The contemporary Magisterium is in doctrinal error.It is teaching error.The contemporary Magisterium's position cannot be defended.Since the present Magisterium is saying there are known exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.This is its standard position. No one has challenged it specifically.
Now the Rome Vicariate, Ecclesia Dei, SSPX,FSSP,CMRI cannot deny the truth.1 They cannot deny what I write here. They cannot deny that today (April 7, 2015) there is no known case of someone saved without 'faith and baptism'. There is no one known saved outside the Church this Tuesday. Today there can never be known any one saved without faith and baptism.
So they agree with me.
I am not presenting a new theology or another concept of Feeneyism.Instead I am saying that we human beings cannot see persons in Heaven with the naked eye.We cannot meet them personally today morning or afternoon.The Rome Vicariate, Ecclesia Dei, SSPX,FSSP and CMRI agree with me.I have been sending them these blog posts.
The contemporary Magisterium ( Pope Benedict, Pope Francis, Cardinal Gerhard Muller) infer that we can see the dead today!
So Vatican Council II is a break with Tradition and they want Catholics in general and the SSPX, Franciscans of the Immaculate, CMRI and other sedevacantists in particular, to accept this error.
I am making a philosophical observation, "We cannot see the dead". The Rome Vicariate, Ecclesia Dei, SSPX, FSSP,CMRI agree with me.
So what's left? What are we left with is the old theology, the old ecclesiology.
The new theology is based on being able to see the dead. Remove the premise, which is, "I can see the dead on earth".We then have the old ecclesiology, the exclusivist ecclesiology.
-Lionel Andrades
1
April 4, 2015
Rome Vicariate, Ecclesia Dei, SSPX, FSSP, CMRI indicate Cardinal Ratzinger made an objective mistake in the Catechism http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/04/rome-vicariate-ecclesia-dei-sspx-fssp_4.html
In what I believe
what premise ?
The irrational premise is "The dead are visible to us on earth".
what inference/ conclusion ?
The inference is since the dead are visible to us on earth, those who are saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance being explicit ( visible in the flesh) become exceptions to the traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
So it is concluded that Vatican Council II (LG 16 etc) contradict the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So it is concluded that Vatican Council II is a break with Tradition, it has the hermeneutic of rupture.
what theology,
The post -1949 theology says every one needs to enter the Catholic Church except for those in invincible ignorance or with the baptism of desire.Since it assumes that defacto( in fact in the present times,explicitly) there are known exceptions to the interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney of Boston.So it is a theology which assumes there is salvation outside the Church even though we cannot know of any one saved without 'faith and baptism'.
what Tradition.
Pre- 1949 Catholic Tradition, on salvation ( soteriology) says there is exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. The three dogmas on extra ecclesiam nulla salus ,defined by three Church Councils, do not mention any exception. The text also does not mention the baptism of desire or being saved in invincible ignorance.I am referring to Cantate Dominio, Council of Florence 1441 etc.
Also Mystici Corporis and the Council of Trent mention implicit desire etc but do not state that these cases are known to us, to be exceptions to the dogma.Neither do they state that there are exceptions to the dogma.
Yet with the false premise and inference is how the Council of Trent, the Catechism of Pope Pius X etc are interpreted.
Do you accept the baptism of desire?
Yes. I believe a Catechuman who has an implicit desire for the baptism of water and dies before he receives it can be saved. Since God will provide the means for him to receive the baptism of water. It has been the experience of saints, including St. Francis Xavier that some people returned from the dead only to be baptised by them with the baptism of water.
Irrational premise, Irrational inference, Non traditional conclusion
The secular media uses an irrational premise which is "We can see the dead who are now in Heaven, we can physically see them in Heaven and on earth".
They then make an irrational inference which is " Since we can see people in Heaven saved without the baptism of water and formal entry into the Church, there is known salvation outside the Church and these cases are an explicit exception to the traditional interpretation of EENS."
Their conclusion is : Vatican Council II is a break with EENS.
They then make an irrational inference which is " Since we can see people in Heaven saved without the baptism of water and formal entry into the Church, there is known salvation outside the Church and these cases are an explicit exception to the traditional interpretation of EENS."
Their conclusion is : Vatican Council II is a break with EENS.
I accept the Magisterium
'For me the magisterial teaching of the Church documents (and not the contemporary magisterium i.e the persons in power) support the rigorist interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ( AG 7,LG 14, CCC 1257,845,846, Redemptoris Missio 55, Dominus Iesus 20 etc).
I accept the Magisterium ( Vatican Council II (AG 7,LG 14), CCC 1257, 845,846, Redemptoris Missio 55, Dominus Iesus 20, Council of Trent,Syllabus of Errors, Catechism of Pope Pius X, Cantate Dominio Council of Florence 1441 etc).
Magisterium, Scripture and Tradition, before and after Vatican Council II support Fr.Leonard Feeney and the four Catholic professors of theology, who were expelled by Boston College. http://www.creativeminorityreport.com/2015/03/dont-blame-vatican-ii.html#comment-1943178630
Exclusivist ecclesiology?
The new theology is based on being able to see the dead. Remove the premise, which is, "I can see the dead on earth".We then have the old ecclesiology, the exclusivist ecclesiology. The ecclesiology of Vatican Council II is exclusivist. Since it affirms the rigorist interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus in Ad Gentes 7, which says all need faith and baptism for salvation.LG 16,LG 8,UR 3,NA 2 etc are not known exceptions to Ad Gentes 7 or the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. We are left with the old ecclesiology.
Who agrees with you?
Exclusivist ecclesiology?
The new theology is based on being able to see the dead. Remove the premise, which is, "I can see the dead on earth".We then have the old ecclesiology, the exclusivist ecclesiology. The ecclesiology of Vatican Council II is exclusivist. Since it affirms the rigorist interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus in Ad Gentes 7, which says all need faith and baptism for salvation.LG 16,LG 8,UR 3,NA 2 etc are not known exceptions to Ad Gentes 7 or the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. We are left with the old ecclesiology.
Who agrees with you?
Archbishop Thomas E.Gullickson says Vatican Council II does not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/11/archbishop-thomas-egullickson-says.html
Implicit intention, invincible ignorance and a good conscience (LG 16) in Vatican Council II do not contradict extra ecclesiam nulla salus –John Martigioni http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/11/implicit-intention-invincible-ignorance.html#links
____________________________
DEAN OF THEOLOGY AT ST. ANSELM SAYS THERE ARE NO KNOWN EXCEPTIONS TO THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
____________________________
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment