The Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II is unique. Any one can use it.It has many advantages.There are many reports on this blog and also on line which explain it.

The Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II is unique. Any one can use it.It has many advantages.There are many  reports on this blog and also on line which explain it.

The difference between the common interpretation of Vatican Council II and my model, comes about when the distinction is made between what is physically visible or invisible.Since if there is an exception to traditional extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS), there would have to be a known case, a visible person.

So I am not putting forward any new theology but mainly observing that the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood (BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance, refer to hypothetical cases only for us human beings. 

All I am saying is that there is no visible case of a non Catholic saved outside the Church.There are no personally known exceptions to EENS this year.

Generally every one agrees with me.BOD, BOB and I.I are always invisible cases. This is common sense.

We can hope and wish that someone outside the Church is saved but we cannot know. We do not know. 

Neither can we say that there were 20 BOD cases this year, or 30 cases of I.I last year. We cannot know.

I cannot see someone saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance.

These people if they exist can only be seen by God.

The Church can declare someone a saint but cannot say that the saint died without the baptism of water.There is no known extra ordinary means of salvation.Since no one on earth can know.

The ordinary means of salvation is faith and baptism(AG 7).

Neither does the Church say that someone on earth, has a special gift to see people in Heaven saved outside the Church.

Human beings within the Church,living on earth, cannot see people in Heaven and neither does the Catholic Church claim to know any one who has this gift, and whose views they accept.

With the L.A interpretation of Vatican Council II this error is avoided.BOD,BOB and I.I always refer to invisible cases.Similarly LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II always refer to hypothetical cases.

So BOD, BOB and I.I are not a rupture with EENS.

Neither is Vatican Council II a rupture with EENS.

EENS itself is not different from EENS as it was known to the missionaries and Magisterium of the 16th century.

So the old ecclesiology of the Church is intact before and after Vatican Council II.

Since there is no known salvation outside the Church there can only be the old ecumenism.There is no rupture with the Syllabus of Errors.There are no exceptions to the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Catholic Church.

So Mission is traditional. Since most people are on the way to Hell since they die without faith and baptism which is needed for salvation(AG 7).Hence the need for the proclamation of the necessity of membership in the Catholic Church to avoid Hell( for salvation).

It was based on the past ecclesiolgy that the Social Reign of Christ the King and the non separation of Church and State was proclaimed in the past.

So this is the advantage of the L.A interpretation of Vatican Council II and other magisterial documents.

-Lionel Andrades

SEPTEMBER 11, 2018

So now all religious communities simply have to affirm Vatican Council II, as if there was no problem,by using the Lionel Andrades model

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/09/so-now-all-religious-communities-simply.html