Saturday, June 8, 2013

Forty Eight hours and it is still difficult for Boniface at Unam Sanctam Catholicam

Forty Eight hours and it is difficult for Boniface at Unam Sanctam Catholicam to discover that Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church are saying that every one needs faith and baptism for salvation ( to go to Heaven and avoid Hell) and that every one needs to enter the Catholic Church as through a door.
 
Some 48 hours have passed and Boniface  cannot say that he does not know any exception to this teaching of Vatican Council II and the Catechism and neither do these Magisterial documents mention any exception.
 
So simple and Boniface cannot respond with a comment on his blog and has blocked all further discussion.
 
This is the confusion being experienced by numerous traditionalists  and Catholics on this  issue but there are many Catholics who are beginning to think. They know something is wrong and something else sounds correct which they cannot put their finger upon.
 
I suspect Cardinal Kaspar and the Vatican Curia also know this and  so the L'Osservatore Romano interview was trying to project Vatican Council II according to the politically correct model.
 
It was simple all along. Only no theologian has mentioned it.
So simple- affirm the Catechism.
The Catechism  is based on Vatican Council II.
 
The Catechism says every one needs to enter the Church for salvation (846,845). This message have been placed under the title Outside the Church No Salvation. Could it be more obvious ?
 
The Catechism (846) does not mention any visible or known exception to all needing to defacto enter the Church for salvation.Neither does Boniface know of any exception. The Catechism 846 is in Agreement with the thrice defined dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and so is Vatican Council II (AG 7).They also do not contradict the Syllabus of Errors on the issue of other religions and Protestant communities and churches.
 
Since it is possible for a non Catholic to be saved with the baptism of desire , invincible ignorance a good conscience etc and these cases would be implicit for us and explicit only for God, these cases do not contradict the Catechism 846 etc.If we assumed that these cases were visible then this would be an irrational premise(false premise) and then there would be a contradiction of CCC 846. Then the Catechism and the Council would be ambigous as Cardinal Kaspar alleges.
 
Now there is no violation of the Principle of Non Contradiction with possibilities known only to God. They are  irrelevant to the dogma on salvation, Ad Gentes 7 and CCC 846.A possibility cannot be seen.
 
 The dogma, Vatican Council II and the Catechism 846 refer to defacto explicitly known cases who need to convert into the Church with visible to us baptism of water and Catholic Faith. While the possibilities  are accepted as only possibilities. We cannot name any such case. So it is irrelevant to the traditional teaching on other  religions and Christian communities..
 
This should be good news for the SSPX and bad news for Cardinal Kaspar.
 
...but how long more before Boniface figures it out?!
-Lionel Andrades
 
 June 8, 2013

Boniface at Unam Sanctam Catholicam still undercover

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2013/06/boniface-at-unam-sanctam-catholicam.html#links

Boniface at Unam Sanctam Catholicam still undercover

Boniface at the website Unam Sanctam Catholicam still cannot say Vatican Council II says all need faith and baptism for salvation in 2013.

It is no surprise that Cardinal Kaspar and the liberal lobby get away in claiming that Vatican Council II is ambigous and a break with the past.


Over 24 hours have passed and there is no comment from this traditionalist. Boniface has removed the original page from it's prominent position on his website and has kept it low key. He will not admirt that the Catechism of the Catholic Church under the title Outside the Church No Salvation has placed Ad Gentes 7. The Catechsim 846 says all need faith and baptism for salvation and all need to enter the Catholic Church as through a door.

All need to enter the Catholic Church as through a door and this would include Protestants who do not have Catholic Faith. They are in mortal sins, of morals and faith (heresy). They have no access to the Sacraments and have a different interpretation of the Gospel.

All need to enter the Catholic Church with faith and baptism also includes the non Christians. They have 'superstition, errors and deficiencies' in their religions (Dominus Iesus).

So Vatican Council II affirms the traditional teaching on other religions and Christian communities and churches.

There are no known exceptions to AG 7 or CCC 846 unless one assumes that the dead saved are physically visible to us  and are known exceptions. This is the false premise which Boniface could have been using too.


So he could be confused. Does the Council and the Catechism affirm the traditional position of the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX)? Are there really no exceptions mentioned in any magisterial text ? Why has no one mentioned this before if this is the teaching of the Catholic magisterium ? Where are the theologians ? These are some thoughts Boniface may have had over the last 24 hours.
-Lionel Andrades
http://unamsanctamcatholicam.blogspot.it/
http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=6086833995941525990&postID=9064062410270373180&isPopup=true

BONIFACE AT UNAM SANCTAM CATHOLICAM DID NOT KNOW THAT VATICAN COUNCIL II (AG 7)SAYS ALL NEED FAITH AND BAPTISM FOR SALVATION : NO WONDER KASPAR AND THE LIBERALS GET AWAY

Protestant salvation and moral theology is being used in the Catholic Church


Monsignor Roderick Strange at the Pontifical Beda College, Rome
It's 'convenient' and less demanding then that of the Catholic Church and its use is widespread often un-noticed.Even orthodox Catholic blogs and Internet forums use it.For instance on the forums True Catholic (Australia) (1) and Extra  Ecclesiam Nulla Salus (USA) (2) the moral theology is Protestant.
 It is assumed that we cannot judge a person by his outer actions.Protestants with their many different doctrines and sects say we cannot judge- but so did the Catholic moral theologians  Fr.Charles Curran and Fr. Bernard Haring.
So a Catholic sponsor of the Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus (EENS) forum, Dr.Brian Kopp could deny the salvation dogma on the forums (EENS/Pascendi) even after being informed, and the others on the forum would not consider it a mortal sin.
Similarly on True Catholic, a Catholic can deny the Church's teachings on salvation etc and the Administrator would not consider it a mortal sin.Case in point Fr.John George of the Archdiocese of Sydney.
In the past one could say that a person is in mortal sin but now you cannot? So something new has been added to moral teaching?Why was homosexuality and denying an ex cathedra dogma a mortal sin in the past and but not now?
Yes we can judge!- when a woman or man is dressed immodestly it is a mortal sin. The outer action indicates the inner intention (Veritatis Splendor). When a Catholic woman wears a bikini at the beach it is a mortal sin. Since she is the cause of scandal and lust in the onlooker.Others are going to Hell because of her.
It's an objective sin. If she is mentally unsound or if there is some other reason why God would not consider it a sin, it would be judged and known only by God. The exception would be known only to God.In general the sin is objective and the Church has called it a sin giving a rational reason.The Catechism says lust and scandal are grave sins.
When a priest in the Archdiocese of Sydney calls homosexuality ' a gift' it  is a mortal sin. When  a Catholic wears tight and vulgar clothing it is a mortal sin... sin means going to the abode of the demons and living in Hell.
Fr.Peter Maher in the parish of Newton in the Archdiocese of Sydney is implying on his website that the homosexual act, relationship and changeable orientation is not to be Confessed in the Sacrament of Reconciliation. So the homosxual wil not go for Confession after indulging in unnatural  acts. He will consider the sin a natural gift. He will not seek help to deal with impure thoughts and spirits.
In Rome at the Beda Pontifical College,Rome (3),  the English Catholic seminary here, the present Rector Mons. Roderick Strange has written a book in which he is  soft on homosexuality.In one chapter, the style and content is vulgar.This book is available at the Beda library for the seminarians. Is not homosexuality a mortal sin for the English Monsignor? Understandably he will not allow me to enter the premises of the Beda Catholic Seminary.I would photograph the book and post extracts here.
The Beda seminarians study at the St.Thomas Acquinas University (Angelicum), Rome where they can read a thick book written by Fr.Charles Curran. It is placed in the reference section of the Angelicum library, it lists moral cases.Curran's  conclusion is that we cannot judge a mortal sin.
Mons. Roderick Strange had a book written by Fr. Matthew Fox, ex Dominican placed in the Spirituality Section of the Beda college library. Matthew Fox says there is no Original Sin.Fox and Curran were corrected by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Fath.
The we cannot judge moral theology is based on the  Fundamental Option Theory which the Catholic Churh has condmened in Veritatis Splendor, Pope John Paul II's encylcial on moral thology.Pope John Paul believed mortal sin existed  and led to Hell. The  Fundamental  Option Theory says we cannot judge anyone negatively and there is no objective mortal sin anymore.Mortal sin is no more a mortal sin. Veritatis Splendor says the opposite.
Yes we can judge!- that  a non Catholic with Original Sin is going to Hell.
Yes we can judge!- that what the Church has traditoinally taught is a mortal sin, is still today, a mortal sin and the way to go to Hell or to avoid Hell, has not changed.
For Dr. Brian Kopp who mysteriously has entered the Catholic traditionalists camp, it is 'we cannot judge'. He's with Curran and Haring.
Similalry on the Internet forum  of apologist  Steve Ray , it is assumed you can write off a defined dogma,extra ecclesiam nulla salus and still be a Catholic. For Steve Ray, for salvation one is only required to believe in Jesus. It is not necessary to be visible member of the Church with faith and baptism (AG 7).He like other convert apologists is using the Protestant salvation theology, in the Catholic Church.
They have judged they can do all of this...but you cannot judge!
-Lionel Andrades
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)

Photo of Mons.Roderick Strange, Rector, Beda Pontifical College, Rome. BBC News