VATICAN COUNCIL II HAS A REALITY OF ITS OWN : INDEPENDENT OF POPE LEO XIV

13.01.2026
VATICAN COUNCIL II HAS A REALITY OF ITS OWN : INDEPENDENT OF POPE LEO XIV

1. 1.The Irrational Premise creates a rupture with Tradition irrespective if you are a liberal or conservative Catholic.
The Rational Premise creates a continuity with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) of the Council of Florence 1442, which did not mention any exceptions.

2, ‘The red is not an exception for the blue’ in Vatican Council II. The hypothetical passages, underscored in red, do not contradict the orthodox passages marked in blue.

If the hypothetical passages in Vatican Council II are marked in purple then the purple is not an exception for the blue here.

3. If the baptism of desire (LG 14) and being saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16) refer to a physically visible case, a known person, saved outside the Catholic Church with the baptism of desire (BOD) or in invincible ignorance (I.I), then the BOD and I.I are explicit exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Athanasius Creed and an ecumenism of return to the Catholic Church of the Syllabus of Pope Pius IX. This is irrespective if you are a progressivist or traditionalist.
But if the baptism of desire (LG 14) and being saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16) refer to an invisible case, then it is not an objective example of salvation outside the Church in the present times (1965-2026).LG 14, LG 16 are not exceptions for the dogma EENS, the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus.
This is a reality, independent of our opinion.

FOR POPE LEO XIV

So Pope Leo can no more project Vatican Council II as a rupture with Tradition (EENS etc).

1. He has chosen the Irrational and not Rational Premise.

2. ‘The red is an exception for the blue’ for him. This is irrational and not traditional. The reality is that ‘the red is not an exception for the blue’.

3. The blue orthodox passages are in harmony with traditional salvation theology this is reality. They dominate in Vatican Council II and do not have any exceptions. But for Pope Leo the blue orthodox passages are contradicted by the red hypothetical passages, which refer to only invisible cases of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance.

4. The baptism of desire refers to a visible case for him. This is not the reality of Vatican Council II.

FOR ME

For me Vatican Council II has continuity with Tradition (EENS etc).

1. I have chosen the Rational Premise.

2. ‘The red is not an exception for the blue’ for me.

3. The blue orthodox passages are in harmony with traditional salvation theology. This is reality. They dominate in Vatican Council II for me and do not have any exceptions.

4. The baptism of desire refers to a physically invisible case in our human reality. This is also the reality of Vatican Council II. It is the same for me.

5. When what is invisible is confused as being visible I call it Cushingism. When what is invisible is seen as just being invisible I call it Feeneyism. Here this is not a reference to the two historical persons with these names.

Pope Leo interprets Vatican Council II with Cushingism and I choose Feeneyism. So our conclusions will be different.

-Lionel Andrades