Even Joseph Shaw, John Lamont, Thomas Pink, John Rao and other Catholic traditionalist professors, use a false premise, inference and conclusion to interpret Vatican Council II.So they philosophically ( false observation, empirical error) and theologically ( outside the Church there is salvation, known salvation is the new theology) they reject or change the teachings of the popes ex cathedra. So Vatican Council II would contradict Vatican Council I, for them, even though there is a choice.
They can choose to interpret magisterial documents with the rational premise, inference and conclusion and then there would be no rupture with Vatican Council I.
Instead they interpret the Creeds and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) with the false premise, inference and conclusion and then criticize the Feeneyites.
Now the traditionalists are non traditional. They attend the Latin Mass and call it the Traditional Latin Mass.There ecclesiology is a rupture with the past ecclesiology.This results with the false interpretation of the baptism of desire (BOD), baptism of blood( BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I) and in Vatican Council II, LG 8, UR 3, NA 3, GS 22 etc.Hypothetical cases are assumed to be non hypothetical.Then they are projected as objective exceptions to Tradition.
For the Magisterium and missionaries in the 16th century BOD, BOB and I.I were not objective exceptions to traditional EENS. It was with this understanding that they offered or attended the Traditional Latin Mass.
The present traditionalists are in schism with the popes over the centuries on EENS and the Creeds. This is first class heresy.It is not Tradition. They are following Pope Paul VI. It is the same for the Society of St. Pius X(SSPX) whose bishops and priests criticize Pope Paul VI but interpret Vatican Council II, the Creeds and EENS, as he did.-Lionel Andrades
They can choose to interpret magisterial documents with the rational premise, inference and conclusion and then there would be no rupture with Vatican Council I.
Instead they interpret the Creeds and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) with the false premise, inference and conclusion and then criticize the Feeneyites.
Now the traditionalists are non traditional. They attend the Latin Mass and call it the Traditional Latin Mass.There ecclesiology is a rupture with the past ecclesiology.This results with the false interpretation of the baptism of desire (BOD), baptism of blood( BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I) and in Vatican Council II, LG 8, UR 3, NA 3, GS 22 etc.Hypothetical cases are assumed to be non hypothetical.Then they are projected as objective exceptions to Tradition.
For the Magisterium and missionaries in the 16th century BOD, BOB and I.I were not objective exceptions to traditional EENS. It was with this understanding that they offered or attended the Traditional Latin Mass.
The present traditionalists are in schism with the popes over the centuries on EENS and the Creeds. This is first class heresy.It is not Tradition. They are following Pope Paul VI. It is the same for the Society of St. Pius X(SSPX) whose bishops and priests criticize Pope Paul VI but interpret Vatican Council II, the Creeds and EENS, as he did.-Lionel Andrades
Posts
