eucharistandmission: Once a traditionalist or sedevacantist has an insight into all this Vatican Council II dramatically changes

Monday, March 16, 2015

Once a traditionalist or sedevacantist has an insight into all this Vatican Council II dramatically changes

We don't know any one on March 16, 2015 who is saved outside the Church without 'faith and baptism'(AG 7). We don't know anyone in the past ,present or future on earth who is saved without faith and baptism.1

We cannot know any one in Heaven on March 16, 2015 saved without being a formal member of the Church. So the SSPX should ask the Vatican why does Dominus Iesus(DI) and Redemptoris Missio (RM) suggest that there is salvation outside the Church.This is irrational.This is a doctrinal issue.

It is a fact that these cases are invisible on earth.They are known to no one on earth.

So if a pope or magisterial document suggests otherwise it is a doctrinal error and should be corrected.The pope in RM and DI is saying there is salvation outside the Church implying that this salvation in an exception to the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).There is a known case in Heave n in 2015 who is there without 'faith and baptism'.

Traditionalists too are not aware of this error and overlook it in magisterial documents including Vatican Council II.

Remember Blackfen. Fischer More College? They simply had to announce that they affirm the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS and there are no exceptions and cannot be any exceptions to the dogma in Vatican Council II.So Vatican Council II can be endorsed with the strict interpretation of EENS.This can be done at the Traditional Latin Mass and the Novus Ordo.It is the doctrine and not liturgy which guarantees Tradition. FSSP priests in Rome offer the TLM as a break with EENS.They are forced to do this by the Vatican and Rome Vicariate.This is liturgy without Church-doctrine.

FOR ME

I accept Vatican Council II without the irrational premise. It's the irrational premise which makes the Council contradict the strict interpretation of EENS.

I accept Vatican Council II according to Feeneyism and not Cushingism.

I accept Vatican Council II according to the General Chapter Statement 2012 of the SSPX on EENS having no exceptions.

I accept the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance as a possibility followed by the baptism of water in accord with EENS.

I affirm the pre-1949 interpretation of EENS in accord with Vatican Council II interpreted without the Marchetti premise.

I reject the Vatican Curia's interpretation of Vatican Council II with Cushingism ( visible, known exceptions to EENS).

I affirm the Nicene Creed but unlike the Vatican Curia. For the Curia there is not one baptism for the forgiveness of sins but two or more known baptisms in the present times. They are the baptism of desire, invincible ignorance, seeds of the Word, elements of sanctification and truth etc.For the Curia these are all explicit baptisms without the baptism of water and they occur in the present times.So they become exceptions to the strict interpretation of EENS.This is their theology.

For me necessity of means and precepts mentioned in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 are known or can be known only to God.So it is irrelevant to the strict interpretation of the dogma.

Lumen Gentium 14 refers to those who know and those in invincible ignorance.What difference does this make to the strict interpretation of the dogma ? .Since these cases can only be judged by God. We cannot know any one saved without faith and baptism.This line comes from the Marchetti wrong inference.

The Good Thief on the Cross or St.Emerentiana cannot be exceptions to the strict interpretation of the dogma. Since they existed centuries back. Exceptions must exist in the present times. Something or someone can only be an exception today. A possibility can be a possibility only .It cannot be an exception to the dogma today.

Every exception to all needing the baptism of water has to happen today.Otherwise it will not be an exception.

For me a priest can offer the Novus Ordo Mass in Italian and hold the strict interpretation of the dogma along with being saved in invincible ignorance or with the baptsm of desire followed with the baptism of water.This would be in accord with the de fide teaching of the dogma.

Fr.Nicholas Gruner for example should not have a problem being incardinated into any diocese when it is realized that Vatican Council II is not in conflict with the strict interpretation of EENS. Without the premise Vatican Council II is traditional.He can affirm Vatican Council II.

So if he is asked by a bishop if he accepts Vatican Council II in which LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc are not exceptions to the strict interpretation of the dogma, he could answer in the affirmative.

Vatican Council II for me is in line with the thrice defined dogma on salvation and Fr.Nicholas Gruner could say that the dogmatic teaching on extra ecclesiam nulla salus is the basis for the doctrine on the Social Reign of Jesus Christ over all political and social systems and laws.

Vatican Council II without the premise does not contradict Quas Primas and Mortalium Animos (which do not say there is salvation outside the Church!)

Bishop Marcello Semeraro, the Bishop of Albano, Italy interprets Vatican Council II with the irrational premise and the SSPX is still not aware of this.SSPX lay members should bring this to his attention.

For the SSPX,Albano being saved in I.I and BOD are explicit exceptions to the strict interpretation of the dogma. They have accepted the Marchetti irrationality.

The fault is not with Vatican Council II. It is the visible-in-Heaven-exceptions premise which makes the Council a break with Tradition.

This is the Catholic Faith and not a personal opinion. It is the Faith according to magisterial texts interpreted without the irrational premise of being able to see persons in Heaven who are there without the baptism of water.

Those who are saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16),imperfect communion with the Church (UR 3) , a ray of that Truth(NA 2) , seeds of the Word (AG 11) are known only to God so they are not explicit exceptions to all needing 'faith and baptism'(AG 7) to go to Heaven and avoid Hell.

Non Christians- Hindus, Buddhists, Jews and Muslims do not have faith and baptism . They are oriented to Hell and there are no exceptions on March 16,2015.

Mohammad did not have 'faith and baptism' which saves. He was oriented to the 'fires of Hell'(Cantate Dominio, Council of Florence 1441).

Those who are saved in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire would also need faith and baptism, since this is the ordinary means of salvation.

I don't want to reject the Council. I want to accept Vatican Council II knowing that the Cushingite error can be avoided. The Council can be interpreted with Feeneyism in which LG 16, UR 3 refer to possibilities and not explicit exceptions in the present times (March 16,2015).

Once a traditionalist or sedevacantist has an insight into all this Vatican Council II dramatically changes.2 The sedevacantists CMRI, MHFM like the SSPX are using the irrational premise in the interpretation of Vatican Council II.
-Lionel Andrades

1.

When Redemptoris Missio and Dominus Iesus were issued neither did Pope John Paul II and Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger know of any exceptions to the dogma

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/03/when-redemptoris-missio-and-dominus.html

2.

Confusion in the Catechism of Pope Pius X

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/03/confusion-in-catechism-of-pope-pius-x.html

Pope Pius IX contributed to the confusion on extra ecclesiam nulla salus

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/03/pope-pius-ix-contributed-to-confusion.html

SSPX show the Vatican the Marchetti error carried over into Redemptoris Missio, Dominus Iesus and other magisterial documents

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/03/sspx-show-vatican-marchetti-error.html

The SSPX must be prepared for the CDF's wrong arguments

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/03/the-sspx-must-be-prepared-for-cdfs.html

Dominus Iesus, Redemptoris Missio carry the Cardinal Francesco Marchetti Selvaggiani mistake

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/03/dominus-iesus-redemptoris-missio-carry.html

Vatican Council II (premise-free) agrees with the SSPX position on an ecumenism of return and non Christians needing to convert for salvation

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/03/vatican-council-ii-premise-free-agrees.html