Sunday, June 21, 2015

Cardinal Napier just like me is saying that we cannot meet any exception today to the traditional teaching on salvation

Collegamento permanente dell'immagine integrata
Cardinal Napier just like me is saying that today June 21 we cannot meet any one who is saved without faith and baptism and so - there are no exceptions to Vatican Council II (AG 7,LG 14).
Cardinal Napier just like me is saying that today June 21, 2015 we cannot meet any one saved outside the Church; saved without being a formal member of the Catholic Church. So there are no exceptions to the traditional and rigorist interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Feeneyite version.
Cardinal Napier just like me is saying that today June 21, we cannot see or know any one saved and now in Heaven without the baptism of water. So there are no exceptions to N.1257 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church which says the Church knows of no means to eternal beatitude other than the baptism of water.
Cardinal Napier just like me affirms John 3:5 and Marck 16:16  which say all need the baptism of water and  those who do not believe will be condemned.
So just like me he affirms the traditional teaching on salvation, which is the same before and after Vatican Council II, since we humans cannot know of any exception today, this month or this year.
Like me he is saying that Vatican Council II says all non Catholics, Jews, Muslims etc need to convert into the Catholic Church for salvation ( to avoid Hell).Also all Christians need Catholic Faith ( AG 7) which include the Sacraments and the faith and moral teachings of the Catholic Church, to avoid Hell and go to Heaven.Vatican Council II is Feeneyite ( no known exceptions today to EENS) and not Marchetti or Cushingite ( there are visible exceptions today to EENS).
Is this not common sense for a Catholic and which you reader also accept ?
-Lionel Andrades

Cardinal Napier : Vatican Council II


Cardinal Napier follows me on Twitter but does not comment on Vatican Council II

They all usually affirm Vatican Council II but when I ask them to do it they will not .I am glad Cardinal Wilfrid Napier is a follower on Twitter but I am disappointed. He did not answer my question on Vatican Council II. For me the Council is traditional on other religions and Christian communities.
Here is the blog post which records part of my interaction with him on Twitter.1
Otherwise, I have affirmed Vatican Council II, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Cantante Domino, Council of Florence 1441 and the Bible (John 3:5, Mk: 16:16)  and have also said that I personally do not know any exception today, to the traditional teaching on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.I know that this is also the position of Cardinal Napier.It is common sense. He also affirms these Church documents and does not know of any exception today, June 21 but he does not say this on Twitter.
One of the implications of his position would be that Fr.Leonard  Feeney of Boston was correct and Cardinal Francesco Marchetti Selvaggiani and the Holy Office 1949 were factually incorrect.
 It would mean he is in agreement  with Vatican Council II, the Catechism of the Catholic Church and the pre-1949  Magisterium but not in in agreement with the contemporary magisterium ( after 1949).The contemporary magisterium has made a mistake and all this time he too has been a part of it.So was I in the past.
So Cardinal Napier has chosen not to endorse Vatican Council II and answer two simple questions.Instead, he who is more knowledgeable than me, chooses graciously to follow me on Twitter.It's only a few weeks for me on Twitter and I have been glad to interact with his Eminence.

His Eminence's silence on this subject, has significance for a reconciliation of the traditionalists with the Vatican. Vatican Council II is traditional when we avoid Marchetti's error. It's simple. All these years there was confusion because the magisterium chose to follow Marchetti's mistake.
For  Cardinal Marchetti, hypothetical cases were defacto exceptions to the dogma interpreted by Fr.Leonard Feeney, the saints, popes and Councils.It contradicted the Bible. Marchetti was irrational, of course.

Yet this irrationality was accepted by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and the SSPX,. Fr.Anthony Cekada for example, would say that the communities of Fr.Leonard Feeney, the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary (MICM) are in mortal sin for not accepting the baptism of desire as an exception to the dogma.He too was assuming that a hypothetical case( baptis of desire) was a defacto exception to the dogma.He still will not apologize for this public error, after his attention was called to it.He has gone into sedevacantism, still using Marchetti' irrationality in the interpretation of Vatican Council II.

Like Fr.Cekada, for the liberals too Vatican Council II is a break with the past.Yet  without Marchetti's inference, they would have no text in Vatican Council II to reject traditional extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) according to Fr.Leonard Feeney of Boston. Cardinal Kaspar would not be able to cite any text to support a new ecclesiology.
This is why bishops and priests in Rome have chosen to remain silent when I ask them simple questions on Vatican Council II. Others instead, have said Vatican Council II is Feeneyite, and I have gladly quoted them on this blog.
If bloggers understood that Vatican Council II is  Feeneyite and not pro-Cardinal Francesco Marchetti  Selvaggiani , then the terms for the SSPX's reconciliation, the  canonical status issue will have changed.The SSPX would be in a position of strength.

The SSPX would come to the negotiating table with a Vatican Council II which is traditional on other religions and an ecumenism of return.The Vatican Curia would then find it hard to accept Vatican Council II, for political reasons.
The Council Fathers in 1965 were conservatives and they did their best under difficult conditions, when at that time, the Church had accepted Marchetti' mistake and many were unaware of it, including Archbishop Lefebvre.They still left us a Council, which can be interpreted traditionally, if we are aware of the irrationality, the new doctrine.

 We can avoid inferring that we can see people in Heaven and on earth, saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16) in the present times.We can avoid saying that these dead who are allegedly visible to us, made it to Heaven without Catholic Faith and the baptism of water and are examples of salvation outside the Church.Cardinal Marchetti went up this tree.
Marchetti could not have known any such case. Neither do we.So LG 16 etc must always be theoretical and hypothetical for us.It can never be an exception to the traditional, rigorist interpretation of the dogma on salvation, according to Fr. Leonard Feeney.
Collegamento permanente dell'immagine integrata
Vatican Council II, Ad Gentes 7 still tells us that Mohammad and all Muslims; all other non Catholics too, cannot be saved without 'faith and baptism'.Mohammad did not have it.

So according to Vatican Council II, all Muslims are oriented to Hell unless they convert into the Catholic Church.Cardinal Wilfrid Napier knows this and has not denied it.
This is traditional EENS - but it is also Vatican Council II.-Lionel Andrades

Cardinal Napier : Vatican Council II- 1

Cardinal Napier : Vatican Council II - 2
Cardinal Napier : Vatican Council II, Catechism of the Catholic Church, dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus