Oxford University like the University of Bristol, U.,K are producing irrational books on Vatican Council II which create a false rupture with Catholic Tradition. Gavin D'Costa at the University of Bristol teaches students to interpret Vatican Council II non rationally, even after he and the university management are informed. Joseph Shaw does the same at St. Benet Hall, Oxford.

Oxford University like the University of Bristol, U.,K are producing irrational books on Vatican Council II which create a false rupture with Catholic Tradition.

Gavin D'Costa at the University of Bristol teaches students to interpret Vatican Council II non rationally, even after he and the university management are informed. Joseph Shaw does the same at St. Benet Hall, Oxford.

The same deceptive policy is underway at Kings College, U.K where the traditionalist Thomas Pink, teaches theology with the same error. Pink has spoken at traditionalists conferences.It is the same with the traditionalists Dr. John Rao and John Lament.

If they did not interpret Vatican Council II deceptively and expediently the Council would support the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Catholic Church, with an ecumenism of return only.The ecclesiology of the Church today for them would be the same as that of the Middle Ages and Vatican Council II would not be a problem.But these Catholic professors of theology and philosophy seem to want to interpret the Council as a rupture with Tradition.

Shaw and Lamony have spoken at the Lepanto Foundation conference of Roberto dei Mattei. At one conference they criticized the New Theology. But they interpret Vatican Council II with the New Theology which is created by assuming that the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) are objective examples of salvation outside the Church and so practical exceptions to traditional extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So like the liberals and Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, their message is outside the Church there is salvation,that  there is known salvation outside the Church. So the traditional outside the Church there is no salvation is rejected by all of them who call themselves traditionalists.

They will not announce that there are no known cases in 2019 of non Catholics saved outside the Church with BOD, BOB and I.I.

Neither will they say that they do not know of any literal cases of any one saved as referenced in LG 8, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II.

 There are so many reports which state or indicate that there is nothing in Unitatis Redintigratio, in its entire text, to contradict the traditional ecumenism of return. But they will not mention it. Instead they will interpret Vatican Council II(UR) as a rupture with the old ecumenism of return.

Bishop Bernard Fellay the past Superior General of the SSPX, and Fr. Pier Paolo Petrucci the foremer District Superior of the SSPX, Italy,interpreted UR 3 as a rupture with the past ecumenism and the past ecclesiology.

Even though they were corrected there were no comments from them. There was no correction or apology from the SSPX bishops and priests.

Catholics are still being misled.

How can hypothetical and speculative cases in UR 3, which exist only in the mind,be objective examples of salvation outside the Church in 2019 and exceptions to the past ecclesiocentric ecclesiology of the Catholic Church?

-Lionel Andrades