Now for Pope Francis, Vatican Council II is a rupture with EENS and the past ecclesiocentrism. So he implies that LG 8 etc refer to visible cases. These visible cases are exceptions for the dogma EENS.

 

When LG 8,14,15,16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II refer to hypothetical cases only, then Vatican Council II has no exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) and the Athanasius Creed.

Now for Pope Francis, Vatican Council II is a rupture with EENS and the past ecclesiocentrism. So he implies that LG 8 etc refer to visible cases. These visible cases are exceptions for the dogma EENS.

For me, LG 8 etc refer to invisible people in 2023. So invisible people cannot be objective examples of salvation outside the Church in 2023.If the person does not exist in our reality then that person cannot be an objective exception for the dogma EENS.Invisible people cannot be visible exceptions for EENS and the rest of Tradition.

Now we all agree that we cannot physically see anyone saved with the baptism of desire. We cannot see someone saved outside the Church in invincible ignorance.They do not exist in our reality. We cannot see or meet someone saved as such. If someone was saved in invincible ignorance etc, outside the Church it could only be known to God.

Pope Francis does not want to affirm Feeneyite EENS. He needs the exceptions. He needs the irrational exceptions. He must state that there are known exceptions even though he cannot know of any such case. Since if there are no exceptions in Vatican Council II for EENS , then he would have to be a Feeneyite on EENS.

 For him the baptism of desire (LG 14) and being saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16) refer to ‘explicit cases’. It is the same with LG 8, LG 14, and LG 16 etc. Vatican Council II has the hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition for him, but not for me.

For me the Council has a hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition. - Lionel Andrades

Lionel Andrades

former Staff Reporter, daily Morning News, Karachi, Pakistan.

Recipient of the All Pakistan Newspaper Society (APNS) Best Reporter of the Year Award, presented by the Prime Minister of Pakistan Benazir Bhutto.

Recipient of the Pakistan Government's Award for Literature ( Childrens stories).

Teacher of English and Church History at the Catholic Minor Seminary, Rawalpindi

Sent to Rome for Ministerial Priesthood by Bishop Anthony Lobo, bishop of Rawalpindi-Islamabad, Pakistan.

Discriminated against by the pontifical universities and seminaries in Rome.He interprets Vatican Council II rationally and not irrationally. So there is a continuity with Tradition. He is not allowed to study at pontifical universities in  Rome,  where it is obligatory to interpret Magisterial Documents, irrationally and unethically.Catholic students and seminarians are discriminated against. This is public and official.

However we have a new discovery in the Catholic Church. There are two interpretations of Vatican Council II, one is rational and the other is irrational, one is interpreted with the false premise and the other without it. One is Magisterial and the other, the common one, is non Magisterial.How can the Holy Spirit make an objective mistake ? So it is human error and not the Magisterium.

 Vatican Council II is dogmatic and not only pastoral, when it is interpreted rationally i.e LG 8,14,15,16,UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II refer to only hypothetical cases. So they are not objective examples of salvation. They are not objective exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Athanasius Creed.

It is the same for the Creeds and Catechisms. There can be two interpretations.Catholics must choose the rational option.The Creeds must not be changed.

Why should Catholics choose an irrational version of the Creeds, Catechisms and Councils, which is heretical, non-traditional and schismatic, when a rational option is there which is traditional?

It is unethical when the popes, cardinals and bishops choose the Irrational Premise to interpret Vatican Council II and other Magisterial Documents and call it Catholic.

Rahner, Ratzinger, Congar, Murray, Balthazar, Kung, Lefebvre and Paul VI interpreted Vatican Council II irrationally. We can today choose to interpret the Council rationally and in harmony with Tradition.

Blog: http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/

Eucharist and Mission (eucharistandmission)

E-mail: lionelandrades10@gmail.com

Twitter : @LionelAndrades1

ONLY THE CATHOLIC CHURCH      SOLAMENTE LA CHIESA CATTOLICA