It is nearly a year now. The sedevacantist bishop, priests and lay supporters will not answer if Vatican Council II,Lumen Gentium 16 ( being saved in invincible ignorance)can be intepreted as referring to explicit for us or invisible for us cases in 2015-2016.
Nor will they deny that they interpret LG 16 as being an explicit for us case in the present times i.e someone saved in invincible ignorance, without the baptism of water, who is personally known; whose name and surname is known.For the sedevacantists this person is a physical exception to all needing the baptism of water in the Catholic Church for salvation. This known person is an example of salvation outside the Church.
Over a year! -and they will not answer.
Bishop Donald Sanborn and Fr. Anthony Cekada have written articles on line on Feeneyism in which they assume that the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ingnorance refer to known cases.They are objectively visible and so these cases are relevant to EENS for them!
SSPX LAY SUPPORTER
Meanwhile a prominent lay supporter of the Society of St.Pius X, who is a speaker and lecturer, has said that we cannot see the soul of a person. So he concedes the baptism of desire etc are not exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So personally he has answered me.He is saying LG 16 refers to an invisible case.However he does not want this to be disclosed in public. He does not want to be quoted.In public he will not say that LG 16 refers to an invisible case in 2016. In other words he is saying that we cannot see people in Heaven with the naked eye in 2016 but he does not want to be quoted saying this!
-Lionel AndradesOCTOBER 5, 2015
Four months and the sedevacantists will not answer if LG 16 is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/10/four-months-and-sedevacantists-will-not.html
Does BOD and I.I refer to visible or invisible cases in 2015 where you live? is a difficult question for a sedevacantist priest
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/10/does-bod-and-ii-refer-to-visible-or.html
so you're a calvanist....clearly...
Lionel:
I am saying that such a person would only be known to God. We cannot see any person's soul saved as such. So to suggest that this person is known to you personally and so is an exception to the dogma EENS contradicts the Church Fathes, popes and saints on EENS. It contradict Jesus in John 3:5 and Mark 16:16.
Calvinists? Susan, even the Calvinists, Baptists and non Christians know your referring to a hypothetical case.
__________________________
WE are most certainly bound by the Sacraments; God is not...
Lionel: According to the dogma EENS without faith and baptism at the time of death, a person is oriented to Hell. This has been the traditional teaching of the Church over the centuries.If there is someone saved without faith and baptism in the Church because God is not bound to Sacraments it would be unknown to us. So you are saying that these unknown cases are known and so are relevant to EENS?
____________________________
I have no desire to 'call up'...
Lionel: Call up someone who has not been conditioned into believeing hypothetical cases are known exceptions in 2016 to the dogma EENS.
I am sorry that the SSPX priest at the chapel you go to cannot help you with this and neither can Louie Verrecchio. Since it is a common sense question. It is common knowledge, known to all people, that we cannot see the soul of someone in Heaven.
_____________________________
EWTN is a protestant mess...
Lionel: Which Fathers of the Church? None of them said the desire for the baptism of water of that famous unknown catechism is an exception to the dogma EENs. You have to infer that it is an exception.
Then we come to Vatican Council II. It is only by making this wrong inference that Vatican Council II is a break with EENS.
I make the explicit-implicit, visible-invisible distinction and choose invisible for us baptism of desire. You unknowlingly choose visible for us baptism of desire.
Then you assume that visible for us baptism of desire(LG 16) is an exception to the traditional interpretation of the dogma EENS, as it was known to the 16th century missionaries in the Catholic Church.
So this is not the teaching of the Catholic Church. It is an innovation approved by the liberals.
_______________________________
And Lionel, I say this in all sincerity and Charity; ...
Lionel: But when are you going to enter the discussion,when will you discus particular points. ? I am saying BOD can be explicit or implicit what are you saying about it? Nothing!
I am saying LG 16 can be visible or invisible in the interpretation of Vatican Council II.What are you saying about this ? Nothing.
Sorry Susan, you mean well and your a good person but we still have not begun a discussion.
__________________________________
A normal, healthy reaction is to wish the other well...
Lionel: The SSPX is interpreting LG 16 as being physically visible for us. If they assume it is invisible for us, Vatican Council II changes.The reconciliation process with the Vatican changes.It is the SSPX then which will doctrinally be in a sure position.So this is an important issue!
-Lionel Andrades