According to Canon Law, all cardinals, bishops, rectors, parish priests and religious superiors have to be Catholic and they must affirm the teachings of the Catholic Church. : We now know how to interpret Vatican Council II rationally. It does not contradict Tradition.

 

According to Canon Law, all cardinals, bishops, rectors, parish priests and religious superiors have to be Catholic and they must affirm the teachings of the Catholic Church. They can no more reject de fide teachings of the Church by saying that they are contradicted by Vatican Council II (irrational).

We now know how to interpret Vatican Council II rationally. It is the same Vatican Council II before us but we  interpret LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 , UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc  in Vatican Council II, as being only hypothetical and theoretical cases. In real life we do not know anyone being saved outside the Church as such. We cannot

 For Pope Francis, the cardinals and bishops, and the rest of the Church, LG 8, 14 and 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, are exceptions for Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So the Syllabus of Errors and the Athanasius Creed are made obsolete. Tradition is obsolete.

But for me, and also an archbishop, many priests and many lay Catholics, LG 8 etc are always hypothetical and speculative. So they do not contradict the Syllabus of Errors. The Council is not a break with Tradition.

They can affirm Vatican Council II with LG 8,14 and 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, being hypothetical and theoretical along with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Syllabus of Errors and the Athanasius Creed. It is no more either Vatican Council II or extra ecclesiam nulla salus. They are compatible.

So how can we have a pope who does not affirm the Athanasius Creed, the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Syllabus of Errors and the rest of Tradition along with  Vatican Council II interpreted rationally, traditionally and honestly ? - Lionel Andrades