EWTN like priests of the Priestly Fraternity if St.Peters (FSSP) in Rome will not affirm the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus but they will assume that the baptism of desire is known to us and an exception to the defined dogma.
This is the position of EWTN’s Bureau Chief in Rome and also the FSSP priests here.
EWTN has put out a critical piece on the SSPX who affirm the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus while Colin B. Donovan, STL of the EWTN denies the dogma.
Similarly on EWTN Patrick Madrid and Peter Vere also deny the dogma by assuming that we know cases of non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance.These cases are supposed to be exceptions to the literal interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney. Fr.Leonard Feeney is criticized for not acknowledging these ghosts.
EWTN cannot affirm the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus in accord with Vatican Council II (AG 7) and the Syllabus of Errors. Instead it assumes that LG 16 contradicts AG 7 and the thrice defined dogma. Hence AG 7 would be contradicting itself for EWTN.
This confusion is presented in a program on baptism which could not state that the baptism of water is needed for the salvation of souls.
Even their Bureau Chief in Rome cannot affirm the faith on this issue and is confused.
It is irrational when the FSSP and EWTN say that being saved in invincible ignorance is an exception to the dogma on exclusive salvation and to also Ad Gentes 7. It is irrational. Since we cannot see ghosts of people. So there are no known exceptions, in Vatican Council II to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus or to the Syllabus of Errors.
To knowingly deny a defined dogma is heresy. Yet EWTN will only choose those apologists who pick up the leftist position which is heretical and irrational.
-Lionel Andrades
http://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/sspx_fssp.htm
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment