Sunday, July 26, 2015

The Ratzinger Error is there in most of the magisterial documents issued during the pontificate of Pope John Paul II

Immagine correlata
The Ratzinger Error is there in most of the magisterial documents issued during the pontificate of Pope John Paul II
It is an irrationality.The reasoning was based on  a false premise. Upon this premise philosophical and theological inferences were made.The error can be traced in Redemptoris Missio, Dominus Iesus....Due to the basic  inference these magisterial documents do not affirm the rigorist interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS). Why ? Since the cardinal- prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) assumed there were known exceptions to traditional EENS.
Being saved in invincible ignorance (I.I) and the baptism of desire(BOD),are hypothetical cases for us. Yet they were inferred to be living persons in the present times.These theoretical cases were considered explicit.They were explicit for the cardinal.So they became exceptions to traditional  EENS.The dead were seen as alive !.BOD and I.I cases which would only be known to God were inferred to be alive on earth  and known.Otherwise how could they be exceptions to EENS?
Pope John Paul II overlooked it. So magisterial documents do not affirm the strict interpretation of the dogma.
Now the new bishop-elect of Los Angeles,USA  influenced by the Ratzinger Error rejects traditional EENS. The traditional teaching indicated most people are on the way to Hell since they are not formal members of the Catholic Church. Or as Vatican Council II puts it, they do not have 'faith and baptism'(Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II), at the time of death.
The Ratzinger Error was part of Fr.Robert Barron's religious formation.It is also there in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1257) which  says God is not limited to the Sacraments.It is as if we know of some such case in the present times, someone in Heaven without the baptism of water and Catholic Faith.The Catechism does not even mention the dogma. Instead it refers to an 'aphorism'(846).CCC 1257 and 846 suggest that there are exceptions to the dogma. The dead are visible! So there are exceptions.Someone down town has been saved without the Sacraments for Cardinal Ratzinger!
Before 1949 being saved in I.I and BOD were known.They were considered invisible for us.They could be known only to God if they existed.So BOD and I.I were not linked to EENS.They were zero cases in our reality. So they could not be exceptions to all needing to formally enter the Church.The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 made the connection, it made the irrational link.This was a mistake seemingly un-noticed  by Cardinal Ratzinger.Since the dead, now who are in Heaven saved in I.I or BOD cannot be known exceptions to the Feeneyite version of the dogma.Fr.Leonard Feeney was traditional and correct.The cardinals Francesco Marchetti Selvaggiani and Richard  Cushing were irrational and heretical.They were rejecting a defined dogma.
Cardinal Ratzinger instead of correcting the error accommodated it in most magisterial documents.He also wrongly interpreted Vatican Council II (AG 7,LG 14) with the dead- are -visible- and- alive reasoning.
In Redemptoris Missio and Dominus Iesus for example, there are traditional passages but the dead are alive premise is also there.The irrational inference is there too.So traditional EENS is missing.This is a break with the pre-1949 interpretation of EENS.It is a break with the Council of Trent. Trent  has passages from Cantate Domino, the Council of Florence (1441) on EENS.
Now the entire CDF machinery, the contemporary magisterium, is working to cover up this error.
May be it was an innocent mistake, but it was an error of the CDF Prefect.It was something overlooked.It was not the work of the Holy Spirit.The contemporary magisterium made a mistake.-Lionel Andrades

Fr.Robert Barron confirms that Pope Benedict XVI and Pope John Paul II used the 1949 irrationality

Fr. Robert Barron means Pope Benedict XVI also denies the dogma and Vatican Council II (AG 7, LG 14))

No comments: