Raymond Arroyo on his blog and other media celebrated Easter, the Resurrection of Jesus but does he qualify to be a Catholic when he does not affirm the teachings of the Catholic Church ? For political reasons he interprets Vatican Council II with a False Premise to create a rupture with Tradition.
For political Left reasons he interprets the baptism of desire(BOD),baptism of blood(BOB)and invincible ignorance(I.I) with the common False Premise and not the Rational Premise to create alleged practical exceptions for 16th century extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).
For political Left reasons with the same False Premise he produces a new version of the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX which also has exceptions.
So when the Catechism of Pope Pius X affirms exclusive salvation, with reference to other religions ( 24Q and 27Q), he would project (29Q being saved in invincible ignorance)in that catechism as a practical exception. So for political Left reasons this would be a rupture with the 'one, true, Catholic and Apostolic Church', of the Patristic period.
His concept of salvation is liberal for political correct with the Left reasons and so it is the same as the correspondents of the National Catholic Reporter.
Even Robert Royal and Fr.Gerard Murray on EWTN World Over use the False Premise instead of the Rational Premise.
So they are not really teaching the Catholic Faith to others, since they have to guard their interests, earnings, careers etc.
For them, like the liberals, with the False Premise, there are practical exceptions for the Syllabus of Errors etc, which are rejected and considered obsolete.Vatican Council II is made a false break with Tradition.
At EWTN they all interpret Vatican Council II like John Allen jr., Massimo Faggioli and the Jesuit priests.
Pope Francis does the same.
The 70 cardinals, bishops and lay theologians who met in Chicago last month, must affirm Vatican Council II. They then will not change the Faith. They will continue to remain in the Catholic Church.
-Lionel Andrades
APRIL 15, 2022
Raymond Arroyo and Robert Royal interpret Vatican Council II with the False and not Ratiional Premise here : they are following the policy of the EWTN
APRIL 18, 2022
Raymond Arroyo does not respond on Twitter
I have texted Raymond Arroyo and also invited him for a conversation on Twitter but I get no response from him.
I have been saying that there are two interpretations of Vatican Council II one with the Rational Premise and the other with the Irrational Premise and the conclusions will be Traditional or Non Traditional. In his World Over report when with Robert Royal he referred to Vatican Council II, it was Vatican Council II ( Irrational) for the both of them.They were interpreting the Council like the 70 cardinals, bishops and lay theologians who met at Chicago last month.
So they all misinterpret hypothetical cases of LG 8,LG 14, LG 16 etc as referring to objective and practical exceptions for the Syllabus of Errors. Then they reject Tradition like Pope Benedict and Cardinal Luiz Ladaria.
But to use a False Premise is unethical.It is dishonest.
If they were honest they could say that they affirm the Syllabus of Errors (ecumenism of return) with there being no practical cases of Christians saved outside the Catholic Church in 2022.So there would not be any practical exceptions for the Athanasius Creed and the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.There would be no practical exceptions for Tradition.
It would mean that the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance always refers to hypothetical and invisible cases and so are not practical exceptions for EENS according to the missionaries in the 16th century.Vatican Council II( Rational) supports the Jesuit missionaries in the Middle Ages.
These are the points which Raymond Arroyo does not respond to- EWTN and the National Catholic Register staff interpret Vatican Council II with the False Premise like the USCCB bishops. Lionel Andrades
-
Posts
