The interpretation of Vatican Council II today by Cardinal Robert Sarah and Cardinal Francis Arinze is irrational. They are correct politically. We are not obliged to interpret Vatican Council II politically like them and Pope Francis. The people have a choice.

 

Everyone is interpreting LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II, one way or the other, whether they know it or not. They are either irrational or rational. Most of them are irrational.

If Vatican Council II is a break with Tradition then they are interpreting Vatican Council II irrationally.

If Vatican Council II has a continuity with the dogma EENS and the rest of Tradition then they are interpreting LG 8 etc rationally.

The Church is traditional since Vatican Council II is traditional for me. There is no rupture with the past Catechisms. There is no new version of the Creeds.

BOOKS ON VATICAN COUNCIL II ARE IRRATIONAL

In general, books on Vatican Council II etc are interpreted irrationally. The liberal Jesuits and the conservatives interpret Vatican Council II as a break with the past. So their interpretation of UR 3 etc is not the same as mine.They are irrational.

But all the same they are interpreting LG 8 etc.Even though some may not think about it.

Some blame the Council for the break with Tradition and reject it. The popes accept the Council as a break with Tradition. But neither of the two mention the false premise (invisible people are visible) and false inference (visible cases of salvation outside the Church make the dogma EENS obsolete).

Now we have a discovery and we know that we have a choice. We can only interpret the Council with the rational premise (invisible cases of LG 8, 14 and 16 etc are invisible) and rational inference (invisible cases of LG 8 etc are not visible examples of salvation outside the Church and so are not exceptions for EENS). So our conclusion is traditional. Vatican Council II has a continuity with Tradition, with the dogma EENS, all the Catechisms and the Syllabus of Errors.

VOCATIONS

So only those cardinals should be allowed to participate in a Conclave who interpret LG 8, 14, LG 16 etc rationally. Presently this is not being done. Most or all of them interpret the Council irrationally and so politically.

Only those vocations to the religious life must be accepted who interpret Vatican Council II rationally. Now it is the opposite.

FIRST COMMUNION AND CONFIRMATION CLASS

At First Communion and Confirmation classes it must be taught that there is exclusive salvation in only the Catholic Church. Since Vatican Council II is in harmony with the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors and the Catechisms of Pius X and Trent.

AMORIS LAETITIA 

The pope can no more justify the Abu Dhabi Declaration or Amortis Laetitis in the name of Vatican Council II interpreted liberally and irrationally. There can only be one honest option.

CARDINALS AT THE CONCLAVE MUST BE HONEST

Only those cardinals can be admitted to the Conclave who interpret the Council rationally. The Profiession of Faith must only be made by those who interpret the Council honestly.

The interpretation of Vatican Council II today by Cardinal Robert Sarah and Cardinal Francis Arinze is irrational. They are correct politically. We are not obliged to interpret Vatican Council II politically like them and Pope Francis. The people have a choice.- Lionel Andrades

 

FUORI DELLA CHIESA CATTOLICA NON C’E SALVEZZA

(OUTSIDE THE CHURCH THERE IS NO SALVATION)

GIOV.3:5, MC.16:16

(JOHN 3:5, MARK 16:16)

CONCILIO VATICANO II (AG7/LG14)

(VATICAN COUNCIL II (AG7/LG14)

CATECHISMO DELLA CHIESA CATTOLICA (846)

(CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH 846)

CATECHISMO DEL TRENTO, CATECHISMO DEL PAPA PIO X,

(CATECHISM OF TRENT, CATECHISM OF POPE PIUS X)

CONCILIO LATERANO (1215), CONCILIO DI FIRENZE (1442)

FOURTH LATERAN COUNCIL (1215), COUNCIL OF FLORENCE (1442).

Name. Lionel Andrades

https://twitter.com/AndradesLionel

E-mail: lionelandrades10@gmail.com

Blog: eucharistandmission ( Lionel’s blog)

Tel:-