At the La Sapienza Department for Jurisprudence, Rome where they also teach Catholic Canon Law, they are interpreting Vatican Council II with the false premise and inference and the Judiciary does not check them.Since the Judiciary also interprets Vatican Council II with the same irrationality to create a rupture with Catholic Tradition.
La Sapienza was founded by a pope who held the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS). Now the professors at this university expect students to believe that invisible and unknown cases of non Catholics, allegedly saved outside the Church, with the baptism of desire, baptism of blood or invincible ignorance,are visible examples of salvation outside the Church.So they become objective exceptions to that pope's interpretation of the dogma outside the Church there is no salvation.This is irrational but this is the common reasoning when they teach Church Law and interpret Vatican Council II, the Creeds and Catechisms with this deception, to create a break with exclusive salvation.This is a rupture which they desire.
The Congregation for the Doctrine(CDF) Secretaries at the Vatican have informed the St. Benedict Center, New Hampshire, USA to interpret the Catechism of the Catholic Church(847-848) and so also Vatican Council II (LG 16),with the common false premise. So in this way they will create a rupture with Feeneyite EENS, the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX and exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church in particular.The CDF expects Italians to make the same mistake. The Italian Judiciary cannot be approached since they, have had their education at Catholic institutions. So they make the same objective and factual error.
The Lefebvrists also interpret Vatican Council II with the same common error. Archbishop Carlo Vigano and Bishop Athanasius Schneider recently issued statements on Vatican Council II. They did not ask President Sergio Matterella to stop interpreting the Council with the false premise and inference and to stop creating a non existing rupture with Tradition.They did not also appeal to the SSPX bishops to interpret Vatican Council II without the false premise and affirm the strict interpretation of EENS.Neither did Vigano and Schneider intepret the Council without the false premise themselves. The Lefebvrists seem to need the hermeneutic of rupture so that they do not have to affirm 16th century EENS which is politically incorrect today.
It means all sides need to acknowledge that the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 and Pope Pius XII made an objective mistake.-Lionel Andrades
Posts
