This is the irrational interpretation of the popes and cardinals including Cardinal Arthur Roche but also that of Una Voce and the Latin Mass Societies.

 

Joseph Shaw has a political and career-oriented report on the blog 1Peter5 which is conspicuous for what it does not say and what it prudently does say. He cannot mention the Boston Heresy of Pope Pius XII and Cardinal Richard Cushing. He does not mention how this common Heresy- common for liberals and traditionalists- has influenced the interpretation of Vatican Council II over 60 years. This is the irrational interpretation of the popes and cardinals including Cardinal Arthur Roche but also that of Una Voce and the Latin Mass Societies. 

To avoid offending the Jewish Left, Shaw, like Michael Voris and Michael Lofton, will not affirm the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) and the Council of Florence (1442). These Councils are not contradicted by Vatican Council II interpreted rationally i.e. LG 8,14,16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, are always hypothetical cases only. They cannot be objective exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, which Joseph Shaw and Cardinal Arthur Roche cannot support in public.

We cannot meet or see any one saved outside the Church in the present times. So in reality there are no known exceptions for EENS as it was defined by the Councils in 1215 and 1442. This was the ecclesiology of the Church in the Catechisms of Trent and Pius X and the Syllabus of Errors of Pius IX. This was Tradition.But this is not the ecclesioslogy at Mass in Latin or English in Britain.

Joseph Shaw in the 1Peter5 blog asks:

Is there any basis on the Conciliar texts which supports Cardinal Roche’s ‘new theology’?

Yes! If LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc are exceptions for the dogma EENS according to the Council of Florence etc, then there is a new theology. It says outside the Church there is known salvation,outside the Church there is salvation. The dogma EENS of the Fourth Lateran Council has been made obsolete. Cardinal Roche is correct. There is a new theology, a new ecclesiology, a new magisterium.

He writes:

Austen Ivereigh should note that I am not the one criticising Vatican II. It is Cardinal Roche, by implication, who seems to be casting it as introducing an historical rupture into the teaching of the Church.

Of course Vatican Council II is a historical rupture when it contradicts the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX, rejects the Athanasius Creed, rejects the Catechism of Pope Pius X ( 24Q,27Q) etc. Is this not a rupture for Joseph Shaw?

This is a good point Joseph Shaw makes below here but again he does not address the issue of the Boston Heresy of Pius XII, upon which Cardinal Arthur Roche, Pope Francis and the liberals have drawn upon.

I’d love to hear more about this, because any such argument is going to have this difficulty: that if the Traditional Mass is bad, then the Church’s entire liturgy was bad for fifteen centuries, and most probably the Eastern Rites are bad even today. It would be intriguing indeed to discover that the Dicastery for Divine Worship is saying that celebration ad orientem is theologically problematic, while the Dicastery for the Eastern Churches is at the very same time trying to impose celebration ad orientem on the Syro-Malabars.

If that turns out to be true, we have reached a new phase in the confusion sadly associated with the current papacy.

 The Church’s entire liturgy was not bad for 15 centuries since the theology was  coherent and consistent. There was no rupture. Now there is a rupture with the Boston Heresy and Cardinal Roche is pointing out to it. This was also known to Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger.

The issue is not just Vatican Council II, it is how you interpret the Council?

For me there is no new magisterium,no new theology and no new ecclesiology. Since I interpret the Council ratonally unlike Cardinal Roche, Joseph Shaw, the Latin Mass Societies, Una Voce and the English bishops.

Since I interpret the Council rationally I can see through the mistake and propaganda of Cardinal Arthur Roche and Pope Francis and earlier Pope Benedict. When Joseph Shaw also learns to interpret Vatican Council II rationally he will be able to correct the public error of Cardinal Roche, Andrea Grillo, Pope Francis and the liberals in general.  - Lionel Andrades

https://onepeterfive.com/cardinal-roche-vatican-ii-rupture/