But if Vigano and Fernandez choose the rational premise they both return to Tradition immediately.Anyone who uses the rational premise to interpret Vatican Council II immediately returns to Tradition, irrespective if otherwise he is a liberal or conservative.

 

                                                  Photo adapted from LifeSite News

Pope Paul VI used the false premise to interpret Vatican Council II and create liberalism which was a break with the Magisterium over the centuries. Many lost their vocation. He could have interpreted Vatican Council II with the rational premise.

The 1949 Letter of the Holy Office (CDF/ Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican) interpreted the baptism of desire with the false premise. So a false break was created with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the rest of Tradition. The 1949 LOHO was a public mistake of the CDF ( Holy Office/Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith).

The CDF also made a public mistake when Archbishop Augustine di Noia, Secretary of the CDF asked Brother Andre Marie micm, to accept invisible cases of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance ( CCC 847-848) as being practical exceptions for CCC 845-846 Outside the Church no salvation) and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, of the Council of Florence 1442.

The 1949 LOHO, Vatican Council II  and the CDF Letter to the St.Benedict Center which is posted on the website of the Diocese of Manchester in New Hampshire are public mistakes.

So now Archbishop Vigano is being asked to accept the error of the 1949 LOHO and Vatican Council II (1965) and so support the new liberalism based upon the fake premise.

But if Vigano and Fernandez choose the rational premise they both return to Tradition immediately.Anyone who uses the rational premise to interpret Vatican Council II immediately returns to Tradition, irrespective if otherwise he is a liberal or conservative.

-Lionel Andrades