Cardinal Agostino Vallini and Rome's Auxiliary bishops,along with Ecclesia Dei, SSPX, FSSP all agree with me : 1
1.The Catholic Church affirms the traditional rigorist interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) since they do not know of any exceptions.
2.So for Rome in 2015 , there are no exceptions mentioned in Vatican Council II to the strict, Feeneyite version of the dogma.
3.Those who are saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are not personally known to them.They are not exceptions.
They, Rome Vicariate, Ecclesia Dei, SSPX, FSSP,CMRI ( I refer to them as the A+ group) indicate that the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1257) is in error when it states ' God is not limited to the Sacraments'.
Since Cardinal Ratzinger's source for this statement was only Cardinal Marchetti's theory which was incorporated in Vatican Council II (LG 14,AG 7 etc):-
1.Cardinal Marchetti did not know any one saved outside the Church i.e without faith and baptism.
2.There was no magisterial document before 1949 which made this claim.There was no precedent. Not a single Church document claimed being saved in invincible ignorance (I.I) and the baptism of desire(BOD) were known to us in personal cases to be exceptions.Neither did any magisterial document before 1949 directly state that these cases were exceptions to the dogma on salvation.There is no such reference in Quanto Conficiamur Moerore, Mystici Corporis or the Council of Trent.Not a single reference.
So except for Marchetti's personal theory Cardinal Ratzinger had no source, no reference,for this new doctrine, 'God is not limited to the Sacramemts', which is heresy.
The A+ group is now contradicting Cardinal Ratzinger with common sense.They are saying that they physically, with the naked eye, cannot see any one saved in I.I or BOD and without the baptism of water in April 2015.
They all agree with me on this point.There are no denials.The deceased who are now in Heaven are not visible on earth today.Those who allegedly died without the baptism of water centuries back ( if there was such a case) are not visible and known today. So they do not contradict Ad Gentes 7 when it says 'all' need 'faith and baptism' for salvation. They do not contradict the dogma. We do not know any one alive today who will be saved without formal entry into the Church. If 'the man in the forest' is saved in I.I and without the baptism of water, as is often said, he would not be known to us personally.
The issue here is not some concept of Feeneyism but if we can personally meet someone in April 2015 who is saved without 'faith and baptism'.Can we see him with the physical eye, do we know his name? No.So for us humans there cannot be exceptions to the dogma.The A+ group has no denial to issue here.
God has chosen to limit salvation to the Sacraments , according to the dogma EENS, and cardinals Ratzinger and Marchetti did not know of any exceptions.No one knew of any exceptions even during Vatican Council II (1960-65).
So it was Fr.Leonard Feeney who was magisterial ( and still is) while Cardinal Richard Cushing was in heresy.Cardinals Marchetti and Ratzinger were Cushingites.
I refer to the Marchetti Letter since it carries his name.The Letter however was made public after he died it is reported.It did not also carry the seal and signature of the responsible officials of the Holy Office.It is believed that the Letter was tampered with in the second half and Fr.Karl Rahner S.J hurriedly placed it in the Denzinger.
The first half of the Letter affirmed the traditional dogma and supported Fr.Leonard Feeney on doctrine. The second part, contradicted the first half of the Letter.This same pattern Cardinal Ratzinger has repeated in Redemptoris Missio, Dominus Iesus etc.There are passages that vaguely affirm the traditional dogma while other passages contradict them, assuming being saved in I.I and BOD are known exceptions.So these documents during the pontificate of Pope John Paul II, do not clearly affirm the rigorist interpretation of the dogma but a new version of it.
Vatican Council II is no more an ideological whip to be used against the Franciscans of the Immaculate, SSPX and traditionalists.They can affirm Vatican Council II and also the rigorist interpretation of EENS.This means an ecumenism of return and non Catholics needing to formally convert into the Catholic Church for salvation.The dogma EENS is the moral basis for proclaiming the traditional teachings on Religious Liberty and the Social Reign of Christ the King over all political laws.
The A+ group affirms the 'crypto Lefebvre' position on Church ecclesiology.It still is exclusivist after Vatican Council II.
-Lionel Andrades
1
No comments:
Post a Comment