John Vennari affirms the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus but does not apply it to Vatican Council II because of the Richard Cushing misunderstanding.
There will be the Rebuilding Cristendom Conference and the Catholic Identity Conference (1) in which many of the speakers are expected to criticize Vatican Council II because they are not familiar with the Richard Cushing Error which they share.Some of them could hold the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
As mentioned in an earlier post they will assume that those saved in invincible ignorance, though dead, are known to us and so are explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesaim nula salus. In other words, there is salvation outside the church according to Vatican Council II.
Since there is salvation outside the church according to Vatican Council II for them, the Council is considered a modernist Council.
So the fault is not with the Council.The fault is with those who assume the dead are visible and so there is salvation outside the church.
Here is an example of John Vennari, one of the speakers at a Conference, making the Richard Cushing Error in his interpretation of Vatican Council II.
John Vennari:
All that the SSPX hold and teach is perfectly in line with the doctrine of Popes Pius IX, Leo XIII, Pius X, Benedict XIV, Pius XI and Pius XII.
This fidelity of the SSPX, however, puts them at odds with the novelties of Vatican II.
Lionel:
Here we have an indication that John Vennari is making the Richard Cushing error and so wrongly interpreting Vatican Council.
John Vennari:
Thus, Cardinal Felici recognized that Vatican II contained novelties no Catholic is bound to accept. These novelties, such as ecumenism, religious liberty, and its new approach to Judaism that claims Jews need not convert to Catholicism for salvation, are contrary to what the Church has always taught, and have proved disastrous for the Church and for souls.
Lionel:
This confirms he is making the Cushing error of assuming that the dead are visible and so they are explcit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. the novelties exist because LG 16 (invincible ignorance/good conscience) are considered exceptions to the dogma. Those saved in invincible ignorance but dead for us, Vennari assumes are alive and so are a known exception to the dogma. AG 7 says all need Catholic Faith and LG 16 does not state that invincible ignorance etc are exceptions to AG 7 or the dogma. Vennari has to assume that it does. Here is the error. No text of Vatican Council II states that we know non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance, good conscience, seeds of the Word, imperfect communion etc. No text in the Council says that there are exceptions to the dogma.
So if Vatican Council II afffirms the dogma with AG 7 and there are no exceptions then the Council does not contradict any of the popes mentioned by John Vennari.
So if Vatican Council II afffirms the dogma with AG 7 and there are no exceptions then the Council does not contradict any of the popes mentioned by John Vennari.
John Vennari in another report has affirmed the literal interpretation of the dogma and has quoted Cantate Domino, Council of Florence but indicates there are exceptions to the dogma in Vatican Council II.
John Vennari:
This is all the more pressing, since the Conciliar novelties such as ecumenism and religious liberty stand condemned by previous Church teaching, particularly Blessed Pius IX Syllabus or Errors (against Religious Liberty), and Pope Pius XI's Mortalium Animos (against Ecumenism).(2)
Lionel:
There is no evidence in Vatican Council II that they are being contradicted unless the Richard Cushing error is made.If the ecclesiology of Vatican Council II is exclusive then the values of the Council are traditional.
So it is not enough just to affirm the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus one also has to apply it to Vatican Council II. If LG 16 (invincible ignorance) is an exception to the dogma then Vatican Council II contradicts the Syllabus of Errors etc. If LG 16 is not known to us and so is not an exception to the dogma Vatican Council II does not contradict the Syllabus of Errors.
The SSPX could accept Vatican Council II 'in line with the doctrine of Popes Pius IX, Leo XIII, Pius X, Benedict XIV, Pius XI and Pius XII.'
-Lionel Andrades
1.
2.
http://op54rosary.ning.com/forum/topics/rome-sspx-the-drama-continues-compiled-by-john-vennari-may-26th-2
ROBERTO de MATTEI’S RADICI CRISTIANI ENDORSES LITERAL INTERPRETATION OF THE SALVATION DOGMA BUT DOES NOT INTERPRET VATICAN COUNCIL II ACCORDING TO THE DOGMA
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/08/roberto-de-matteis-radici-cristiani.html#links
TWO CATHOLIC CONFERENCES ARE READY TO CRITICIZE VATICAN COUNCIL II BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT AWARE OF THE RICHARD CUSHING ERROR OF THE ‘VISIBLE DEAD’.
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/08/two-catholic-conferences-are-ready-to.html#links
NOVUS ORDO PRIESTS WITH CANONICAL STATUS HAVE AFFIRMED THE DOGMA AND VATICAN COUNCIL II - THEIR VALUES ARE THOSE OF THE SSPX
http://eucharistandmission.blo...
IF THE SISTERS CAN GET CANONICAL STATUS THEN WHY NOT THE SSPX: THE REAL ISSUE IS THE LITERAL INTERPRETATION OF THE DOGMA AND NOT VATICAN COUNCIL II
http://eucharistandmission.blo...
Vatican Council II indicates there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church so it makes the old Muller-Ladaria way of understanding Vatican Council II obsolete.
The Cushing problem has been identified and corrected. We cannot know the dead who are saved
http://eucharistandmission.blo...
SSPX IF THE SISTERS HAVE CANONICAL STATUS SO CAN YOU
http://eucharistandmission.blo...
SSPX COULD CHOOSE THE SISTERS OF ST.BENEDICT CENTER MODEL FOR AFFIRMING VATICAN COUNCIL II IN ACCORD WITH TRADITION
http://eucharistandmission.blo...
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment