Wednesday, April 10, 2013

If LG 16 is 'invisible' : Koch,Ladaria and Di Noia could be outside the Church and the SSPX in

 

Lumen Gentium 16,Vatican refers to invisible- to-us invincible ignorance and  Lumen Gentium 8 refers to invisible to us 'elements of sanctification'.Lumen Gentium  16,being saved in invincible ignorance, is explicit only for God. While the present day liberal interpretation of Vatican Council II suggests the opposite.For the Jewish Left Lumen Gentium 16 is explicit and visible also for us humans.So we can judge and see these cases,now dead and in Heaven. The Lumen Gentium 16 invisible-version of Vatican Council II has a continuity with Tradition and also with Ad Gentes 7, which says all need 'faith and baptism' for salvation.LG 16 is not a break with the past.LG 16(visible) is a break with the past but LG 16(invisible) is not a break with Tradition.The Vatican Council II model approved by Pope Benedict XV and the International Theological Commission is not the Lumen Gentium 16( invisible version).It has the hermeneutic of rupture. It is also an irrational interpretation.It suggests that those who are saved with 'elements of sanctification' (LG 8) and invincible ignorance (LG 16) are known to us (visible)and so they are known exceptions(visible exceptions) to Ad Gentes 7.They are exceptions to the traditional teaching that all need faith and baptism for salvation (AG 7).
 
 
If the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican (CDF) supports the Lumen Gentium 16 being invisible, it would be telling Archbishop Augustine Di Noia at Ecclesia Dei,Vatican and the Vatican Curia,  that we do not know anyone saved with 'elements of sanctification'.So LG 8 is not an exception to AG 7.Since only God can know who is saved in invincible ignorance etc  LG 16 is not an exception  to AG 7. This means all non Catholics, Jews included, are oriented to Hell, unless they convert into the Catholic Church.This would draw protests from the Jewish Left.

This would be supporting the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) position on other religions and ecumenism.It would be supporting traditional ecclesiology.This is the interpretation that the CDF must choose in all honesty and not pretend that there is only one interpretation of Vatican Council II- the false one.

The Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) would then not be in schism. If Archbishop Augustine Di Noia, Cardinal Luiz Ladaria S.J and Cardinal Kurt Koch reject this interpretation of Vatican Council II, the only rational one, the only one in continuity with Tradition it is they who would be in heresy. They would be 'in schism', in the words of Di Noia in an interview with  National Catholic Register when he referred to the SSPX.
 
Who will be in and who will be out of the Catholic Church ?
 
The Vatican Curia  needs to interpret Vatican Council in accord with Tradition and Ad Gentes 7,so does Pope Francis. -Lionel Andrades

Liberal Australian priest calls an interpretation of Vatican Council II fundamentalist

Rejects Vatican Council II as 'fundo'.

Fr.John George 92 on the forum True Catholic has to choose between two interpretations of Vatican Council II. One in which LG 16 (invincible ignorance) is considered visible to us in the present times, i.e we can physically see people now in Heaven who are saved and the second, that these cases are invisible to us and known only to God.

If invincible ignorance etc is visible to us in 2013 then it means Vatican Council II is a break with the past.LG 16 etc contradicts Ad Gentes 7 whichs says all need 'faith and baptism' for salvation.

In this case there are known exceptions to AG 7.The exceptions are those saved in invincible ignorance etc who are allegedly visible to us.

The second interpretation is those saved in invincible ignorance etc are not known to us and so they are not exceptions to AG 7 and the traditional teaching on other religions. So Vatican Council II is not a break with the past. It means all non Catholics in Sydney, Australia need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation.

The second interpretation is rejected by Fr.John George as fundamentalist.He prefers to say that he can see the dead who are exceptions and so for him this is the teaching of the Church on non Catholics and salvation.

He does not use the rational visible-invisible, explicit-implicit, in fact-in principle analysis of Church document. This analysis was used in the Introduction to Dominus Iesus (defacto-dejure).
-Lionel Andrades