I have been saying on this blog that if we simply interpret LG 8,LG 14,LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II, as being hypothetical cases only, the interpretation of Vatican Council II changes

 

I have been saying on this blog that if we simply interpret LG 8,LG 14,LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II, as being hypothetical cases only, the interpretation of Vatican Council II changes.

Without this change, LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc are commonly interpreted as non hypothetical, objective people, non Catholics, saved outside the Church without ‘faith and baptism’(AG 7). So they become exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS), the Athanasius Creed, Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX, and the rest of Tradition.

Now when the French bishops criticize the Latin Mass and the old ecclesiology, they have to see Vatican Council II, with LG 8 etc not being hypothetical cases in the present times(1965-2021). In this way there is a  parallel Church with Tradition.

This is public deception, it is unethical.It is political, supported by the Left, which opposes Catholic Tradition.

So if Le Pen announces that Vatican Council II is to be interpreted rationally and without deliberate confusion, the parallel Church starts crumbling.

The non separation of Church and State can be proclaimed to save souls from going to Hell, when the old ecclesiocentrism of the Catholic Church returns.

Doctrinally there would be no rupture with the past.So with the Council supporting Tradition, collegiality, ecumenism and religious liberty would no more be an issue. There can once again be the proclamation of the Social Reign of Christ the King in all political legislation.-Lionel Andrades