Monday, June 30, 2014

I accept implicit baptism of desire according to Vatican Council II, Mystici Corporis etc.

Just so we're clear, Lionel, Father Feeney and his group got into trouble because they claimed, 1) the catechetical materials that were being used in the Diocese of Boston (namely, the Baltimore Catechism) contained formal heresy, and 2) that the Bishop of Boston was a formal heretic within the Catholic Church.


Lionel:
Any one who says that the baptism of desire is visible to us and is an exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus is irrational.Even if a cardinal says that he can see  the dead-saved with the baptism of desire it would be fantasy.
 
To claim there are visible exceptions to the defined dogma is heresy. It is irrational and heretical to claim there is salvation outside the Church.This was the heresy of the cardinal who issued the Letter of the Holy Office 1949, the Archbishop of Boston who approved it and the Holy Office which condoned it.This was public heresy.It was a major break in Catholic teaching.


 As for the Holy Office Letter, it states,
Now, among those things which the Church has always preached and will never cease to preach is contained also that infallible statement by which we are taught that there is no salvation outside the Church.
I understand that, from your perspective, they are teaching visible salvation outside of the Catholic Church, but from their perspective, they are not. 
 
 
 
Lionel:
They are sayng that the baptism of desire is an exception to the centuries old interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
So from their perspective the baptism of  desire is visible, objectively seen for it to be an exception.
For me the baptism of desire is always implicit, a possibility a hypothetical case.So it is not an exception to the literal interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney.


 As for me, I am going to accept their words over your interpretation of their words.
Lionel:
For them the baptism of desire is an exception since it is allegedly visible.It is personally  known.An exception has to be visible and known.So you are saying that you know some person in 2014 saved with the baptism of desire.This person whom you can see and shake hands with, is a visible exception to the traditional interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney !!!
I shall not accept the irrationality of the Letter of the Holy Office but I shall accept the baptism of desire according to Vatican Council II, Mystici Corporis etc which do not state that the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance  are visible for us.There is no inference in the text. The text does not state that there is  an exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
 
There is no inference for me. No false premise of the visible-dead.Vatican Council II does not state that there is an exception to the interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney.I do not make the false inference. You do.
-Lionel Andrades
 

No comments: