Thursday, June 19, 2014

How is the Good Thief on the Cross, the patriarchs and prophets VISIBLE to you ? They are not VISIBLE on earth to me.

Athanasius says:
LIONELANDRADES,
I think your error lies in your separation of the letter of the law from its spirit, a common error of the Scriptural Pharisees.
Lionel:
Athanasius why cannot you respond to this paragraph?
For me the baptism of desire/ implicit desire refers to the hypothetical case of a person who is INVISIBLE physically on earth.Since he is invisible he cannot be an exception in 2014 to the traditional teaching of the Church which says all need faith and baptism for salvation and there are no exceptions.If he does not exist physically he cannot be an exception.
Why cannot you respond also to this paragraph. Are you afraid of something?
For you and the editor there are exceptions to the dogma on salvation.So you infer that there are VISIBLE cases on earth.Otherwise how could they be exceptions?
And why have you ignored this passage ? It is direct and clear.Are you afraid of something ?
Athanasius:
of invincible ignorance, baptism of blood and baptism of desire, or do you not accept them?
Lionel:
I accept them only as physically INVISIBLE cases.I accept them as possibilities.I do not accept them as being physically VISIBLE on earth.
You have no comment here?
Athanasius:
You know, the Church’s formal teaching is very easy for the faithful to understand.
Lionel:
If the faithful understand the baptism of desire as being known to us in special cases, of being VISIBLE to us, I reject this.For the faithful the baptism of desire is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.For me this view is irrational
Are you afraid to say the magisteriium was not rational and was wrong?
Lionel:
I am obligated to refer to INVISIBLE and VISIBLE baptism of desire since most people imply ( whether they know it or not) that these hypothetical cases are VISIBLE to us in real life.
Athanasius:
Trust the teaching of the authentic Magisterium
Lionel:
If the magisterium implies that these cases are VISIBLE to us then it is an objective error.
If they imply that the baptism of desire (implicit for us) is an exception to the extra ecclesiam nulla salus then the magisterium has made a factual error.It is common knowledge that we cannot see the dead. This is nor theology or a personal opinion.
Finally you have not answered these questions.
Lionel:
I have tried to define my terms.
Basically I would ask you is the baptism of desire referring to cases physically visible to you on earth ?
If these cases are implicit for us and known only to God can they be inferred as being explicit exceptions to the traditional interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus e.g Cantate Dominio, Council of Florence?
Athanasius:In actual fact there are no exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus since those who go to heaven by invincible ignorance, baptism of blood or baptism of desire, are implicitly part of the Mystical Body of Christ, His Holy Catholic Church, in spirit. That they were, or are, deprived on earth of either the knowledge or time to confirm that union by formal baptism with water or actual reception into the Church in the material sense does not detract from their good will and their dying without unrepented objective mortal sin on their souls.
 Lionel:
So are you saying that the baptism of desire ( implicit/invisible for us) is a possibility of salvation but there are no VISIBLE cases and so there are no known exceptions in 2014 to all needing faith and baptism in the Catholic Church for salvation?
You have not defined your terms, so there is confusion here.
Athanasius:
The argument, then, about visible and invisible baptism of desire is false.
Lionel:
You have not addressed the issue of the case of the baptism of desire, of someone being saved with the baptism of desire , being physically VISIBLE or INVISIBLE on earth. This is a rational question ?
Athansius:
 Some cases are known to us from Sacred Scripture, such as the Old Testament patriarchs and prophets, the Good Thief on Calvary and the martyred Catechumens of the early Church. These are all visible examples of baptism of desire and/or blood. Others are unknown to us but are known to God.
Lionel:
How is the Good Thief on the Cross, the patriarchs and prophets VISIBLE to you ? They are not VISIBLE on earth to me.
You have not defined your terms.
You have not made the distinction between implicit and explicit for us baptism of desire, invisible and visible for us baptism of desire.
Athanasius:
Only two things are important for us to remember in this matter. The first is that the mercy of God excludes the possibility of Hell for all who die in invincible ignorance or with a desire for baptism who have kept the law written in the hearts of all men and who have no objective mortal sin on their souls. The other is that this doctrine cannot and must not be extended to become the heresy of ‘Universal Salvation,’ as some of today’s liberals would like to see.
Lionel:
Yes I agree with you but this is not the subject being discussed.
Athanasius:
It is, as I said before, a very easy doctrine to understand, so stop making a rod for your own back by excessive introspection
Lionel:
You have not answered my questions, for whatever reasons.
You and the editor, are affirming there being exceptions, physically VISIBLE EXCEPTIONS, to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.This is irrational, non traditional and heretical. It is heresy related to the defined dogma and the Nicene Creed. Heresy is sin.This also happens to be the general, common interpretation of the Letter of the Holy Office and Vatican Council II.- Lionel Andrades
Note: Athanasius had responded to this link:

For you there are exceptions to the dogma on salvation.So you infer that there are VISIBLE cases on earth.Otherwise how could there be exceptions?

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/06/for-you-there-are-exceptions-to-dogma.html#links
 
 

Franciscans of the Immaculate can say YES to a Vatican Council II ( without the visible-dead premise which are alleged exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus)

 
Sister Fernanda Barbiero overseeing the Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate and Marinella Perroni, who teaches New Testament at the Benedictine College, Saint Anselm in Rome like the Freemasons,interpret Vatican Council II as saying there are exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.So they irrationally imply that there are visible cases in 2014, exceptions to the traditional teaching on salvation.

This was the Freemason victory in the Boston Case when Cardinal Cushing inferred that there were known exceptions to the traditional interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney.This same false inference is being made in Vatican Council II even though the text does not state this.

This point is the weakness of the Left.

Once the distinction between INVISIBLE and VISIBLE salvation is made, there is no text in Vatican Council II , which Barbiero, Perroni or any one else, can cite, to claim that Vatican Council II is a break with traditional teaching.This is important for the Franciscans of the Immaculate.It means the Vatican Council II which they have to accept, is traditional, without a false inference. They can say YES to a Vatican Council II ( without the visible-dead premise which are alleged exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus).
 
Here is the Dean of Theology at the Benedictine College,Saint Anselm in Rome contradicting Marinella Perroni.

Perhaps Marinella is also in ignorance and once she is aware of the objective error she would agree with the Benedictine priest-professor of theology.

DEAN OF THEOLOGY AT ST. ANSELM SAYS THERE ARE NO KNOWN EXCEPTIONS TO THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2013/10/dean-of-theology-at-st-anselm-says.html#links

He is saying that Nostra Aetate is not an exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.He is saying that the baptism of desire ( implicit for us) is not an exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.


 
This was not part of the formation of the Franciscans of the Immaculate.
-Lionel Andrades
__________________________________________________

For you there are exceptions to the dogma on salvation.So you infer that there are VISIBLE cases on earth.Otherwise how could there be exceptions?

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/06/for-you-there-are-exceptions-to-dogma.html#links
Catholic Religious contradict most Catholic priests and nuns : Nostra Aetate is not an exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/06/catholic-religious-contradict-most.html
http://eponymousflower.blogspot.it/2014/06/franciscan-sisters-of-immaculate.html?showComment=1403180353425

For you there are exceptions to the dogma on salvation.So you infer that there are VISIBLE cases on earth.Otherwise how could there be exceptions?

Athanasius:
I’m at a loss with this distinction you introduce between implicit and explicit baptism of desire. What exactly are you trying to say?
Lionel:
I am saying that when we have a discussion on a controversial subject we need to define our terms.Otherwise I will be saying something and it could mean something else for you.
The baptism of desire refers to the catechumen who dies before receiving the baptism of water.Theologically some Catholics say that God will provide him with a teacher and the baptism of water necessary for salvation.(St.Thomas Aquinas was one of them).Other Catholics say that the catechuman had justification and also salvation.He could be saved and is saved. This is theology.
I am not referring to theology at this moment. Bear with me.
I am saying that a catechumen who had the desire to receive the baptism of water dies and is in Heaven and is INVISIBLE for us on earth. He cannot be known or seen on earth in a physical sense.This is a theoretical case. A hypothetical case.Please note again I am making an intellectual observation of a fact of life. We cannot see the dead physically. Again I repeat,this is not theology.It is a fact of life that we cannot see the dead.It is an objective understanding that in general, the dead cannot be seen in the flesh on earth.
So I come back to defining our terms.
For me the baptism of desire/ implicit desire refers to the hypothetical case of a person who is INVISIBLE physically on earth.Since he is invisible he cannot be an exception in 2014 to the traditional teaching of the Church which says all need faith and baptism for salvation and there are no exceptions.If he does not exist physically he cannot be an exception.
For you and the editor there are exceptions to the dogma on salvation.So you infer that there are VISIBLE cases on earth.Otherwise how could they be exceptions?
Athanasius:
Do you accept the Church’s complimentary doctrine (complimentary to her infallible dogma)
Lionel:
Now lets define our terms here.
The infallible dogma does not mention any exceptions.I have already provided you the text of Cantate Dominion, Council of Florence,1441 etc.
While I accept an implicit baptism of desire,invisible for me, but theoretically acceptable.
This is complimentary to the infallible dogma.
Athanasius:
of invincible ignorance, baptism of blood and baptism of desire, or do you not accept them?
Lionel:
I accept them only as physically INVISIBLE cases.I accept them as possibilities.I do not accept them as being physically VISIBLE on earth.
Athanasius:
There is no difference in God’s sight between those who implicitly desire baptism and those who make that implicit desire explicit.
Lionel:
This would be the theology.
Athanasius:
God reads the hearts of men regardless of if and how that desire manifests itself to others.
 Lionel:
True. I agree with you here.
Athanasius:
You know, the Church’s formal teaching is very easy for the faithful to understand.
Lionel:
If the faithful understand the baptism of desire as being known to us in special cases, of being VISIBLE to us, I reject this.For the faithful the baptism of desire is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.For me this view is irrational.
Athanasius:
Why, then, do you seek to complicate it with incomprehensible interpretations of you own making.
 
Lionel:
I am obligated to refer to INVISIBLE and VISIBLE baptism of desire since most people imply ( whether they know it or not) that these hypothetical cases are VISIBLE to us in real life.
Athanasius:
Trust the teaching of the authentic Magisterium
Lionel:
If the magisterium implies that these cases are VISIBLE to us then it is an objective error.
If they imply that the baptism of desire (implicit for us) is an exception to the extra ecclesiam nulla salus then the magisterium has made a factual error.It is common knowledge that we cannot see the dead. This is nor theology or a personal opinion.
Athanasius:
rather than your own imaginings. It’s not a complicated doctrine, Lionel.
 
Lionel:
It is made complicated by those who infer that the deceased-saved are visible to us.
Athansius:
If you do wish to continue to insist on your own theory then you will have to explain your understanding of things with more clarity. At the moment, I don’t know what exactly it is you believe and don’t believe.
Lionel:
I have tried to define my terms.
Basically I would ask you is the baptism of desire referring to cases physically visible to you on earth ?
If these cases are implicit for us and known only to God can they be inferred as being explicit exceptions to the traditional interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus e.g Cantate Dominio, Council of Florence?
-Lionel Andrades

This teaching of the Church on baptism of desire refers to cases which are INVISIBLE or VISIBLE for you ?

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/06/this-teaching-of-church-on-baptism-of.html#links