Monday, April 23, 2012

PREFECT OF THE SUPREME TRIBUNAL: CAN THERE BE AN ‘ECCLESIAL RUPTURE’ FOR NOT AFFIRMING ‘ A VISIBLE BAPTISM OF DESIRE’ AND A LIBERAL, IRRATIONAL INTERPRETATION OF THE CATECHISM AND VATICAN COUNCIL II ?

I appeal to Cardinal Raymond Burke, Prefect of the Supreme Tribunal, Vatican to ask Ecclesia Dei and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF), how can we know cases of non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire?How can they also be explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as the CDF alleges.


Evidence:

1. The Secretary of the CDF Cardinal Luiz Ladaria S.J on the International Theological Commission website in two position papers states that there is no more exclusive salvation in only the Catholic Church since Vatican Council II (LG 16) and the documents of Pope Pius XII indicate that there are exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and its literal interpretation.

2. Pope Benedict XVI in Light of the World (Ignatius) p.107 indicates that those saved in invincible ignorance etc are defacto exceptions to the dogma which taught that there is only one way of salvation and everyone needed to convert into the Church.The pope suggests that all those who are saved are saved through Jesus Christ (CCC 846) and this is the one channel. So there are explicit exceptions to the dogma and to Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II which says all need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation; all need to convert into the Church.CCC 846 also states all need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation (to avoid Hell).This was the one way, the centuries old interpretation of the Catholic Church.

I appeal to His Eminence Cardinal Raymond Burke to note that when we do not know any case of a person saved in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire how can they be explicit exceptions to the dogmatic teaching on  exclusive salvation being there in only the Catholic Church?

So why should there be an ‘ecclesial rupture’ between the CDF/Ecclesia Dei and the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX); why should there be this threat to the SSPX to accept Vatican Council II with this irrational interpretation of knowing cases on earth  saved in invincible ignorance and a good conscience(LG 16)?

Why should the Institute of the Good Shepherd (IGS) accept the Ecclesia Dei advice to follow the Catechism of the Catholic Church when the CDF/Ecclesia Dei never clarifies how does the Catechism and Vatican Council II negate the literal interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus and exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church? Vatican Council II affirms the literal interpretation of the dogma (AG 7) and there are no known exceptions(LG 16 etc). So Vatican Council II is in agreement with the SSPX position on ecumenism and other religions.

Why cannot Catholics accept the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and also implicit baptism of desire and invincible ignorance?

Why does the CDF/Ecclesia Dei expect Fr.Leonard Feeney’s communities, the St.Benedict Centers, also traditionalists, in Los Angeles, Worcester and Manchester,USA to assume that the baptism of desire is a defacto exception to the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was interpreted by Fr.Leonard Feeney, the popes, Councils,saints, Catechisms and Vatican Council I and II ? One of the communities in Los Angeles is not being recognized it is learnt since the Archbishop and just about every body there assumes that implicit baptism of desire is explicit and so is a defacto exception to the literal interpretation of the dogma held by this Catholic community in Los Angeles.

No Magisterial document claims that the baptism of desire is an explicit exception to the dogma or that these cases can be known to us personally, and so are exceptions to the traditional teaching of exclusive salvation being there in only the Catholic Church.

I have appealed to the CDF and Ecclesia Dei through this blog and have sent them copies of these blog posts over the years, hoping they would do something about this issue but they have done nothing.Now they are issuing notices to traditionalist groups to accept their liberal heresy.Foreign lobbies are openly appealing to the pope and the CDF to change Church teaching, as if this is possible, and to penalize the traditionalists for being faithful to the teachings of the Catholic Church.

In Christ.

Mr.Lionel Andrades
Catholic Layman in Rome

No comments: