There is ambiguity in Vatican Council II because of the use of a false premise and not because of the Council itself.Change the premise and the interpretation of Vatican Council II changes.
On this blog I have cited numerous Catholics using a false premise and then assuming that the Council is liberal and ambiguous.
I have also shown how if you correct the premise , Vatican Council II and the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 take on a new meaning.They are no more a break with the past.
There cannot be ambiguity if Cardinal Luiz Ladaria S.J, Archbishop Gerhard Muller and Archbishop Augustine Di Noia do not assume the dead are visible to us. This is the irrational premise being used today by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith cardinal and archbishops.
It's probably unintentional. Something they have overlooked. This was my error also once upon a time.I am no apologist.I don't have academic degrees in theology, philosophy or Scripture.I keep saying I am no authority but of one thing I am dead sure, it is, we cannot see the dead.
Unlike the CDF and the Vatican Curia Michael Voris on Church Militant TV understands. He got it right. He asked Fr.Jonathan Morris to name someone who does not need to enter the Catholic Church for salvation (1). Similarly Cardinal Walter Kaspar cannot name any one saved in inculpable ignorance (LG 16), seeds of the Word (AG 11), imperfect communion with the Church (UR 3) and good and holy things in their religion (NA 2).
Vatican Council II does not name any one saved. There is no one named who is saved and outside the church.
Vatican Council II instead indicates that all need to be visible members of the Catholic Church for salvation, with visible Catholic Faith and visible to us baptism of desire.
I suspect Cardinal Walter Kaspar knows all this.Otherwise he would have been quick to present some theology to refute what I have been writing over the years.
This issue is shocking and disappointing for many liberals.They realize that the false premise was the cause of the ambiguity in Vatican Council II.
They realize that if those saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are not visible to us then how on earth (no pun intended), can we meet or find an exception to the literal interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
We cannot see the dead! This is an objective observation, a fact of life. Recognize this premise and the ambiguity goes.
Vatican Council II (AG 7) affirms extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was interpreted for centuries. It's pro- St.Robert Bellarmine and the Jesuit missionaries.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church (846) affirms extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was interpreted for centuries.
Lumen Gentium 16 is not an exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it is commonly reported on the Internet.
The liberals had been looking at those saved, 'exceptions',independently of the dogma on salvation.Then they also assumed that the 'exceptions' were known.Tradition shows us that 'the ordinary means of salvation' (Redemptoris Missio 55) is the Church, it is 'faith and baptism' (AG 7). The ordinary means of salvation is not the exceptions which we accept as only possibilities known only to God.
We have Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church in agreement with Tradition on the issue of other religions and Christian communities/churches and there is no ambiguity here.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment