Over time non Christians will learn that Vatican Council II can also be interpreted with rational theology and the result is traditional.It supports exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church

What about non Christians- the Jews and Muslims,  are they also expected to interpret Vatican Council II dishonestly ? Will they at some point of time, correct the present ecclesiastics who are 'the Church' ?

Even if there are married priests and women deacons proposed at the Amazon Synod, will they interpret Vatican Council II with Cushingism or Feeneyism ? Is it ethical to interpret the Council with Cushingism when one knows that Cushingism is irrational and creates an artificial rupture with Tradition. 

Non Christians are not aware now that a Cushingite interpretation of Vatican Council II is being imposed upon the whole Church, including the Amazon, when a Feeneyite rational option exists.

Non Christians will know in future that it is irrational to interpret Vatican Council II with Cushingism. They will become aware that the present ecclesiastics are interpreting all magisterial documents with an irrational premise to create an artificial false conclusion. 

This was how Pope Benedict presented Nostra Aetate after the Regensburg reaction.He did not say that Ad Gentes 7 says all need faith and baptism for salvation. He did not say that Vatican Council II in Nostra Aetate does not contradict the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) as it was known to the missionaries in the 16th century.He did not announce that the Council, interpreted with Feeneyite philosophy and theology supported the past exclusivist ecclesiology. He deceptively interpreted Vatican Council II with Cushingism.This was a new, politically correct Gospel.

Similarly at Abu Dhabi Pope Francis interpreted Vatican Council II with Cushingism and then justified the joint statement. 

It was Pope John Paul II who cited EENS( Feeneyite) when he went to New Delhi, India.He may have made this call in impromtu, spontaneous comments.

Hindu nationalist groups protested.The European Archbishop of Delhi denied that there was a call to conversion by Pope John Paul II.However the text of Ecclesia di Asia(1999) is Cushingite.Cardinal Ratzinger is a Cushingite. He rejected exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. So the text of Ecclesia di Asia is Christological without an ecclesio-centrism.This has been the theology of other 'magisterial documents'.With the Cushingite false premise, there is a new theology which creates an artificial rupture with EENS, the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors etc which were all ecclesiocentric.It was Jesus with the necessity of membership in the Catholic Church for salvation.How can this be magisterial ? This is new theology based upon a mistake, a false premise, an irrational reasoning. A mistake in observation.

The pope was not given permission to go to China. Pope John Paul II called all in India to convert to Jesus in the Catholic Church. He side stepped Vatican Council II( Cushingite).

This was the past.Over time non Christians will learn that Vatican Council II can also be interpreted with rational theology and the result is traditional which supports exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.-Lionel Andrades