Saturday, April 25, 2015

Gavin D'Costa will not say that Vatican Council II indicates all Muslims in Britain and elsewhere are on the way to Hell : there is no correction or apology for irrational reasoning





Gavin D'Costa will not say that Vatican Council II indicates all Muslims in Britain and elsewhere are on the way to Hell and that this is the official Catholic teaching according to the text of Church documents. Instead he uses un-professional reasoning which   would be a lie for any academic.This is  theology with a deception.It is reasoning based on an objective error and this error is accepted as scholarship by the University of Bristol.

He has not denied that he uses irrationality.I mentioned this in a blog post.1 In other words he agrees that he uses false inferences in interpreting Vatican Council II and projects it as the new teachings of the Catholic Church.
This is unethical.He would also be suggesting that my interpretation of Vatican Council II is not that of the Catholic Church, since I do not make  the irrational premise, inference and conclusion as he does. This is not scholarship. It would be dishonesty to know that a factual error is the basis for a theology or theory and then to go ahead and repeat it.
He does not want to  issue a correction or apology and neither does he want to discuss it.
An objective error was made in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (846,1257) which was based on the same mistake  Cardinal Francesco Marchetti Selvaggiani made in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949. D'Costa uses this irrational premise and inference in the interpretation of Vatican Council II.
-Lionel Andrades

1

Gavin D'Costa has not denied that he uses a false reasoning, which is factually and objectively incorrect

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/04/gavin-dcosta-has-not-denied-that-he.html

Archbishop testifies to the fruit of Medjugorje

Archbishop testifies to the fruit of Medjugorje

Mgr Salvador Piñeiro García Calderón, the Archbishop of Ayacucho and President of the Peruvian Episcopal Conference, was in Medjugorje this month. It was his second pilgrimage to Medjugorje. His first was in June 2003.
In an interview with Radio Mir the 66-year-old Archbishop said:

“I have long been listening to Our Lady’s messages of conversion and adoration, but it’s not easy to come here because it is so far away. Some pilgrims from Peru were able to come and I am here because of them.

“In Lima we have a centre called the Queen of Peace and people come there to spread Our Lady’s messages and acquaint us more and more with Medjugorje.

“During my stay here I heard many confessions, and it is a huge comfort to the priest when he sees so many believers come with pain and tears and then leave and go home happy. This is the fruit and wonder of this place.”
http://crownofstars.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/archbishop-testifies-to-fruit-of.html

Michael Voris does not say every one needs to be a card carrying member of the Church for salvation. For him there are exceptions.

Church Militant - Serving Catholics

DO NON-CATHOLICS GO TO HELL?


April 24, 2015 | The Vortex

http://www.churchmilitant.com/video/episode/do-non-catholics-go-to-hell



Do all non-Catholics go to Hell? It's a question that has been the subject of many heated conversations.
Lionel:
Michael Voris cannot answer the question directly or there will be an uproar from the Archdiocese of Detroit and the political Left. 
__________________________
But there is a deeper question here, because there is a deeper principle involved. The deeper principle beyond being a “card-carrying, on the parish rolls” 
Lionel:
He does not say every one needs to be a card carrying member of the Church for salvation. For him there are exceptions. The baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance are exceptions.If he does not say these cases are exceptions, he would not be supporting 'good relations with the Jews'( of the Left).
_________________________
Catholic is: How does one actually attain salvation? What is necessary for salvation? What is necessary to get to Heaven? That is the more fundamental question here, the foundation from which springs the further question about being in the Catholic Church.
Lionel:
The fundamental teaching was that every one needs the baptism of water in the Catholic Church for salvation.This was referred to as exclusivist ecclesiology. This is rejected by  Michael Voris.
__________________________
The Church teaches that one must be in a state of grace upon death to achieve salvation. And a person can only be in either a state of grace or a state of mortal sin.
Lionel:
If  one dies outside the Church, without Catholic Faith and the baptism of water, it is a mortal sin of Faith.It leads to Hell.
If there are any exceptions we humans cannot know of them.They would only be known to God.
So there cannot be any defacto exception to the ordinary means of salvation 'faith and baptism'(AG 7, LG 14 )
___________________________
 If a person dies in a state of unrepented mortal sin, he descends immediately and directly into Hell for all eternity, where he suffers the tortures of his demonic masters—but is most tortured from his everlasting separation from God, whom he knows he was created to be with and yet detests at the same time.
So the primary question is: How does a person achieve a state of grace? A state of grace is the state where the life of the Blessed Trinity is present in the soul. Sanctifying grace comes to the soul for the first moment in baptism and helps to sustain the supernatural virtues: the theological virtues of faith, hope and charity. A man dying without these virtues dies without God. He is owned by Hell.
It is impossible to possess these virtues without sanctifying grace. Mortal sin (mortal coming from the Latin morte, “death”) means the supernatural life of the soul is now gone. The soul is dead spiritually. It still for a while possesses its natural aspect of giving life to the body, animating the flesh—but when the end comes, not only is the body dead, but the soul remains in a perpetual state of death: the Second Death of which the Scriptures speak. Its now everlasting pain is to have to endure death when it was created for divine life. 
How to avoid this worst of all realities is to die not in a state of deadly sin, but in a state of life—divine life. Our Blessed Lord points out the way most vividly and lovingly: “If you love Me you will keep My commandments, and My Father and I will come to you and We will make Our home in you” (John 14:15). This is the most direct way to understand what is meant by a state of grace—that the Holy Trinity takes up residence in our souls. God lives in us; we are in a perpetual state of possessing divine grace—divine life.
The only thing that can alter this most precious of all realities is to commit mortal sin.  When that happens, God immediately flees, for He cannot abide sin. It is an abomination to Him. Purity cannot abide that which is impure. 
So the key to the question “Is there salvation outside the Church?” is to first understand that the Church’s role is to assist souls in attaining and maintaining a state of grace.
Lionel:
Is there salvation outside the Church? Has the dogma been contradicted?
Yes for Cardinal Marchetti in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949. Yes for Michael Voris at Church Militant and especially in this video.
_________________________
 This is the sole purpose for the sacraments: to infuse supernatural grace into the soul, visible signs instituted by Our Lord for the imparting of grace.
Now true, God’s grace is not bound by the sacraments.
Lionel:
False.God's grace for salvation is bound to the Sacraments according to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. God has chosen to restrict salvation to the Sacraments.
_________________________
 He can certainly operate outside of them.
Lionel:
He can but Michael Voris cannot infer that he knows of any such case or that this case known to him, is an explicit exception to the dogma (Cantate Dominio, Council of Florence 1441). This was the Marchetti-Cushing error.This is the error approved by the Left. It is the false premise, inference and conclusion. It is confusion.
Voris chooses to be liberal and politically correct here.
'God’s grace is not bound by the sacraments', since there are known cases saved outside the Church for Michael Voris.They  are personally known to him.They would have to be known in the present times to be exceptions.So he says God's grace it not bound to the Sacraments (CCC 1257)
Vatican Council II is also a break with the  rigorist interpretation of the dogma since LG 16,UR 3,NA 2 etc refer to known cases in the present times saved without the baptism of water and Catholic Faith. It is no surprise that Vatican Council II is ambigous for him. Since there are the orthodox passages and there are passages which refer to known salvation in the present times for Michael Voris. 
For me there are no exceptions in Vatican Council II to the dogma. Since there are the orthodox passages and there are passages which do not refer to known salvation in the present times. They refer to cases of people who would finally also be saved with the baptism of water in the Catholic Church, in a way known to God.This would be dogmatic.The text any way does not say that these cases are known to us.
___________________________
 He did in such manifest cases as the conversion of St. Paul, for example.
Lionel:
Yes, God choose to do so.However how can Michael Voris infer that these cases are known exceptions to the dogma which says all need to formally enter the Church to avoid the fires of Hell? How can it be an exception today? It would have to happen today to be an exception? The dogma refers to all needing 'faith and baptism' today. Does Michael Voris know of someone who does not need to formally enter the Church this April ?
___________________________
 Saul received a singular grace of conversion. And while that grace was not mediated through a formal sacrament, it nevertheless did come through the Church—as all graces do. It was after all the Church that was praying non-stop for relief from the murderous Saul.  In answer to the prayer of the Church about Saul, God sent them Paul.
Lionel:
How is what happened centuries back a defacto exception to all needing to enter the Church with Catholic Faith and the baptism of water to go to Heaven?
Can someone from the past be a known exception to the dogma today?
___________________________
The purpose of the Church in the grand scheme is to create saints, to make us holy. As St. Peter tells us, “You are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people of His own” (1 Peter 2:9). When he wrote his first letter, the first Pope was speaking to the first Catholics. We Catholics sometimes forget this truth, owing to the Protestant co-opting of the Scriptures as though they belonged to them. They most certainly do not. They never have.
The Bible, the canon of Scripture is Catholic, period. So the formula laid out for us in Scripture has specific and singular reference to those souls who are alive within the body of Christ—His Catholic Church. When Catholic souls plunge into spiritual death through committing mortal sin, they have a sacramental remedy to be resurrected: the sacrament of confession.
But when a non-Catholic soul, even one baptized in some Protestant denomination, falls into mortal sin, what remedy does it possess? Short of an act of perfect contrition prior to death, nothing. Such a man dies in his mortal sin.
The debate over salvation outside the church is kind of a moot question then, as it’s generally argued. The example case is always brought up: Does the “good” Protestant husband and father go to Hell because he wasn’t Catholic?
Lionel:
According to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus Protestants and Orthodox Christians are on the way to Hell.
According to Vatican Council II (AG 7,LG 14) all need Catholic Faith for salvation. Protestants and Orthodox Christians do not have it.
______________________
That question is framed totally incorrectly. It should not be asked, “Will he go to Heaven if he wasn’t Catholic?” 
Lionel:
The dogma indicates he is on the way to Hell.
_______________________
but, “Was he in a state of grace—and if he wasn’t Catholic, how was it possible for him to be in a state of grace?” Now, we can never know with any certitude, of course, the disposition of any particular soul; that is completely in the realm of Our Lord as Judge.
Lionel:
The ordinary way of salvation is Catholic Faith and the baptism of water. We cannot know of any exception.We cannot judge someone to be an exception.
_________________________
 But in the hypothetical discussions people engage in, we can ask these questions. We speak in hypotheticals because principles of understanding fall from them. 
And the singular principle that falls from all of this is: It is much more difficult to be saved if you are not a Catholic with access to the sacraments to restore you to and keep you in a state of grace. Faithful sacrament-frequenting Catholics are much more likely to be saved than anyone else because such a man is much more likely to die in a state of grace—which is necessary to be saved.
This is the whole point of evangelizing: to help people understand the perilous risk to which they are exposing their souls if they do not become Catholic and faithfully receive the sacraments given to us by Our Lord Himself for our salvation.
All salvation comes through the Catholic Church, and outside of Her there is no salvation.
Lionel:
Every one with no exception needs to be 'a cary carrying member' of the Catholic Church for salvation.
When Michael Voris says 'All salvation comes through the Catholic Church'(CCC 846) he  infers that there are known exceptions. It suggests that there is salvation outside the Church.This was the mistake in the Catechism.The influence of the error can be seen in Redemptoris Missio and Dominus Iesus which do not affirm the traditional and rigorist interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
-Lionel Andrades


SSPX must continue to reject Vatican Council II and other magisterial documents interpreted with the false premise and conclusion ? : ChurchMilitant TV still does not respond

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/04/sspx-must-continue-to-reject-vatican_25.html


SSPX must continue to reject Vatican Council II and other magisterial documents interpreted with the false premise and conclusion ? : ChurchMilitant TV still does not respond



SSPX must continue to reject Vatican Council II and other magisterial documents interpreted with the false premise and conclusion ? : ChurchMilitant TV still does not respond.

Is the contemporary Magisterium interpreting Vatican Council II with an irrational premise and inference ? There is no comment from Michael Voris.


Michael Voris uses the false premise, inference and conclusion in the interpretation of Vatican Council II and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, as does the Archbishop of Detroit, where CMTV is situated.So we cannot expect much from him here.He has to accept and teach the factual error of the Magisterium, to remain ' a card carrying Catholic'.

So it was no surprise in an Mic'd Up program when Michael  unleashed the propaganda against the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) saying they were in schism, while he did not ask   John Allen ( National Catholic Reporter) on that same program,  how could he receive the Eucharist at Mass? 

Neither did he put any of the hard questions to Edward Pentin since Pentin,Allen and Voris reject the traditional rigorist interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. All three use the same irrationality. They will not discuss this or deny it.

So must the SSPX continue to reject Vatican Council II and other magisterial documents interpreted with the false premise and conclusion ? There is no answer from CMTV. Michael Voris, Simon Rafe and others at CMTV  are Catholics who claim others are in schism since the magisterium for them cannot be in heresy and schism. It is unthinkable or unsayable.


For centuries the Church always taught that one had to be ' a card carrying ' member of the Church, every one needed to be a formal member of the Church to avoid Hell. All need the baptism of water in the Catholic Church was the teaching of the Church Councils, popes and saints.Now Church Militant TV has changed it. They have accepted the change based on Marchetti's objective error.

The baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance refer to known cases in the present times for Voris and Rafe. So Michael Voris presents the new theology.He says all who are saved are saved by the Church. This is the new ecclesiology based on visible for us exceptions to the dogma.

He asked Fr.Jonathan Morris whom did he know who did not need to enter the Church for salvation. He cannot ask his Archbishop whom does he know who is saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire this year, without the baptism of water.

So school children in Detroit are officially taught that not every one needs to be a card carrying member of the Church.Why? SInce the liberal bishop in the diocese says so  and so does Church Militant TV.Michael Voris cannot say that books with an imprimatur carry a factual mistake on this issue.The entire new theology and ecclesiology is based on this factual error.

Cardinal Ratzinger accomodated the error in the Catechism of the Catholic Church and then consolidated it with a new Code of Canon Law which incorporates the mistake.If the dogma can be changed then so also moral theology. He approved of all those permutations, as if he knew Jesus would use those theories on the Day of Judgement.Cardinal Ratzinger was worth his weight in gold for the Masons.

So now it is all very convenient for CMTV.Imagine if  Michael Voris  said that every one needs to be a card carrying member of the Catholic Church for salvation. There would be an uproar from the Left. Archbishop Vignon has already told Michael Voris not to use the term Catholic .What would be his next move? 
So to compromise with the Left, Michael Voris does not affirm the rigorist interpretation of the dogma, says the SSPX is in schism and gives John Allen an easy pass.Welcome to the Church of Nice !
Mary Carberry (Divine Mercy Messages)  shut down her website and in her last message said that the forces of darkness would not allow her to continue.The forces of darkness would also be putting pressure on Michael Voris.They could have asked him to change the crypto Lefebvre image.
So now he does not advocate  the Traditional Latin Mass only.He does  not even emphasize it as in the past. He says the SSPX is in schism and he does not state that the magisterium has made an objective error in the interpretation of Vatican Council II and that  this error is there in the Catechism of the Catholuc Church 1257 etc.
CMTV is politically correct like Cardinal Dolan.They both do not  want to be sued by the Left.Both are compromising  Church doctrine.
I appreciate all the good work done by Michael.Though he is now part of the establishment.He has to protect the interests of the many people he employs. This is also the reason why bishops and cardinals whom he criticises are not affirming the dogmatic teachings of the Church. They have to protect their property etc.
Even David Obeid an apologist in Australia who appeared on Mic'd Up is not affirming the strict interpretation of the dogma, since he does not want his colleges to be targeted by the bishops or the Left. He does not want the bishop to tell Catholics not to attend his college as once Cardinal Richard Cushing placed a ban on Fr.Leonard Feeney and the St.Benedict Center in Boston..
CMTV is not saying the obvious - that the magisterium made a factual error in the Marchetti Letter.This was carried over into Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
The same error is being repeated  by Michael Voris.  
-Lionel Andrades