Wednesday, August 22, 2012

CATHOLIC FAMILY NEWS USES WRONG PREMISE

On the Catholic Family News website there are a few articles critical of Vatican Council II (1)  because the writer used the premise of Richard Cushing i.e those who are saved in invincible ignorance who have not had the Gospel preached to them through no fault of their own and who are now dead are known to us, they are visible to us on earth.

He then chose material from Vatican Council II to justify this error.So much is concluded wrongly abut Vatican Council II because of one small premise.

For John Vennari Vatican Council II says there is salvation outside the Church- So it is a modernist,heretical Council.

For me, without the Cushing error, Vatican Councl II says there is no salvation outside the church.So it is in agreement with tradition.I can cite text from the Council to support my view.

For me being saved with implicit desire/ baptism of desire is not an exception to the dogma.For John Vennari it is.

So here is the difference between the two interpretations. if John Vennari is aware of the irrationality he can discover the Council  as traditional.

The interpretation of the Council by the liberals is the same as that of John Vennari.They are all using the ‘visible dead’ argument to claim there is salvation outside the church according to Vatican Council II.

Since there is salvation outside the church for them, the Syllabus of Errors and extra ecclesiam nulla salus is contradicted. We then have a modernist Council which the SSPX and John Vennari criticize..

The wrong premise is : those who are saved in invincible ignorance, who have not had the Gospel preached to them through no fault of their own and who are now dead, are known to us, they are visible to us on earth.

The conclusion: there is salvation outside the Church.
-Lionel Andrades

1.
Magnificent Si Si No No Series on

"The Errors of Vatican II"
Seven part series:
Highlights:

• Vatican II's Ambiguous Juridical Nature

• Mutilated concept of the Magisterium

•The contamination of Catholic doctrine with intrinsically anti-Catholic "modern thinking."

• Relevant Omissions - at least 8 points the Council should have addressed but failed to...

These are highlights only from Part I. See list for entire Seven part series.

It is important for us to re-study this series, especially when we are confronted with Archbishop Müller and Archbishop DiNoia who try to tell us there are no errors in Vatican II, but only bad interpretation. Time to re-study at a time when ecumenical post-Conciliar Vatican prelates try to convince of a position that is not true!

January 2003 Si Si No No Reprint No. 50
Errors of Vatican II Part I

March 2003 Si Si No No Reprint No. 51
Errors of Vatican II Part II
Note on Dominus Jesus

May 2003 Si Si No No Reprint No. 52
Errors of Vatican II Part III

July 2003 Si Si No No Reprint No. 53
Errors of Vatican II Part IV

September 2003 Si Si No No Reprint No. 54
Errors of Vatican II Part V

November 2003 Si Si No No Reprint No. 55
Errors of Vatican II Part VI

January 2004 Si Si No No Reprint No. 56
Errors of Vatican II Part VII

March 2004 Si Si No No Reprint No. 57
Errors of Vatican II Part VIII

Do John Vennari,Doug Bersaw, Gary Potter, John Sharpe and others under stand that being saved in invincible ignorance and implicit desire are not exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ?

So even if John Vennari,Doug Bersaw, Gary Potter, John Sharpe and the others are not indifferentists and and even affirm the traditional interpretation of the dogma and the Syllabus do they assume that Vatican Counciil II is a traditional Council with traditional values on other religions , ecumenism and religious liberty ?


Does Robert Sungenis consider LG 16 an exception to the dogma on exclusive salvation?


None of the speakers at the Rebuilding Christiandom Conference (1) to be held this week in Washington have ever said that Vatican Council II is in agreement with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Syllabus of Errors and Catholic Tradition.


On the contrary some of them are criticial of Vatican Council II since they assume that the Council mentions explicit exceptions to the dogma on salvation and to the Syllabus.


So if Vatican Council II is not in sync with the dogma and the Syllabus for the speakers, then this is no basis to build a foundation for what could otherwise be a good conference.


If for them, Vatican Council II indicates there is salvation outside the Church it means they are interpreting the Council (LG 16 etc) with the liberal errors and in particular that of Cardinal Richard Cushing.


He assumed that those saved in invincible ignorance and with implicit desire are exceptions to the traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and to Fr.Leonard Feeney. Implicit desire is irrelevant to the literal interpretation of the dogma or to Fr.Leonard Feeney.


Even today good people say innocently that every one needs to enter the Church except for those in invincible ignorance etc which are exceptions to the dogma.


For John Vennari for example Vatican Council II contradicts the Syllabus of Errors and extra ecclesiam nulla salus.


The fault is there not with the Council but with those, who like Cushing, assume the dead are visible and so these cases are cited as exceptions to the dogma.For them there is salvation outside the church.
So even if John Vennari,Doug Bersaw, Gary Potter, John Sharpe and the others  are not indifferentists and and even affirm the traditional interpretation of the dogma and the Syllabus do they assume that Vatican Counciil II is a traditional Council with traditional values on other religions , ecumenism and religious liberty ?

Without the Richard Cushing Error the speakers perspective on Vatican Council II would change and their understanding of the Council would become traditional.

The Sisters of St.Benedict, Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, Worcester,USA  affirm the literal interpretation of the dogma on exclusive salvation similar to the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) July 19,2012 communique.The Sisters interpret Vatican council II according to Fr.Leonard Feeney and not Cardinal Richard Cushing.

For them Vatican Council II (AG 7) affirms the dogma according to Fr.Leonard Feeney while invincible ignorance etc (LG 16) are not exceptions to the dogma.

This religious community granted full canonical status knows there is no salvation outside the church.So the theology of religions and ecclesiology of communion would be irrational for them.

They acknowledge the possibility of a non Catholic being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire however for them this would also include receiving the baptism of water provided in a way known only to God.

Since there is no salvation outside the Chruch ,there being no known exceptions,this year or during the last 100 years or more,Vatican Council II is in accord with Tradition. The Council is traditional.The Council does not contradict the Syllabus of Errors, Pascendi, Mystici Corporis and of course extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to Fr.Leonard Feeney.

-Lionel Andrades

1.

 
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'
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.

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'

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.


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...