Any one who says that the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance are linked to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus is a liberal

1. May 22, 2015 at 3:15 AM

   Susan.
   C'mon Lionel...the SSPX and the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary are the ones you're calling liberal???
   Lionel:
   Any one who says that the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance are linked to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus is a liberal.
   The Angelus Press of the SSPX (USA) has published a book 'Is Feeneyism Catholic' by Fr.Francois Laisney, which assumes that being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are exceptions to the rigorist interpretation of the dogma according to Fr.Leonard Feeney. This is apparition theology, liberal theology.
   There are liberal consequences, non traditional results. Since there are known exceptions for the SSPX (USA), all do not need to enter the Catholic Church in the present times.Sounds familiar. Pope Francis....
   Since there are known exceptions , there are exceptions to the traditional teaching on the Social Reign of Jesus Christ over all political systems. Every one doesn't have to be Catholic to go to Heaven....
   Since there are known exceptions, an ecumenism of return is good but it is not obligatory for salvation.This is all liberalism.
   _______________
   
   The Slaves of the Immaculate affirm the dogma correctly and God bless them for this but- for the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, Vatican Council II is a break with the rigorist interpretation of the dogma according to Fr.Leonard Feeney.
   Since LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, LG 8 etc refer to known exceptions in the present times. They would have to be known to be exceptions to the dogma. And if they are known in 2015 they are apparitions of the dead!
   How can being saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16), a ray of the that Truth which saves (NA 2) etc be a known or unknown exception to the rigorist interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus ? How can it even be relevant to the dogma?
   So like the liberals, the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary ( and the SSPX) say that Vatican Council II is a break with the dogma. For me this is liberalism, since I affirm the rigorist interpretation of the dogma in accord with Vatican Council II. The Council is not 'ambigous' for me, with reference to the dogma.
   For the SSPX and the MICM, Vatican Council II is a break with Tradition.
   _____________________
   
   Pull your head out of your nether region, and quite eating the good guys.
   Lionel:
   The good guys are using the same irrationality as the Vatican Curia.They are part of the problem and not the solution.
   
   Seriously, you're doing francis' work....think about that.
   Lionel:
   I am affirming the rigorist interpretation of the dogma in agreement with Vatican Council II. So my ecclesiology is ecclesiocentric, if I attend the Traditional Latin Mass or the Novus Ordo Mass.
   For me Vatican Council II supports an ecumenism of return (AG 7 and LG 14) and there are no exceptions mentioned in the Council II. For me the Council is in agreement with the Syllabus of Errors, since I avoid Marchetti's error.
   Does Pope Francis say this ? No!
   Do the SSPX and MICM say this ? No!
   Then who do you think really supports Pope Francis and the error in the Catholic Church?
   The good guys!

-Lionel Andrades


http://eponymousflower.blogspot.it/2015/05/unjust-laws-and-civil-disobedience.html?showComment=1432367743612