Monday, June 17, 2013

Modernism at Rorate Caeili


Rorate Caeili has posted a passage written by Mons. Fenton which mentions implicit desire;being saved with an unconscious desire. There are no explanations or qualifications from the traditionalist website. The position of Rorate Caeili on this issue is otherwise a modernist one.It was the common mistake of Mons. Fenton who did not realize that we could hold the 'rigorist interpretation' of the dogma on salvation along with the possibility of being saved with implicit desire.One could eat ones cake, in this case, and also have it. It's not an either 'this' or 'that' position.

Rorate Caeili is making the Richard Cushing Error and their interpretation of Vatican Council II is also otherwise full of the Richard Cushing Confusion. Visible-to-us implicit desire is an irrationality. Deadwood. It is useful for causing ambiguity.This is the stuff of modernism which Rorate Caeili criticizes.

In Mystici Corporis Pope Pius XII does not state that those saved with an unconscious desire are physically visible to us.Neither does he claim that these cases are known exceptions to the dogma on salvation. If we cannot see these cases and if we cannot know them personally, how can Rorate Caeili assume that they are exceptions to the traditional teaching on salvation?

In the Mystical Body of Christ, the Catholic Church, there are no known exceptions to the defined dogma on salvation and the Syllabus of Errors.

Since it is possible to be saved with implicit desire within the Mystical Body of Christ it does not mean that we can name any such case or count the number of persons saved with an unconscious desire. This is known only to God. So the possibility is not a known reality.It is irrelevant to the literal interpretation of the dogma according to the Church Councils, the popes, the saints and Vatican Council II.

Rorate Caeili is implying, that there is a known exception.The dogma has known exceptions ?!This is modernism.A person can be saved with implicit desire but it is not a known exception.One can affirm implicit desire without considering it an exception.On this issue Rorate Caeili and Cardinal Walter Kaspar are making the same error. Like the Archbishop of Boston, Richard Cushing and the liberals, Rorate is repeating this propaganda irrespective of tradition and being informed. This was the Cushing Prerogative.

Like Cardinal Richard Cushing the editor of Rorate Caeili is maintaining a lie ( visible implicit desire/Richard Cushing Error) and not correcting the confusion and propaganda on this issue which is there in the secular media, in general.-Lionel Andrades

http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.it/2013/06/mystici-corporis-at-70-i-true-church-of.html


Richard Cushing Error is assuming that we can physically see the dead now saved in Heaven and then further assuming that these cases visible to us and known personally to us, are known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus or Ad Gentes 7 (all need faith and baptism for salvation).

Richard Cushing Confusion is the general interpretation of Vatican Council II with the Richard Cushing Error.It is the use of an irrelevant statement, to the main text or passage in a Council text,which causes ambiguity. It is mixing up a possibility with a known reality.This leads to confusion in Council texts with dual statements.

Deadwood Statements are used in Vatican Council II to cause the Richard Cushing Confusion. They mix up what is implicit, dejure and theoretical. with a statement referring to something, which is explicit, de facto and practical.Usually hypotehetical statements are assumed to be known cases in the present times.

Cushing Prerogative refers to the Archbishop of Boston Richard Cushing  using his power  to suppress the truth  and Fr.Leonard Feeney and also not issue a correction when the Boston secular newspapers implied there were known exceptions to the dogma on salvation. The Archbishop never lifted the excommunication of Fr.Leonard Feeney even though the priest was nover in heresy and was not required to recant his postion when the excommunication was finally lifted.