Tuesday, June 2, 2015

No denial from Robert Spencer

There is no denial from Robert Spencer . He assumed that (A) being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire  were exceptions to (B) the rigorist interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Feeneyite version.This was his understanding of Vatican Council II when he wrote a book with Daniel Ali. So my guess initially was correct.
His theology and interpretation of Vatican Council II, as a Catholic was irrational.
Since A were exceptions to B for  him , it means A refers  to explicit cases in the present times. It refers to defacto, known cases who are exceptions to all needing to formally enter the Church to be saved from Hell-otherwise how could they be exceptions ?.Spencer is irrational since these persons (A) would be in Heaven and would be unknown to us human beings.
'Zero cases of something cannot be exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus' says the apologist and biblical scholar John Martignoni.
For Robert Spencer A does not refer to zero cases. If they referred to zero cases they would not be relevant to the dogma.They would not be exceptions.Since there are exceptions for Robert Spencer there are no zero cases.
For me A is not in conflict with B.This is  how it was before 1949. So for me  there are no exceptions mentioned in Vatican Council II to the rigorist, traditional interpretation of the dogma on exclusive salvation. The Church still teaches, in the text of Vatican Council II, that all Muslims and other non Catholics need to formally convert into the Church with 'faith and baptism' to avoid Hell and go to Heaven. It is Vatican Council II (AG 7, LG 14) which is saying that all Muslims and Jews need to be card carrying members of the Church for salvation.It is not just the popes and saints of the past. It is Vatican Council II which indicates that all people alive today in 2015, need to get their names on the parish baptism register, to go to Heaven.There are no exceptions and cannot be any known exception in the present times.
I have written this not to criticize Robert Spencer but so that he takes note of this and in his future book on apologetics for Catholics, with reference to Islam, mentions these concepts.He needs to tell Muslims that they are all going to Hell with no known exception in the present times, and that this is the official teaching of the Catholic Church, not according to the contemporary magisterium, but according to magisterial texts, Church documents, which are part of the Deposit of the Faith.This is the teaching of the Catholic Church also according to common sense and with no claims of being able to see apparitions.
-Lionel Andrades


Without the irrationality, pre-Vatican Council II and post Vatican Council II teachings on Islam have not changed
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/06/without-irrationality-pre-vatican.html

Robert Spencer's answer to these two questions will indicate if he using the Marchetti error in the interpretation of Vatican Council II

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/06/robert-spencers-answer-to-these-two.html



Without the irrationality, pre-Vatican Council II and post Vatican Council II teachings on Islam have not changed

WildJew:
 you are going to find it increasingly difficult to reconcile your faith and your convictions with that of the leadership in your church

Lionel:
Every one needs to be a card carrying member of the Catholic Church is the teaching of Vatican Council II (AG 7, LG 14) unless one assumes that the dead-saved are personally visible and known in June 2015 to be exceptions to this traditional Catholic teaching.

This will be in conflict with the leftist political values and also that of the Vatican, the leadership in the Church. This has not been refuted yet by Robert Spencer . So I can still assume that he is using the same irrationality in interpretating Vatican Council II as Pope Francis and the leadership in the Catholic Church.
Without the irrationality, pre-Vatican Council II and post Vatican Council II teachings on Islam, for example, have not changed.He could write a book on this.
Presently Catholics quote the popes and saints on Islam. They do not quote Vatican Council II, even though they can.The same with Judaism and other religions.
Vatican Council II (AG 7,LG 14) still promotes an ecumenism of return, as in pre-Vatican Council II times.
Avoid apparition theology,  Marchetti's  false inference, and Vatican Council II is traditional.
-Lionel Andrades

Questions and Answers : Vatican Council II is Feeneyite. It has an exclusivist ecclesiology
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/05/questions-and-answers-vatican-council.html
   
Michael Voris does not say every one needs to be a card carrying member of the Church for For him there are exceptions
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/04/michael-voris-does-not-say-every-one.html
 
VATICAN COUNCIL II SAYS
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/02/vatican-council-ii-says.html

According to the Catholic Church Islam/Islamism is not a path to salvation
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/05/according-to-catholic-church.html

Questions and Answers : Did the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 make a factual mistake ?
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/05/questions-and-answers-did-letter-of.html

Questions and Answers : Evangelizing with Vatican Council II
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/05/questions-and-answers-evangelising-with.html
________________

Robert Spencer's answer to these two questions will indicate if he using the Marchetti error in the interpretation of Vatican Council II

 
 
 
:
Robert Spencer :
This guy admits he hasn't read the book and then presumes to assume what I did say?
Absurd beyond measure.
Lionel:
I am the only person who is writing on Vatican Council II not being in conflict with the traditional, rigorist interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So the odds are, as I mentioned in the comment/blogpost , that you are using Pope Francis and the political Left's interpretation of Vatican Council II.
So I was hoping that being a Catholic, you would write another book which interprets Vatican Council II rationally and traditionally. An apologetical book is needed for Catholics with reference to Islam and the other religions.
In interpretating Vatican Council II many people make the following three errors. May be they also apply to Robert Spencer.
 
1.Someone in the past is an exception to the dogma on June 2,2015.

2.Someone living, will be an exception to the dogma today since he will be saved without faith and baptism.As if we can know!
3.Someone in Heaven is an exception to the dogma on earth.As if we can see people in Heaven.This is the dead-man walking theory!
 
So they are unable to answer these TWO QUESTIONS:
 
TWO QUESTIONS
 
1) Do we personally know the dead now saved in invincible ignorance, a good conscience (LG 16) etc,can we see them, are they physically visible to us in 2015 ?

2) Since we do not know any of these cases, in real life, they are not visible for us, there are no known exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, or Ad Gentes 7 which states 'all' need 'faith and baptism' for salvation ?
Robert Spencer's answer to these two questions will indicate if he using the Marchetti error in the interpretation of Vatican Council II. -Lionel Andrades
 
 
 
 

Would Vatican Council II be anti-Semitic for Pope Francis and Robert Spencer if Marchetti's model is not used ?



Pope Francis says if he does not recognise the state of Israel it would be anti-Semitic.Would it also be anti-Semitic if he affimed the Bible, Tradition and pre-1949 Magisterium and said all Jews and Muslims are oriented to Hell according to Vatican Council II ?  According to the pre-1949 Magisterium there was no conflict between (A) being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire and (B) the rigorist interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Feeneyite version.
So if A does not contradict B, if they are not in conflict, then there is nothing in Vatican Council II to contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to Tradition and the pre-1949 Magisterium.Then it would mean that Vatican Council II says all Jews and Muslims need 'faith and baptism'(Ad Gentes 7, Lumen Gentium 14) to go to Heaven and avoid Hell.Would this be anti-Semitic?
Presently, the contemporary magisterium interprets a Vatican Council II in which A is in conflict with B.So A is a break with Tradition and the thrice defined dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So Vatican Council II is interpreted as changing Church teachings on other religions and ecumenism.This is the 1949 Cardinal Francesco Marchetti Selvaggiani model.
If the Marchetti model is not used A does not contradict B , they both exist, A refers to theoretical cases, hypothetical for us and known only to God.B refers to defacto cases in the present times, who need visible- for- us Catholic Faith and the baptism of water.So theoretical A and objective B do not contradict the Principle of Non Contradiction.This is the traditional approach to this issue.
If the traditional model is used, and not Marchetti's, then A is recognised as not being objective, explicit and visible in the flesh.It does not exist in our reality.What does not resist in our reality cannot be an exception to all needing to formally enter the Church to avoid Hell.It cannot be an exception to anything.
The Marchetti model which Pope Francis and the Jesuits use is irrational.It assumes that A refers to cases which are explicit and objective for us.So they become exceptions to all needing to formally enter the Church today, with 'faith and baptism'(AG 7,LG 14).
If Robert Spencer held this rational view would it be considered anti-Semitic ? Would it be anti-Semitic for the pope?
The Jewish Left media and political and social institutions are using Marchetti's model in the interpretation of Vatican Council II in which A conflicts with B.
For me Vatican Council II is in agreement with the rigorist interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, which Pope Pius XII called an 'infallible teaching' in the first part of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949, which supported Fr.Leonard Feeney of Boston.
-Lionel Andrades

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/06/pope-anyone-who-does-not-recognize-the-state-of-israel-is-guilty-of-anti-semitism/comment-page-1#comment-1246611