until the Pope himself clarifies this epicenter of our Faith
Lionel:
What about the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary ? When will they clarify it ?
Are you saying that they are in error? I am waiting for your clarifiction.
Once again: Is the baptism of desire explicit and known to us in individual cases in 2013?
If these cases are not known to us then is the baptism of desire per se an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.?
And if it is not then are there any exceptions mentioned in Vatican Council II to the interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney ?
-Lionel Andrades
Posts
3 comments:
Lionel:
What about the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary ? When will they clarify it ?
Are you saying that they are in error? I am waiting for your clarifiction.
George:
Of course the Slaves of the Immaculate of Mary are in error as are all in error that do not teach the absolute necessity of converting and belonging to the Catholic Church. No one and I mean no one can be excused and presumed to be saved by the mercies of God while alive. No one can be presumed or safe in their non Catholic beliefs. All must hear, comply, live and obey the necessity of belonging to the Catholic Church. It is incumbent upon the Pope to clarify this or the crisis will not end. Conversion is mandatory and thus all this babel of the last sixty plus years which is a punishment for modernism and not living and safeguarding our faith. The Pope must act !
JMJ,
George Brenner ( OK to post )
Of course the Slaves of the Immaculate of Mary are in error as are all in error that do not teach the absolute necessity of converting and belonging to the Catholic Church.
Lionel.
George the issue is the baptism of desire per se.
The Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary do teach the absolute necessity of belonging to the Catholic Church.
In the interpretation of the dogma on salvation they do not use Cushingism but depend on the text of the dogma. They are correct here.
However when discussing Vatican Council II they use Cushingism (with visible exceptions).So LG 16 would contradict extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
Also their concept of the baptism of desire independent of the dogma is one of being explicit and visible to us in 2013.
So it is difficult for them to accept implicit baptism of desire, known only to God as being compatible with the traditional interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus. This could be an indication also that they consider being saved with the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance as explicit and visible to us.
This is why it would be helpful if they clarified their position.
" This is why it would be helpful if they clarified their position"
eternally helpful..... The job description of a priest is to lead as many souls to heaven as possible. Truth is not helpful it is mandatory.
JMJ,
George Brenner
Post a Comment