from the blog Vox Cantoris
Dave Armstrong says:
I have twenty officially published books with six different publishers, including most of the largest Catholic ones (including four bestsellers in the field).
Dave Armstrong is a liberal on the issue of salvation.He rejects the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. He interprets it with the objective error of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.It is no surprise that the publishers accept his books.
My first book has a Foreword by Servant of God, Fr. John A. Hardon, SJ, who was Blessed Mother Teresa's catechist and a close adviser to Blessed Pope Paul VI.
Cardinal Raymond Burke approved Fr. John Hardon's error
What was Fr. Hardons error that Cardinal Burke approved?
Cardinal Raymond Burke approved the article. Fr.Hardon like Cardinal Marchetti makes this wrong inference in the article.
Rome made a mistake in 1949 and Fr.John Hardon did not notice it
The Catechumen you refer to is a hypothetical case for you and me. So it is not an explicit exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus : Fr.John Hardon too did not notice this.
My second book has a Foreword by Dr. Scott Hahn. I've been endorsed by virtually all of the leading apologists, have been interviewed on Catholic radio over 20 times, including twice on "Catholic Answers Live".
He is endorsed by the liberal Catholic apologists who interpret magisterial documents using Cushingism instead of Feeneyism. If they interpreted Vatican Council II with Feeneyism they would not be allowed to appear on EWTN. The local bishop, to protect himself from the political Left, would disown them .This would affect their income as apologists. So they change Church doctrines to remain politically correct."Why not?", they may say, since "Popes, cardinals and bishops are also doing it".
Jimmy Akins, Catholic Answers present an irrational version of Catholic salvation
Would Catholic Answers apologists Tim Staples and Jimmy Akin be approved by Bishop Robert H.Brom in the diocese of San Diego if they did not lie ?
Catholic Answers calls being a full fledged member of the Catholic Church extremism: imprimatur from the Bishop of San Diego, USA http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2013/06/catholic-answers-calls-being-full.html
LUMEN GENTIUM 14: FUTILE DISCUSSION ON CATHOLIC ANSWERS
I have Imprimaturs, including from my own bishop, a column every other week for "The Michigan Catholic," worked for The Coming Home Network for three years, but I am merely self-appointed and not even entitled to use the title "apologist" to describe myself. What the heck am I, then?
'What the heck am I, then?' asks Dave. A liberal Catholic apologist who like liberal bishops and the political Left reject the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) with an innovation. They all interpret Vatican Council II as a break with the dogma EENS, the Syllabus of Errors and Tradition, by using the irrational Cushingite innovation.
They refuse to interpret Vatican Council II and the dogma EENS with traditional Feeneyism,with the exclusivist ecclesiology.Their innovative tool is assuming invisible cases are visible and these 'ghosts' are living exceptions to exclusivist interpretation of the dogma.
Many do this out of ignorance but Dave Armstrong has been informed over these years.
I've made my living by writing apologetics these past 14 years. Oh, I forgot: I'm just one "of these sorts." That's what I'll put on my tax form, for occupation]
[I am an apologist; see the above.
A liberal and heretical apologist like Mark Shea.They reject a defined dogma of the Church by reinterpreting it with an irrationality. They then change the Nicene Creed with that same irrationality . Vatican Council II is presented with the same irrationality to produce a non traditional and heretical conclusion.They are supported by the contemporary liberal magisterium, especially the bishops of the USCCB.
I have attended a traditional Latin Mass since 1991, attended the Tridentine Mass at midnight on Christmas (obviously because I hate it so much) and was in favor of widespread access to it 16 years before Pope Benedict XVI decreed it.
Yes it is the Tridentine Mass with the new ecclesiology, interpreted with Cushingism.This is also the common ecclesiology of the Novus Ordo Mass.
I've also written many articles favoring liturgical positions taken by mainstream traditionalists: one of whom -- a person with a major traditionalist website: Unam Sanctam Catholicam -- I invited to my house a few weeks ago to give a talk on the TLM.
He also supports the Tridentine Mass with the new ecclesiology. He is a Cushingite.With him it is the old Mass with the new ecclesiology and he does not seem to know what is the exact cause, the basis of the new ecclesiology.
He sees the result in Vatican Council II and assumes the Council is the cause.For him it is Vatican Council II interpreted with Cushingism. If he interprets Vatican Council II with Feeneyism ( there are no known exceptions to the exclusivist ecclesiology of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus) they will not approve of it at the Angelicum University. Also his bishop will not approve it. Boniface is a good person and means well but he is following the general confusion on this issue.
Dave Armstrong pulls down all comments and does not answer questions http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/03/dave-armstrong-pulls-down-all-comments.html
Dave Armstrong let me ask you what I have asked Fr.Angelo Geiger F.I
Dave Armstrong interprets Vatican Council II and accepts the Novus Ordo Mass using the irrational premise
Dave Armstrong, Mark Shea adjust Church doctrine to serve their financial interests