Saturday, August 22, 2015

Implicit desire and martyrdom being baptisms and explicit like the baptism of water is an American theory which originated in Baltimore

Immagine correlata
That implicit desire and martrydom are baptisms  and that they are explicit is an American theory that originated in Baltimore and was completed fully in Boston. It was then placed in Vatican Council II.

That the baptism of desire (BOD) and baptism of blood(BOB) are related to extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) or is an exception to all needing to formally enter the Church is an American theory. It originated clearly in Baltimore . The ecclesiastics  placed this opinion in their Catechism (1808).

They then popularised it through their sources  and Pope Pius X  places this new beginning of modernism, in his Catechism, perhaps innocently.He di not realize that this opinion would be used to contradict the Nicene Creed ( I believe in one baptism for the forgivesness of sins), with the replacement of more than one baptism ( I believe in three baptisms for the forgiveness of sins'. It would also contradict the dogma  EENS.
Immagine correlataImmagine correlataImmagine correlata
In 1965 the media used this irrational reasoning from Baltimore  to interpret Vatican Council II as a break with EENS.Until today even the traditionalists use the Baltimore reasoning in accepting the 1949 Holy Office  decision against Fr.Leonard Feeney.
In 1808 Baltimore they said BOD and BOB were baptisms in 1949 Boston they infer that they were explicit baptisms and so contradicted the Feeneyite traditonal interpretation of EENS.
Fr.Leonard Feeney refused to accept being saved with implicit desire or in martyrdom  as being known to us humans. For him these were not cases of salvation outside the Church.Obviously there were no such cases.A theory or speculation  could not be a defacto  exception to all needing to convert into the Church as taught since the time of Jesus.
Yet in 1949 this error had become magisterial. The Magisterium went sour during the pontificate of Pope Pius XII when the pope did not correct this error.This was heresy. It was the beginning of a change in ecclesiology. Catholics would start offering the Novus Ordo Mass after Vatican Council II with this new ecclesiology.
Until today the SSPX criticizes the Novus Ordo Mass when the fault is with the ecclesiology and not the Mass.
 Cardinal Ratzinger accepted the irrational reasoning and made it magisterial in the Catechism.So now priests offer the Novus Ordo Mass assuming BOD, BOB and I.I are baptisms and they are explicit cases in 2015. So every one does not need to convert into the Church for salvation is their conclusion.This is what they confidently preach.
 Cardinal Ratzinger could  have interpreted BOD and BOB as a possibility known to God and then clarified that these cases  are not defacto, they are not objective in the present times.They are accepted de jure ( in principle) and will be followed by the baptism of water as St. Thomas Aquinas taught about the man in forest in invincible ignorance.
Cardinal Ratzinger makes the defacto-dejure distinction in Dominus Iesus but does not make it with the issue of BOD, BOB and EENs.
 He did not want to affirm the dogma EENS clearly similar to Pope Pius XII.
There was an alternative which he avoided.We still have that option today.
 We can affirm the strict interpretation of EENS along with implcit for us  BOD, BOB and invincible ignorance(I.I).We can accept BOD, BOB and I.I as only theoretical possibilities, since for us humans, they can only be theoretical possibilities and not defacto cases.
So we are back to the original ecclesiology of the Church if we avoid the Baltimore-Boston confusion.There is a  rational alternative. The present ecclesiology is based on being able to see persons in Heaven saved with BOD, BOB and I.I and allegedly without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.This is fantasy.
Immagine correlata
Without this irrational reasoning from Baltimore and the Boston Case (1949), we can interpret a Vatican Council II in which LG 16,LG 8, NA 2, UR 3 etc are not explicit and so do not contradict Fr.Leonard Feeney on EENS. 
Immagine correlata
The Novus Ordo Mass can be offered by priests who affirm the rigorist interpretation of EENS.The ecclesiology of the Traditional Latin Mass even when offered by FSSP priests can have the old ecclesiology.
Immagine correlata
There is no change in the traditional teaching on other religions not being paths to salvation and their members needing Catholic Faith with the baptism of water to avoid Hell. Ecumenism is still one of return and based on this old ecclesiology we affirm the traditional teachings on the Social Kingship of Jesus Christ over all political legislation.There is no separation of Church and State.
The magisterium is not likely to make these changes however we lay Catholics, with reason complementing faith, can hold on to the Truth and express it when possible.
-Lionel Andrades

No comments: