholic Church. They can no more reject de
fide teachings of the Church by saying that they are contradicted by Vatican
Council II (irrational).
We now know how to interpret Vatican Council II rationally. It is the
same Vatican Council II before us but we
interpret LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 , UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II, as being only
hypothetical and theoretical cases. In real life we do not know anyone being
saved outside the Church as such. We cannot
But for me, and also an archbishop, many priests and many lay Catholics,
LG 8 etc are always hypothetical and speculative. So they do not contradict the
Syllabus of Errors. The Council is not a break with Tradition.
They can affirm Vatican Council II with LG 8,14 and 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS
22 etc, being hypothetical and theoretical along with the dogma extra ecclesiam
nulla salus, the Syllabus of Errors and the Athanasius Creed. It is no more
either Vatican Council II or extra ecclesiam nulla salus. They are compatible.
So how can we have a pope who does not affirm the
Athanasius Creed, the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Syllabus of Errors
and the rest of Tradition along with
Vatican Council II interpreted rationally, traditionally and honestly ? - Lionel Andrades
No comments:
Post a Comment