Friday, November 14, 2014

Popes have not checked this objective error. It is a fact of life that we cannot see the dead who are now in Heaven.

The Catholic Church is infallible. Her infallibility is supremely invested in the Roman Pontiff, but is also exercised by the college of bishops, when they universally teach the same doctrine with and under the pope.
Lionel:
The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 made an objective mistake when it inferred that implicit desire and being saved in invincible ignorance were visible to us in real life. They would have to be visible for us, for them to be exceptions to all needing the baptism of water in the present times for salvation.
The infallible teaching says outside the Church there is no salvation. The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 says there is salvation outside the Church. It cites theoretical cases and assumes they are defacto exceptions. Persons in Heaven are assumed to be present on earth and they become exceptions to the dogma.
Popes have not checked this objective error. It is a fact of life that we cannot see the dead who are now in Heaven. So how can they be exceptions to the traditional interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to the Church Councils, popes, saints and Fr.Leonard Feeney?.
Then the same error has been made in the Catechism of the Catholic Church when with reference to the baptism of water, it is said God is not limited to the Sacraments.(CCC 1257-1260).The dogma indicates that God is limited to the Sacraments but the Catechism suggests there are known exceptions. The familiar ghosts seen on earth.
This has been approved by the popes.
-Lionel Andrades
 

Is Bishop Semeraro willing to accept Vatican Council II in agreement with extra ecclesiam nulla salus ? : SSPX has still to ask

The Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) has to respond to the Notification of Bishop Marcello Semeraro,Bishop of Albano, by citing doctrine which supports them. They have ignored this in the Press Release which they have issued.
They have some good points in their Press Release but they have not referred to Vatican Council II being in agreement with Tradition and especially the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.Is the Bishop of Albano willing to accept extra ecclesiam nulla salus ? They have not asked.


The issue is Vatican Council II. The bishop is using an irrational premise in the interpretation.With this irrational interpretation of UR 3,NA 2 etc he justifies his understanding of ecumenism etc .This is doctrine for him.

He wants the SSPX to accept this irrational version of the Council which will be a break with the traditonal teaching on other religiions etc.Based on this irrational understanding of the Council he is trying to discipline the SSPX.

-Lionel Andrades
 
 
____________________________________________
 
 
Then they should ask the bishop if he is willing to accept this interpretation of the Council II.This is a doctrinal issue.
 
Vatican Council II can be interpreted without the irrational premise.It is then Vatican Council II is non heretical and has a hermeneutic of continuity. They must ask the Bishop of Albano to first accept this rational version of Vatican Council II and then they could follow.They could have announced that Vatican Council II can be interpreted with or without an irrational premise. Without the irrational premise the Council supports the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Tradition. Then they should ask the bishop if he is willing to accept this interpretation of the Council II.This is a doctrinal issue.
 
The SSPX must respond to Bishop Semeraro by citing Catholic doctrine on Vatican Council II which supports their positionhttp://eucharistandmission.blo...
I
f the Bishops of Argentine and Albano cannot accept Vatican Council II without the irrational inference, then it is a doctrinal issue
http://eucharistandmission.blo...
 
Ecclesia Dei, SSPX and the Latin Mass Society interpret Vatican Council II with the same irrationality as the two bishopshttp://eucharistandmission.blo...
The Bishop of Albano will not like this. But then at least he cannot say that the SSPX has to accept Vatican Council II (with the premise) http://eucharistandmission.blo...
 
SSPX APPEAL TO BISHOP MARCELLO SEMERARO TO ENDORSE VATICAN COUNCIL II WITHOUT THE FALSE PREMISE FOR AN AGREEMENThttp://eucharistandmission.blo...
 
We call upon Bishop Semeraro to please do the same. Affirm Vatican Council II as we interpret it http://eucharistandmission.blo...
 
 

This new theology

CraigV:
this new theology.
 
Lionel:
‘this new theology’ is based on invincible ignorance in faith and morals, being physically visible to us in the present times ( 2014) to be an explicit exception to the tradtional teaching.
So the Catechism of the Catholic Church 1257-1260 says God is not limited to the Sacraments with reference to the baptism of water.In other words there are explicit exceptions.
In morals the Catechism of the Catholic Church 1857-1860 says ‘three conditions must together be met: “Mortal sin is sin whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent.”(1857).It is as if we can know who has committed a mortal sin with full knowledge and deliberate consent. In other words they are explicit for us and so are exceptions to the traditional teaching on mortal sin.
The new theology is based on an irrational premise, the ability to see the dead who are in Heaven.
I cannot see any one on earth or Heaven who has been saved without Catholic Faith and the baptism of water. I cannot see or know any exception to the dogma.
I cannot see or know any one who has died with grave sin as taught traditionally by the Church and who is in Heaven because he did not have ‘full knowledge’ etc. I cannot see or know any exception to the traditional teaching on mortal sin.
CCC 1257-1260 is a negation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Catechism of Pope Pius X and the Nicene Creed ( I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sin). This is Cushingism i.e assuming there are known exceptions to the dogma on salvation. The Catechism has not corrected the error in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 but repeated it.So LG 16,LG 8,UR 3 etc are wrongly interpreted to refer to the dead being visible on earth.It has to be inferred wronly independent of the text.The text does not repeat the error.
This is the irratonal, heretical new theology.
-Lionel Andrades

Vatican Council II is traditional when salvation is understood to be physically invisible for us on earth: no problem for incardination among traditionalist priests

Fr.Nicholas Gruner should have no problem being incardinated in any diocese, because of not accepting Vatican Council II, if it becomes clear to all, that  salvation alluded to in the Council is not visible and known to us in 2014, to be exceptions to Tradition.Invisible cases in 2014 are possibilities but not explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
 
So if he is asked by a bishop if he accepts Vatican Council II, he could answer,"Yes. A Vatican Council II in which LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2, LG 14, AG 11( seeds of the Word) etc are not exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Tradition".One can accept implicit for us baptism of desire and also 'the rigorist' interpretation of the dogma.We can have it both ways.
 
"Vatican Council II is in agreement with the thrice defined dogma on salvation, the Syllabus of Errors and the Catechism of Pope Pius X",he could explain" and so supports the Social Kingship of Jesus Christ."
 
 Since outside the Church there is no known salvation in 2014, all political and social norms and legislation,must have Jesus Christ at the center, as he is known and taught by the Catholic Church, the only Church he founded. Vatican Council II is in line with Quas Primas and Mortalium Animos.The Council only becomes ambigous when it is assumed that salvation in Heaven, is physically visible to us on earth.
 
What about Religious Liberty? Non Catholics are free in a state with a secular Constitution to live their religion, equal to that of the Catholic Church.Error has rights in a secular state.This is the defacto situation in the world today.However in a Catholic Confessional State the Catholic Faith is the guide for all legislation.Error has no legal right.Non Catholics have a right to exist and to freely follow their religions,which are not paths to salvation, however the legislation and norms would be Catholic.
Even during the time of the Catholic Confessional states the pope allowed
non Catholics to live and follow their religion.
 image
I don't know how Fr.Gruner would respond but basically what I am saying is that Vatican Council II is traditional when salvation is understood to be invisible for us on earth.That we cannot physically see the dead is common knowledge.It is not a theological concept. So this should not be difficult for any bishop to accept.
 
 
 
 
 
The bishop could ask why do traditionalists interpret Vatican Council II as a break with Mortalium Animos and its concept of ecumenism.I would answer : it is because in Vatican Council II (Unitatis Redintigratio 3, the Decree on Ecumenism, etc) they see references to salvation among non Catholics, independent of the dogma.If they kept the dogma before them, they could read UR 3 differently . Now they assume hypothetical  cases are defacto known in the present times.They mistake possibilities  as being not just possibilities but explicit exceptions to the dogma.It is this irrationality which makes the Council a break with Tradition on ecumenism.
-Lionel Andrades

Fr.Nicholas Gruner can ask the pope and the Vatican Curia, in a fresh complaint, to also affirm Vatican Council II in agreement with extra ecclesiam nulla salus as he does http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/11/frgruner-can-ask-pope-and-vatican-curia.html