Saturday, October 6, 2012

ARCHBISHOP GERHARD MULLER CHOOSES A HERETICAL INTERPRETATION OF LUMEN GENTIUM 14 WHICH IS A BREAK FROM TRADITION

Archbishop Gerhard Muller interpreted Lumen Gentium 14 as contradicting the literal interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
In the interview with the National Catholic Register (Oct.2,2012) (1) the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith interpreted Lumen Gentium 14(LG 14) as a break from tradition.he also used an irrationality and a false premise, perhaps, unknowingly.The CDF, Prefect may not  have known also, that he was expressing heresy in public.

We can interpret LG 14 with a hermeneutic of continuity or a break from tradition. He chose the latter.

A. LG 14 indicates God will judge who knew about Jesus and the Church and did not enter and who did not know. This has the hermeneutic of continuity.Since only God can judge, we do not know these cases . Since we do not know these cases, who knew or did not know, there are no exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.LG 14 does not contradict the dogma which says every one needs to convert into the Church for salvation.

B. LG 14 indicates for the Archbishop that we can judge and know who is saved in invincible ignorance and who is not.So every body does not have to enter the Church.Only those who know need to enter.This is a a break with Tradition; the dogma and the Syllabus of Errors.

The Archbishop’s interpretation (B) is irrational since we humans cannot judge. These cases are not known to us in the present times.So this interpretation is non traditional and irrational.It’s a new doctrine.It is also heresy since it alleges a defined dogma on salvation has explicit exceptions.

In public Archbishop Muller is denying the dogma allegedly in the name of Vatican Council II (LG 14).

There are two interpretations of LG 14 and its the Archbishop’s interpretation which denies the dogma with an irrationality. He uses the false premise of the dead- saved and visible to him, who are known exceptions to the dogma.So since he knows these cases everyone does not need to convert into the Church but only those whom he knows, knows.

The interpretation (A) is in accord with the SSPX chapter statement (July 19,2012) which says  there is salvation in only the Catholic Church and there are no exceptions. The SSPX could choose to interpret LG 14 as a continuity with the dogma and tradition.

The SSPX could respond to Archbishop Gerhard Muller by showing him that  there is an interpretation of Vatican Council II in accord with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the SSPX could ask the CDF Prefect to accept it. The SSPX will continue to reject heretical interpretations of Vatican Council II.-Lionel Andrades


1.
Archbishop Gerhard Müller: 'The Church Is Not a Fortress'


Do you, nevertheless, accept there’s been a weakening of the Church’s teaching because of this underlying confusion of terminology? One example sometimes cited is that the teaching of “no salvation outside the Church” seems to have become less prominent.

That has been discussed, but here, too, there has been a development of all that was said in the Church, beginning with St. Cyprian, one of the Fathers of the Church, in the third century. Again, the perspective is different between then and now. In the third century, some Christian groups wanted to be outside the Church, and what St. Cyprian said is that without the Church a Christian cannot be saved. The Second Vatican Council also said this: Lumen Gentium 14 says: “Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.” He who is aware of the presence of Revelation is obliged by his conscience to belong publicly — and not only in his conscience, in his heart — to this Catholic Church by remaining in communion with the Pope and those bishops in communion with him.

But we cannot say that those who are inculpably ignorant of this truth are necessarily condemned for that reason. We must hope that those who do not belong to the Church through no fault of their own, but who follow the dictates of their God-given conscience, will be saved by Jesus Christ whom they do not yet know. Every person has the right to act according to his or her own conscience. However, if a Catholic says today, “I am going to put myself outside the Church,” we would have to respond that without the Church that person is in danger of losing salvation.

Therefore, we must always examine the context of these statements. The problem that many people have is that they are linking statements of doctrine from different centuries and different contexts — and this cannot be done rationally without a hermeneutic of interpretation. We need a theological hermeneutic for an authentic interpretation, but interpretation does not change the content of the teaching.
________________________________________________

ARCHBISHOP GERHARD MULLER ASSUMES THAT THE DEAD WHO ARE SAVED ARE VISIBLE ON EARTH AND SO EVERY ONE DOES NOT NEED TO ENTER THE CHURCH:NCR interview

A PRIEST’S QUESTION : NOSTRA AETATE DECLARED AT VATICAN COUNCIL II ...?

A PRIEST'S QUESTION: Lumen Gentium declared at Vatican Council II...?

ASK YOUR PARISH PRIEST FOR MORE INFORMATION ON AD GENTES 7, VATICAN COUNCIL II

ARCHBISHOPS IN HERESY EXCOMMUNICATING THE INNOCENT

For 19 years they did not lift the excommunication of Fr. Leonard Feeney.Since the Archbishop believed the baptism of desire was an exception to the dogma.


Now the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) could be excommunicated because the Vatican  believes invincible ignorance, a good conscience (LG 16) , seeds of the Word (AG 7), elements of sanctification (LG 9) etc are explicit exceptions to the salvation dogma -  so there is salvation outside the church, according to Vatican Council II.


This is the heresy of Archbishop Gerhard Muller similarly to the heresy of Archbishop Richard Cushing at the time of the excommunication of the innocent priest at Boston.


The position of Archbishops Muller and Cushing is - there are defacto, known exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.


This means the dead now saved, are visible to them, on earth. Since they are known to them personally, they are exceptions to the literal interpretation of the outside the church there is no salvation.These are known exceptions.


The  SSPX has to accept an interpretation of Vatican Council II which indicates the dead are visible, otherwise, there could be an 'ecclesial rupture'.


An injustice was done by the Vatican and the Archbishop of Boston to a priest faithful to the centuries old teaching on the dogma. Now an injustice could be done to four bishops and some 500 Catholic priests, as innocent as Fr. Leonard Feeney.


Pope Pius XII did not excommunicate Archbishop Richard Cushing for heresy and neither is Pope Benedict XVI going to excommunicate Archbishop Gerhard Muller.


The rest of the cardinals and bishops are watching silently.


No one wants to support the SSPX by saying the dead saved and visible is a false premise and Vatican Council II really says outside the church there is no salvation. They will not say that the Council is in agreement with the SSPX‘s traditional values.

Archbishop Muller’s interpretation of Vatican Council II is a break from tradition and it should be rejected by all good Catholics. The issue is complicated since this is the only understanding some of the SSPX bishops have Vatican Council II.


According to the Deposit of the Faith, until the 1930’s, one could hold the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus along with implicit baptism of desire and being saved implicitly in invincible ignorance. This same position is tenable for all Catholics. It does not violate the Principle of Non Contradiction. For the Archbishops it would violate the Principle of Non Contradiction since for them the baptism of desire etc are explicit. They can telephone or fax these cases on earth.


We Catholics can affirm a Vatican Council II with implicit salvation along with the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. We do not claim that the dead are visible.


Being able to see the dead saved and alive on earth is a weird suggestion of the two Archbishops
- Lionel Andrades


For nearly 20 years the Holy Office(CDF) and the Archbishop of Boston did not lift the excommunication of Fr.Leonard Feeney when the baptism of desire was never ever an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/10/for-nearly-20-years-holy-officecdf-and.html#links

For nearly 20 years the Holy Office(CDF) and the Archbishop of Boston did not lift the excommunication of Fr.Leonard Feeney when the baptism of desire was never ever an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus

For nearly 20 years the Holy Office (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) and the Archbishop of Boston did not lift the excommunication of Fr. Leonard Feeney when the baptism of desire was never an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Archbishop Muller, the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican( CDF ) now says there will be no doctrinal talks with the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) who reject the explicit baptism of desire interpretation of Vatican Council II, which comes from the error at Boston.

The SSPX could be excommunicated for being faithful to the teachings of the Catholic Church, just like the innocent priest from Boston.

We recognize being saved with implicit desire and in invincible ignorance but they are not exceptions to the dogma on salvation which Pope Pius XII called an ‘infallible teaching’.

The Archbishop of Boston said there were exceptions to the defined dogma. This was heresy. He was supported by the Jesuits. Fr. Leonard Feeney’s priestly faculties were suspended. Catholics were not to visit the St. Benedict Center. He was dismissed by the Jesuits. The Vatican (CDF/Holy Office) followed with an excommunication.

The excommunication was not lifted for 19 years (1953-1972).

Now we know that the baptism of desire was irrelevant to the dogma. The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 does not directly state that the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance are explicit exceptions to the dogma. One has to imply it. The Letter supports Fr. Leonard Feeney when it mentions ‘the dogma’. The text of the dogma does not cite any exceptions like the baptism of desire etc.

An injustice was done to Fr. Leonard Feeney and the Catholic community at St. Benedict Center.
-Lionel Andrades
Oct.6,2012
First Saturday.

POPE JOHN XXIII, POPE PAUL VI AND POPE JOHN PAUL II NEVER IDENTIFIED THE VISIBLE DEAD SAVED MISUNDERSTANDING WHICH CAME FROM THE FR.LEONARD FEENEY ERA

ARCHBISHOP GERHARD MULLER ASSUMES THAT THE DEAD WHO ARE SAVED ARE VISIBLE ON EARTH AND SO EVERY ONE DOES NOT NEED TO ENTER THE CHURCH:NCR interview