Cardinals Kasper and Koch interpret Unitatis Redintigratio, Vatican Council II, with a false premise in support of the New Ecumenism : why should the whole Church follow them ?

Cardinals Kasper and Koch interpret Unitatis Redintigratio in the Second Vatican Council as a support for the New Ecumenism. Why should the whole Church follow them?

On the blog Rorate Caeili, Don Pietro Leone wrote on Vatican Council II and extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS). He quotes Unitatis Redintigratio, Decree on Ecumenism, Vatican Council II, to contradict the EENS dogma and support a New Ecumenism. For him Unitatis Redintigratio (UR) has exceptions for EENS. It contradicts an ecumenism of return to the Catholic Church. There is therefore a hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition,for him.

For me, UR refers only to hypothetical and speculative cases.They exist only in our mind. It would be irrational to consider them objective and practical examples, of being saved outside the Church. So for me they are not exceptions to EENS.

 Unitatis Redintigratio, the Decree on Ecumenism,is not a break with Tradition. I interpret Vatican Council II with the hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition.

Why should Catholics interpret Unitatis Redintigratio with the hermeneutic of rupture instead of continuity, with Tradition?

Why cannot citations from Unitatis Redintigratio simply refer to hypothetical cases and therefore do not contradict EENS in 2021? I can choose to consider Unitatis Redintigratio as not being in conflict with the traditional, strict interpretation of EENS. Other Catholics can do the same.

Similarly Louie Verrecchio on his blog, chooses to interpret UR as a break with the past ecumenism. I pointed this out to him. It's irrational, but he keeps doing the same thing. This is modernism. He uses a false premise to interpret Vatican Council II etc and so the conclusion is non traditional.

UR 3 for example can only be hypothetical. There is no other choice. If someone is saved in another religion, without the Catholic faith and water- baptism, he would be known only to God.

Cardinals Kasper and Koch also interpret Unitatis Redintigratio as a support for the New Ecumenism. Why should the whole Church follow them? They are irrational. It is dishonest to cite theoretical cases, referred to in UR, as practical exceptions to the EENS, in 1965-2021. There is really no new theology supporting the New Ecumenism or the New Theology of Rahner and Ratzinger or 'the development of doctrine', as Pope Benedict and Francis call it.

Vatican Council II interpreted with a false premise cannot be a new revelation. It cannot also be a new ecumenism. It's simple dishonesty.-Lionel Andrades