The pattern of error from the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 can be seen incorporated into Vatican Council II. It would seem as if Vatican Council II was called, only to make official, the error used to reject the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
This was the pattern: a hypothetical case was considered explict, real, seen in the fleshThen it was concluded it was an exception to the traditional teaching on salvation.
An irrational premise was made like there are known people in the present times who are saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church. Then it was inferred that these cases were exceptions to the traditional, strict interpretation of the dogma on exclusive salvation in only the Catholic Church.
Check out the pattern in Vatican Council II.
Here are some examples at random.
Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it is necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing.-Letter of the Holy Office
CONCLUSION
it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member
WHY ?
Since 'one may obtain eternal salvation' also 'by desire and longing'.
SO WHAT?
And these cases are known, they are explicit in the present times and so they are exceptions to the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).
HOW CAN THEY BE EXPLICIT FOR US?
Since someone has seen these cases in Heaven saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
Someone knows of persons who will be saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
False premise: There are people in Heaven saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church and they are known to us in the present times.
False inference : These persons are known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.So it is not always required that a person be incorporated into the Church actually as a member.
Traditionalists and liberals use this reasoning. No one asks, "Hey wait! Where are these people, who are these people saved without the baptism of water? I cannot see any one . I do not know any one as such. How can you reason like this?"
Since no one asked, no one objected, not even Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Michael Davis and the other traditionalists, this reasoning was used in Vatican Council II in so many places. Hypothetical cases were mentioned as if they were explicit exceptions to EENS:
Here are some examples
NOSTRA AETATE 2
I
She regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings which, though differing in many aspects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men.-Nostra Aetate, Vatican Coun cil II.
FALSE PREMISE: 'among persons known to us'
She regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings (in other religions, necessary for salvation among persons known to us)
FALSE INFERENCE : 'so all do not need to convert formally into the Church for salvation'.
These persons known to us, reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men, they are saved, so all do not need to convert fornally into the Church for salvation.
_______________________________
II
She regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings which, though differing in many aspects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men.-Nostra Aetate, Vatican Council II.
it is not always required that he ( a non Catholic, a non baptised person ) be incorporated into the Church actually as a member
WHY ?
Since 'one may obtain eternal salvation' also 'by desire and longing'. Or by following 'those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings', which ' reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men ' , which saves.
SO WHAT?
And these cases are known, they are explicit in the present times and so they are exceptions to the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).
HOW CAN THEY BE EXPLICIT FOR US?
Since someone has seen these cases in Heaven saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
Someone knows of persons who will be saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
_________________________________
Unitatis Redintigratio 3
For men who believe in Christ and have been truly baptized are in communion with the Catholic Church even though this communion is imperfect. - Unitatis Redintigratio 3, Vatican Council II
For men who believe in Christ and have been truly baptized (in other religions, who are saved and are among persons known to us)
FALSE INFERENCE : 'so all do not need to convert formally into the Church for salvation'.
These persons known to us, are in communion with the Catholic Church , they are saved, so all do not need to convert fornally into the Church for salvation.
_______________________________
For men who believe in Christ and have been truly baptized are in communion with the Catholic Church even though this communion is imperfect. - Unitatis Redintigratio 3, Vatican Council II
CONCLUSION
it is not always required that he( a non Catholic, ) be incorporated into the Church actually as a member
WHY ?
Since 'one may obtain eternal salvation' also 'by desire and longing'. Or by ' believing in Christ' and being 'truly baptized' .
SO WHAT?
And these cases are known, they are explicit in the present times and so they are exceptions to the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).
HOW CAN THEY BE EXPLICIT FOR US?
Since someone has seen these cases in Heaven saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
Someone knows of persons who will be saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
_________________________________
Unitatis Redintigratio 3 (continued)
But even in spite of them it remains true that all who have been justified by faith in Baptism are members of Christ's body - Unitatis Redintigratio 3, Vatican Council II
FALSE PREMISE: 'among persons known to us'
For men who believe in Christ and have been truly baptized (in other religions, who are saved and are among persons known to us)
FALSE INFERENCE : 'so all do not need to convert formally into the Church for salvation'.
These persons known to us, are in communion with the Catholic Church , they are saved, so all do not need to convert fornally into the Church for salvation.
_______________________________
II
But even in spite of them it remains true that all who have been justified by faith in Baptism are members of Christ's body - Unitatis Redintigratio 3, Vatican Council II
CONCLUSION
it is not always required that he ( a non Catholic) be incorporated into the Church actually as a formal member
WHY ?
Since ' members of Christ's body ' also include those 'who have been justified by faith in Baptism'.
SO WHAT?
And these cases are known, they are explicit in the present times and so they are exceptions to the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).
HOW CAN THEY BE EXPLICIT FOR US?
Since someone has seen these cases in Heaven saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
Someone knows of persons who will be saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
_________________________________
Apply the same irrational reasoning to these two passages also from Unitatis Redintigratio 3.
Moreover, some and even very many of the significant elements and endowments which together go to build up and give life to the Church itself, can exist outside the visible boundaries of the Catholic Church: the written word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, and visible elements too. All of these, which come from Christ and lead back to Christ, belong by right to the one Church of Christ.- Unitatis Redintigratio 3, Vatican Council II
It follows that the separated Churches and Communities as such, though we believe them to be deficient in some respects, have been by no means deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Church.- Unitatis Redintigratio 3, Vatican Council II
_______________________________________
_______________________________________
'the separated Churches and Communities as such', ' have been by no means deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation', why had they to mention this in Vatican Council II(UR 3) ? Since these are hypothetical cases. They are the stuff of speculation?
Why?
Since this was the reasoning in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949. Hypothetical cases ( the baptism of desire etc) were assumed to be known and visible (premise) and then it was assumed that they were exceptions and relevant (inference) to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
-Lionel Andrades
The Letter made a mistake. Archbishop Lefebvre did not notice it
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/12/the-letter-made-mistakearchbishop.html
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment