Thursday, March 10, 2016

Ecclesiastical Masonry?

Comment from the blog The Eponymous Flower
Ecclesiastical Masonry?
How could none of them know that physically we cannot see people saved without the baptism of water?
Was it ecclesiastical masonry at Baltimore and then Boston and then finally Vatican Council II?
And the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1992) went along with the error?


When reading Vatican Council II we have to de condition ourself and then the Council is traditional and rational
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/03/when-reading-vatican-council-ii-we-have.html

You may say that BOD is not explicit for you.But if there are exceptions to EENS it means you know of an explicit case, an explicit exception.For the magisterium there are exceptions.So the baptism of desire is explicit for the Vatican and the traditionalists.

Musings of a Pertinacious Papist



Comments from the blog  Musings of a Pertinacious Papist 

Lionel :
In this link
 (http://www.catholicessentials.net/baptismofdesire.htm )
there is not a single person who claims that the baptism of desire (BOD) is objectively visible to us human beings. This is all assumed by the owner of Catholic Essentials.

I accept BOD as being hypothetical and invisible.So it is not relevant or an exception to the dogma EENS (EENS).
So i affirm the strict interpretation of EENS along with BOD ( invisible).
So how can you say that I am in heresy.
Any way EENS is the defined teaching and I am affirming it.
________________________

What about you and the sedes at Catholic Essentials?
Can you affirm the Feeneyite interpretion of EENs? That is there are no known exceptions to the dogma EENS, there is no known salvation outside the Church, every one needs to be a 'card carrying member ' of the Church in 2016. No one in Boston 1949 saw someone saved outside the Church. There is not case in Catholic Church history of a cleric seeing someone saved in Heaven without the baptism of water and with the baptism of desire or blood. The proof is there on the Catholic Essential website.Not a single citation says there is a known exception to EENS. This has to be inferred by those who infer that BOD is objective in our reality.

So you cannot affirm EENS. You would probably have to use double speak and hope it makes sense.Since for you BOD is explicit, seen in the flesh and objectively visible in 2016. So it is an exception to traditional EENS. The dogma has 'developed' for you.
________________________

You may say that BOD is not explicit for you.
You may say this. But if there are explicit exceptions to EENS, then it means you know of some exception. You can see or meet someone today who is in Heaven without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church or that you know someone who will be saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.

This is irrational. How can you see someone in Heaven without the baptism of water, someone saved outside the Church. And how can you know of someone who will be saved tomorrow without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church ?
Aside from the irrationality, do you see 'traces' of heresy in the sedes, traditionalists and liberal position? It is simple there are no known exceptions and you all are inferring there are._____________________

How can the contemporary magisterium support this irrationality ? Is this not magisterial heresy of the present times ( after the Council of Trent) that you all are supporting and assuming that it is traditional because it is official ?

-Lionel
________________________
Delete


BloggerLionel :.
The Baptism of Desire refers to invisible cases. This is common sense. If a pope or saint says otherwise it would be wrong
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/11/the-baptism-of-desire-refers-to.html
-Lionel Andrades

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=6312447&postID=3327428903210579713&page=1&token=1457625757483