Peter O'Dwyer on Mic'd Up (The Real Spirit of Vatican II) has not quoted AG 7 and LG 14 which is in line with the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
The liberals assume that LG 16, LG 8 etc are exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.But reality tells us that in 2015 there are no such cases. So there are defacto no exceptions in 2015 to AG 7 and LG 14. LG 16 ( invincible ignorance) does not really contradict AG 7 and LG 16. For the Spirit of Vatican Council II it would be a contradiction.
The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 is related to Peter's interpretation of Vatican Council II.
Cardinal Francesco Marcgetti Selvaggiani, who issued the Letter, assumed that the baptism of desire and the baptism of desire are exceptions to the dogma, the traditional strict interpretation.He assumed that there was salvation outside the Church. In other words there were defacto, explicit cases of persons saved with the baptism of desire etc in 1949. Reason tells us that these persons are in Heaven. So how could they really be exceptions?
Also there are NO Church documents before 1949 which says that the baptism of desire etc refer to known cases or that they are explicit exceptions to the dogma. No precedent!The Council of Trent and the Mystici Corporis only mention these cases. They do not say that they are explicit for us or that they are exceptions to the dogma.So it is with this Marchetti Inference that Church Militant TV seems to be interpretating Vatican Council II with reference to extra ecclesiam nulla salus and other religions and Christian communities.
The liberals assume that LG 16, LG 8 etc are exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.But reality tells us that in 2015 there are no such cases. So there are defacto no exceptions in 2015 to AG 7 and LG 14. LG 16 ( invincible ignorance) does not really contradict AG 7 and LG 16. For the Spirit of Vatican Council II it would be a contradiction.
The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 is related to Peter's interpretation of Vatican Council II.
Cardinal Francesco Marcgetti Selvaggiani, who issued the Letter, assumed that the baptism of desire and the baptism of desire are exceptions to the dogma, the traditional strict interpretation.He assumed that there was salvation outside the Church. In other words there were defacto, explicit cases of persons saved with the baptism of desire etc in 1949. Reason tells us that these persons are in Heaven. So how could they really be exceptions?
Also there are NO Church documents before 1949 which says that the baptism of desire etc refer to known cases or that they are explicit exceptions to the dogma. No precedent!The Council of Trent and the Mystici Corporis only mention these cases. They do not say that they are explicit for us or that they are exceptions to the dogma.So it is with this Marchetti Inference that Church Militant TV seems to be interpretating Vatican Council II with reference to extra ecclesiam nulla salus and other religions and Christian communities.
Here are some brief reports , in the following link, in which I interpret Vatican Council II without using the irrational premise, the Marchetti Inference.
February 27, 2015
-Lionel Andrades
Mic'd Up : The REAL Spirit of Vatican II
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment