I interpret LG 8, LG 14,
LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc as being hypothetical and subjective and they interpret
LG 8 etc as being objective examples of salvation outside the Church. Their
premise is what is invisible is visible and mine is what is invisible is
invisible only.
So their inference is that
visible cases of LG 8 etc are objective exceptions for the dogma extra
ecclesiam nulla salus. For me they are not exceptions. Since invisible people
cannot be visible exceptions.
For them Vatican Council
II is a break with Tradition (EENS, Athanasius Creed etc) since there are
objective cases of LG 8 etc. For me Vatican Council II is not a break with
Tradition since there are no objective exceptions in 1065-2023.
For me Ad Gentes 7 says
all need faith and baptism for salvation. Does AG 7 support Tradition? While
hypothetical cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 15, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, are not
practical exceptions for Ad Gentes 7 and the dogma EENS of the Fourth Lateran
Council.
So for them there is a
separation with the Magisterial over the centuries and for me there is continuity.
They have changed the
doctrine on salvation and I have maintained it.- Lionel Andrades
No comments:
Post a Comment