Thursday, September 10, 2015

Three months and sedevacantists cannot answer if LG 16 is explicit and an exception to EENS

It's about three months and a lay sedevacantist is unable to answer if LG 16 is explicit or implicit for us. He cannot answer  if it is not explicit can it be an exception to all needing to enter the Church for salvation. He will still not answer if LG 16 is an exception to EENS.

These links 1 show the discussion with IAAD the blog owner of Introibo Ad Altare Dei, a sedevacantist, on our mutual blogs last June 2015.

There is one report which says Sedevacantists are teaching irrationality. No priest or seminarian from the seminary has responded .

Here are  recent comments with a sedevacantist from the blog post Ask the Wife

Sedevacantist :
BOD and BOB never were, nor are they now, considered "exceptions."
Agreed that being saved with implicit desire for the baptism of water was never exceptions,then and now.Neither martyrdom.
Also being saved with implicit desire or martyrdom were never baptisms like the baptism of water, in 1808 or now.Physically they could not know of any case at that time.So it was theoretical speculation.

If you receive BOD or BOB you are a member of Christ's One True Church--so what's your problem?


Yes, these are theoretical cases so they are not a problem with or without the baptism of water.They never were, so they were not mentioned in the text of the dogma by any of the three Councils, which defined extra ecclesiam nulla salus.


It only becomes problematic if you claim BOW is necessary IN ADDITION to BOB and BOD


It's theoretical so it is not problematic.Either way it is not an exception to EENS.


--or that BOB and BOD do not admit you to membership in the CHURCH.


It's theoretical. So one can long as it is not implied that these cases are known, and so are relevant or exceptions to all needing to formally enter the Church for salvation.


Trent did define BOD, stating the necessity of water baptism, .."OR THE DESIRE THEREOF."



We accept it in theory.

Since Trent did not say that these cases were explicit, must be followed without the baptism of water or that they were exceptions to EENS.Trent did not make these inferences.-Lionel Andrades

Sedevacantists refuse to answer if LG 16 is an exception to EENS
Fr.Anthony Cekada has used an irrational premise ( BOD is explicit, objective in the present times ) and an irrational inference ( BOD is explicit and so an exception to EENS).

Fr.Anthony Cekada should have apologised to the communities of Fr.Leonard Feeney

Bishop Donald Sanborn interprets Vatican Council II with Marchetti's error

Sedevacantists jump ship

Bishop Sanborn, Fr.Cekada agree : in the present times there are no explicit exceptions to EENS

We do not know of a BOB and BOD exception in the present times. Here we can all agree since it is common knowledge.

It is a fact of life that we do not know any one saved with BOD or BOD today ( June 30,2015) Do you not agree here? Do not your readers agree here?

Collegamento permanente dell'immagine integrata
Sedevacantists are teaching irrationality

If you assume BOB and BOD are linked to EENS, then LG 16,LG 8, UR 3 etc will contradict EENS. Then V2 is heretical

For Fr.Cekada Lumen Gentium 16 is an exception to EENS when he does not know any LG 16 case in 2015 in the USA.Yet it is an exception to EENS for him

We cannot say that any particular person on earth today will be saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church but instead with baptism of desire.

The Fathers do not say that BOD and BOB are physically known to us in the present times to be exceptions to all needing to formally enter the Church for salvation.

Pope Francis like the sedevacantists uses Marchetti's irrational premise and inference. He accepts the Council with this error

The EWTN report Tragic Errors of Fr.Leonard Feeney by Fr.William Most is based on irrational Cushingism

Marchettiism is a major heresy in the Catholic Church in the present times

For you UR 3 and LG 8 are exceptions to the dogma.Why? Who do you know today who is saved as mentioned in UR 3,LG 8?

Immagine correlataImmagine correlata

Ask the wife 2

Fr.Paul Kramer like Cardinal Ratzinger has been offering Holy Mass by changing the Nicene Creed, rejecting a defined dogma and interpreting Vatican Council II with LG 16 being explicit

No comments: