This is not the premise and conclusion taught at the pontifical universities and seminaries in Italy.Nor is it being taught to many international students at the Angelicum University in Rome where philosophical error is being taught even after the Dominicans and the faculty have been informed.
ANGLICAN UNIVERSITY TEACHERS PHILOSOPHICAL ERRORS IN VATICAN COUNCIL II
If you come to Vatican Council II with this approach-that being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) and the baptism of desire(BOD) cannot be exceptions to EENS - you will find Vatican Council II full of philosophical errors.Some of the specific philosophical errors in Vatican Council II, I will mention in this blog post.If you aviod them the interpretation of Vatican Council II changes.
Basically, Vatican Council II should not have mentioned the anonymous case of someone being saved in invincible ignorance (Lumen Gentium 16) or the unknown catechumen who has not yet received the baptism of water but had an intended to join the Church(before he died).They are 'zero cases' in our reality as John Martignoni, the apologist, has said.
ANGELICUM UNIVERSITY GRANTS LICENTIATES APPROVING THE IRRATIONAL LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE 1949
The magisterium made a mistake in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr., Leonard Feeney.It inferred that the baptism of desire was relevant and an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).The cardinals wrongly inferred that there were known cases of the baptism of desire.This mistake from 1949 was then incorporated into the text of Vatican Council II.I have cited some of the passages below.
Here are the 'zero cases' in Lumen Gentium and Unitatis Redintigratio.
____________________
ERROR IN THE TEXT OF LUMEN GENTIUM
Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience.-Lumen Gentium 16, Vatican Council II
Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience.-Lumen Gentium 16, Vatican Council II
Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.-Lumen Gentium 14 ( emphasis added).
ERROR IN THE TEXT OF UNITATIS REDINTIGRATIO
It follows that the separated Churches and Communities as such, though we believe them to be deficient in some respects, have been by no means deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Church.-Unitatis Redintigratio 3,Vatican Council II.
Lionel:
This text above is mentioned in Vatican Council II since in principle it is assumed that there is known salvation outside the Church.In principle it was accepted by the Council Fathers that hypothetical cases were not hypothetical but objectively known.They included people saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
It is the same error seen in Lumen Gentium 16 and Lumen Gentium 14 above.
The following three passages, refer to 'zero cases'.They must be interpreted as being hypothetical. Then they will not contradict the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.They never did.
This text above is mentioned in Vatican Council II since in principle it is assumed that there is known salvation outside the Church.In principle it was accepted by the Council Fathers that hypothetical cases were not hypothetical but objectively known.They included people saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
It is the same error seen in Lumen Gentium 16 and Lumen Gentium 14 above.
The following three passages, refer to 'zero cases'.They must be interpreted as being hypothetical. Then they will not contradict the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.They never did.
_______________________
Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience.-Lumen Gentium 16, Vatican Council II
Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.-Lumen Gentium 14 ( emphasis added).
Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience.-Lumen Gentium 16, Vatican Council II
Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.-Lumen Gentium 14 ( emphasis added).
It follows that the separated Churches and Communities as such, though we believe them to be deficient in some respects, have been by no means deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Church.-Unitatis Redintigratio 3,Vatican Council II.
Lionel:
Placing these passages in Vatican Council II was a mistake of the Council Fathers.They are superflous and irrelevant passages.They give the Council its ambiguity.
Most people are not aware of this philosophical error in the Council text.It is an error in principle made by the theologians at Vatican Council II.
The same mistake is there in Nostra Aetate 2 ( good and holy people saved outside the Church), Lumen Gentium 8( invisible persons saved with elements of sanctification and truth), Ad Gentes 11( invisible and unknown cases in the present times of non Catholics saved with seeds of the Word) etc.
Vatican Council II is riddled with this philosophical error.The norm was to assume invisible cases are visible. This then became the basis of the new theology, the Ratzinger-Rahner New Theology.
According to the New Theology there are known cases of non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance, outside the Church. They are saved without 'faith and baptism'.
So we get this new doctrine in Lumen Gentium 14.It comes directly from the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.
___________________________
Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.-Lumen Gentium 14 ( emphasis added).
Lionel:
When interpreting Vatican Council II, it is important to assume hypothetical cases are just hypothetical. In this way we eliminate the New Theology and return to the old ecclesiology of the Church.It's simple.
Of course this error is human error and it cannot be the work of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit cannot teach irrationality.
________________________
For men who believe in Christ and have been truly baptized are in communion with the Catholic Church even though this communion is imperfect.- Unitatis Redintigratio 3( Decree on Ecumenism)
Lionel:This passage above is meaningless with reference to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So why was it mentioned here ?
Why?
Since the Council Fathers assumed this was a reference to a known case.
Hypothetical cases were in principle assumed not to be hypothetical.So in this way they reject an ecumenism of return based on the dogma EENS.
_____________________________
But even in spite of them it remains true that all who have been justified by faith in Baptism are members of Christ's body, and have a right to be called Christian, and so are correctly accepted as brothers by the children of the Catholic Church.- Unitatis Redintigratio 3
Lionel:
Whom do we know among the Protestants, Pentecostals, Orthodox Christians and other Christian denominatations who is in Heaven baptised with water, but without Catholic faith, i.e the Sacraments and the faith and moral teachings of the Catholic Church?
Whom do we know?
No one.
______________________________
It follows that the separated Churches and Communities as such, though we believe them to be deficient in some respects, have been by no means deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation.- UR 3
Lionel:
This passage has been placed here since the Church Fathers assumed there was salvation outside the Church according to the mistake in the 1949 Letter. The unknown case of the catechumen was assumed to be a known case of salvation outside the Church. So with this premise they placed this passage in Unitatis Redintigratio.
_______________________________
For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Church.- UR 3
Lionel:
The Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using somone known in the Protestant or Orthodox Church who is saved without Catholic faith? Can there be such a person physically seen and known?
No. However the Council Fathers were in principle assuming invisible cases were not invisible in time and space.
Similarly Nostra Aetate 2 infers unknown people are known exceptions to the traditional salvation theology and ecclesiology.Ad Gentes 11 assumes there are known cases of non Catholics saved without 'faith and baptism' but with 'seeds of the Word'.
Similarly Nostra Aetate 2 infers unknown people are known exceptions to the traditional salvation theology and ecclesiology.Ad Gentes 11 assumes there are known cases of non Catholics saved without 'faith and baptism' but with 'seeds of the Word'.
NICENE CREED CHANGED
So the Nicene Creed has been changed. It always referred to the baptism of water as the known baptism('I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins'). Now we have known cases of being saved with the 'seeds of the Word', 'imperfect communion with the Church'(UR 3), 'good and holy things in other religions'(NA 2) etc.So the concept of one baptism in the Nicene Creed is no more traditional.
So the Nicene Creed has been changed. It always referred to the baptism of water as the known baptism('I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins'). Now we have known cases of being saved with the 'seeds of the Word', 'imperfect communion with the Church'(UR 3), 'good and holy things in other religions'(NA 2) etc.So the concept of one baptism in the Nicene Creed is no more traditional.
In the Nicene Creed most Catholics pray 'I believe in one, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church' and mean, in which there are many forms of 'known baptisms' which exclude the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.This is a new doctrine.
MIX UP BETWEEN WHAT IS VISIBLE AND INVISIBLE
MIX UP BETWEEN WHAT IS VISIBLE AND INVISIBLE
So by mixing up what is invisible as being visible there is a non traditional interpretation of Vatican Council II in 2016. The Nicene Creed and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus is no more like it was for the 16th century missionaries.For Pope Benedict XVI, who protected the New Theology, this is just ' a development'.
So with the New Theology all these Church documents were interpreted as a break with theology.It was done with one simple stroke.
UNDO THE NEW THEOLOGY
Now with one simple stroke we can undo the New Theology and go back to the old ecclesiology. It's simple. Interpret all these Church documents without the irrational premise and conclusion.
Vatican Council II for example would be in harmony with EENS according to the 16th century missionaries. It would not be a rupture with the Syllabus of Errors.Since we would be back to the old ecclesiology there could only be an ecumenism of return. Based on the old ecclesiology a priority must be the teaching on the Social Reign of Christ the King over all political legislation.The Nicene Creed would only refer to one known baptism, the baptism of water.
GAUDIUM ET SPECS 22
Gaudium et Specs 22 is referred to as an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus by Archbishop Kevin McDonald in the video https://youtu.be/HrEnMM6aAv0(3:43).Here is the text .
All this holds true not only for Christians, but for all men of good will in whose hearts grace works in an unseen way. For, since Christ died for all men, and since the ultimate vocation of man is in fact one, and divine, we ought to believe that the Holy Spirit in a manner known only to God offers to every man the possibility of being associated with this paschal mystery.- Gaudium et Specs 22
So when Archbishop McDonald refers in the video to ' all men of good will in whose hearts grace works in an unseen way' it really is a reference to an invisible person-but not for him!. For us human beings Gaudium et Specs 22 cannot refer to an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.(EENS). It is not relevant to EENS since it is a reference to an invisible person, an unknown person.
In the video he wrongly says that Gaudium et Specs says that people outside the Church ' can engage with the mystery of salvation' and that 'the Holy Spirit works in their life'. In other words these are not hypothetical cases. They are known people for him.So they become examples of salvation outside the Church for him and they are exceptions to the dogma EENS.
He says that 'the Holy Spirit can be operative in the lives of people who haven't come to faith in Christ'.Once again he is implying that these are known cases.They are not hypothetical or theoretical cases.So for him there are known exceptions outside the Church. In other words there is salvation outside the Church for him.
REDEMPTORIS MISSIO IS CUSHINGITE
He says that 'the Holy Spirit can be operative in the lives of people who haven't come to faith in Christ'.Once again he is implying that these are known cases.They are not hypothetical or theoretical cases.So for him there are known exceptions outside the Church. In other words there is salvation outside the Church for him.
REDEMPTORIS MISSIO IS CUSHINGITE
He refers to Redemptoris Missio(4:25). Yes even for Cardinal Ratzinger there was salvation outside the Church since invisible cases were visible.Rahner's Anonymous Christian theology is based upon this error.
(4:40) 'If people live in goodness and truth and integrity in their own lives then the Holy Spirit is operative in that perosn'.Fine- but why mention this with reference to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.Is it being implied that this is an exception to the dogma EENS and an example of salvation outside the Church? Yes. This is the staple theology of the liberals.
He calls this 'a statement of theological principle'. In principle, in his theology, he mixes up what is invisible as being visible.So now there are two theologies within the Catholic Church, Cushingism ( known exceptions to EENS and Feeneyism( no known exceptions to EENS) and their conclusion is different.
VATICAN COUNCIL II CAN BE INTERPRETED WITH FEENEYISM OF CUSHINGISM : THE ANGELICUM TEACHES ERROR
VATICAN COUNCIL II CAN BE INTERPRETED WITH FEENEYISM OF CUSHINGISM : THE ANGELICUM TEACHES ERROR
So Vatican Council II can be interpreted with Feeneyism(there are not known exceptions to EENS, BOD and I.I are not exceptions to EENS) or Cushingism(there are known exceptions to EENS,BOD and I.I are exceptions) and the conclusion is different.
Similarly EENS is interpreted with Feeneyism or Cushingism and the conclusion is different.
With the Feeneyite-Cushingite model Vatican Council II has a continuity or rupture with Tradition.For the English bishops Vatican Council II has a rupture with Tradition.
With the Cushingite model we have, what the bishop calls ' a developing model of Church'(5:09).
He says 'we must preach Jesus Christ'(5:56) and he means without the necessity of non Catholics entering the Church as members. This is no more an obligation since there is known salvation outside the Church for him.
With the Cushingite model we have, what the bishop calls ' a developing model of Church'(5:09).
He says 'we must preach Jesus Christ'(5:56) and he means without the necessity of non Catholics entering the Church as members. This is no more an obligation since there is known salvation outside the Church for him.
Examples of the Cushing-Jesuit Factual Error in Vatican Council II
All this holds true not only for Christians, but for all men of good will in whose hearts grace works in an unseen way. For, since Christ died for all men, and since the ultimate vocation of man is in fact one, and divine, we ought to believe that the Holy Spirit in a manner known only to God offers to every man the possibility of being associated with this paschal mystery.- Gaudium et Specs 22. Quoted above in Catholic Answers Magazine http://www.catholic.com/magazine/articles/what-no-salvation-outside-the-church-means
GAUDIUM ET SPECS 22: CUSHING.JESUIT FACTUAL ERROR
All this holds true not only for Christians, but for all men of good will in whose hearts grace works in an unseen way.
It is possible that a person with good will, will be saved in an unseen way.This would be known only to God.This case would be invisible for us.
This case is not visible for us. So it would not be an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
So when it assumed on the Catholic Answer Magazine above quoted that this is an exception to the traditional teaching which says all non Catholics are going to Hell unless they convert into the Catholic Church it means the invisible is being considered to be visible. This is the Cushing- Jesuit Factual Error.
It is a fact that we do not know any such case who is an exception. Neither does the passage above claim that it is a known exception. Yet dissenters will imply that this refers to an explicit case.
We ought to believe that the Holy Spirit in a manner known only to God offers to every man the possibility of being associated with this paschal mystery.-Gaudium et Specs 22.
Yes as a possibility but no as a defacto, reality.Yes hypothetically but not in fact, not in reality, not personally known.The Cushing-Jesuit Factual Error confuses the distinction between a possibility with being known in reality.
When this distinction is not made Vatican Council comes across as 'ambiguous'.However this passage in Gaudium et Specs should not have been there. Since it is mere theoretical speculation.It could have different meaning and interpretation for different people since it is theoretical.
We ought to believe that the Holy Spirit in a manner known only to God offers to every man the possibility of being associated with this paschal mystery.-Gaudium et Specs 22.
Yes as a possibility but no as a defacto, reality.Yes hypothetically but not in fact, not in reality, not personally known.The Cushing-Jesuit Factual Error confuses the distinction between a possibility with being known in reality.
When this distinction is not made Vatican Council comes across as 'ambiguous'.However this passage in Gaudium et Specs should not have been there. Since it is mere theoretical speculation.It could have different meaning and interpretation for different people since it is theoretical.
Ad Gentes 7,Vatican Council II : This missionary activity derives its reason from the will of God, "who wishes all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, Himself a man, Jesus Christ, who gave Himself as a ransom for all" (1 Tim. 2:45), "neither is there salvation in any other" (Acts 4:12). Therefore, all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church's preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door. Therefore those men cannot be saved, who though aware that God, through Jesus Christ founded the Church as something necessary, still do not wish to enter into it, or to persevere in it."(17) Therefore though God in ways known to Himself can lead those inculpably ignorant of the Gospel to find that faith without which it is impossible to please Him (Heb. 11:6), yet a necessity lies upon the Church (1 Cor. 9:16), and at the same time a sacred duty, to preach the Gospel. And hence missionary activity today as always retains its power and necessity.
By means of this activity, the Mystical Body of Christ unceasingly gathers and directs its forces toward its own growth (cf. Eph. 4:11-16). The members of the Church are impelled to carry on such missionary activity by reason of the love with which they love God and by which they desire to share with all men the spiritual goods of both its life and the life to come.
Finally, by means of this missionary activity, God is fully glorified, provided that men fully and consciously accept His work of salvation, which He has accomplished in Christ. In this way and by this means, the plan of God is fulfilled - that plan to which Christ conformed with loving obedience for the glory of the Father who sent Him,(18) that the whole human race might form one people of God and be built up into one temple of the Holy Spirit which, being the expression of brotherly harmony, corresponds with the inmost wishes of all men. And so at last, there will be realized the plan of our Creator who formed man to His own image and likeness, when all who share one human nature, regenerated in Christ through the Holy Spirit and beholding the glory of God, will be able to say with one accord: "Our Father."-Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II
Ad Gentes 7: Cushing-Jesuit Factual Error
Lumen Gentium 8: SUBSIST IT : Cushing-Jesuit Factual Error
This Church constituted and organized in the world as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church, which is governed by the successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him,(13*) although many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside of its visible structure. These elements, as gifts belonging to the Church of Christ, are forces impelling toward catholic unity.-LG 8,Vatican Council II
'although many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside of its visible structure'.-LG 8
If a non Catholic is saved with elements of sanctification and of truth outside the visible structure of the Catholic Church it would not be known to us on earth. So it would not be an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. With the Cushing- Jesuit Factual Error it is assumed that these cases are explicit for us.
SUBSIST IT CASES ARE THEORETICAL, HYPOTHETICAL
By means of this activity, the Mystical Body of Christ unceasingly gathers and directs its forces toward its own growth (cf. Eph. 4:11-16). The members of the Church are impelled to carry on such missionary activity by reason of the love with which they love God and by which they desire to share with all men the spiritual goods of both its life and the life to come.
Finally, by means of this missionary activity, God is fully glorified, provided that men fully and consciously accept His work of salvation, which He has accomplished in Christ. In this way and by this means, the plan of God is fulfilled - that plan to which Christ conformed with loving obedience for the glory of the Father who sent Him,(18) that the whole human race might form one people of God and be built up into one temple of the Holy Spirit which, being the expression of brotherly harmony, corresponds with the inmost wishes of all men. And so at last, there will be realized the plan of our Creator who formed man to His own image and likeness, when all who share one human nature, regenerated in Christ through the Holy Spirit and beholding the glory of God, will be able to say with one accord: "Our Father."-Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II
Ad Gentes 7: Cushing-Jesuit Factual Error
'made known by the Church's preaching'
Every one needs to enter the Church with 'faith and baptism' (AG 7) and if there is any one saved in invincible ignorance it would be known only to God.
We do not know who is saved in invincible ignorance or who was condemned because he knew about Jesus and the Church through the Church's preaching and did not enter or persevere.
So why was this mentioned? Being 'made known by the Church's preaching' is known only to God.
With the Richard Cushing Factual Error it is assumed that these cases are explicit and known to us in the present times. So there is a new doctrine formed. It is every one does not have to enter the Church as before but only those who know about the Church as it was made known by the Church's preaching.
Therefore those men cannot be saved, who though aware that God, through Jesus Christ founded the Church as something necessary, still do not wish to enter into it, or to persevere in it."-AG 7
who though aware ?
Therefore those men cannot be saved, who though aware that God, through Jesus Christ founded the Church as something necessary, still do not wish to enter into it, or to persevere in it."-AG 7
who though aware ?
This is known only to God, so why mention it? Every one needs to enter the Church with 'faith and baptism' as it is stated in AG 7. If a person is in invincible ignorance or was 'aware', would be known only to God. The ordinary means of salvation is 'faith and baptism' (AG 7). If some one is saved with the baptism of desire it would not be known to us.So it is not an exception to all needing to enter the Catholic Church in 2014 for salvation.
With the Cushing-Jesuit Factual Error it is said that only those persons need to enter the Catholic Church who are aware of the Church.
'Therefore though God in ways known to Himself can lead those inculpably ignorant of the Gospel to find that faith without which it is impossible to please Him (Heb. 11:6)'
We do not know a single case saved inculpably ignorant of the Gospel so why mention it ? How is it relevant to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ? How does it change the traditional teaching on other religions ? It is possible that a non Catholic could be saved in invincible ignorance but this person would not be known to us and so it is not an exception to the traditional extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
'Therefore though God in ways known to Himself can lead those inculpably ignorant of the Gospel to find that faith without which it is impossible to please Him (Heb. 11:6)'
We do not know a single case saved inculpably ignorant of the Gospel so why mention it ? How is it relevant to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ? How does it change the traditional teaching on other religions ? It is possible that a non Catholic could be saved in invincible ignorance but this person would not be known to us and so it is not an exception to the traditional extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
Being saved in invincible ignorance is considered visible and known to us in personal cases. This is the Cushing-Jesuit Factual Error.
'provided that men fully and consciously'
Do we know who is saved by fully and consciously accepting Jesus' work of salvation. Is it relevant to Ad Gentes 7 which states 'all' need 'faith and baptism' for salvation?
Yes we accept this in faith but it refers to something implicit and invisible for us. When it is implied that it is explicit, visible and personally known in particular cases it is the Cushing-Jesuit Factual Error.
Unitatis Redintigratio 3 : Cushing-Jesuit Factual Error
For men who believe in Christ and have been truly baptized are in communion with the Catholic Church even though this communion is imperfect.
If there is a non Catholic saved in imperfect communion with the Catholic Church it would not be known to us in 2014. With the Cushing-Jesuit Factual Error it is assumed that these cases are explicit for us and so an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was known to St.Robert Bellarmine and the saints.
Unitatis Redintigratio 3 : Cushing-Jesuit Factual Error
For men who believe in Christ and have been truly baptized are in communion with the Catholic Church even though this communion is imperfect.
If there is a non Catholic saved in imperfect communion with the Catholic Church it would not be known to us in 2014. With the Cushing-Jesuit Factual Error it is assumed that these cases are explicit for us and so an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was known to St.Robert Bellarmine and the saints.
Lumen Gentium 8: SUBSIST IT : Cushing-Jesuit Factual Error
This Church constituted and organized in the world as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church, which is governed by the successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him,(13*) although many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside of its visible structure. These elements, as gifts belonging to the Church of Christ, are forces impelling toward catholic unity.-LG 8,Vatican Council II
'although many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside of its visible structure'.-LG 8
If a non Catholic is saved with elements of sanctification and of truth outside the visible structure of the Catholic Church it would not be known to us on earth. So it would not be an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. With the Cushing- Jesuit Factual Error it is assumed that these cases are explicit for us.
SUBSIST IT CASES ARE THEORETICAL, HYPOTHETICAL
Why is subsist it an issue? It is an issue only in Vatican Council II, Cushingite. In Vatican Council II, Feeneyite it is meaningless. It is not a rupture with Tradition and the old ecclesiology.
If you consider the baptism of desire as being invisible or visible decides how you interpret Vatican Council II.
'let them gladly and reverently lay bare the seeds of the Word which lie hidden among their fellows'-AG 11
It is often implied that there could be non Catholics saved with 'the seeds of the Word' and so they do not have to convert into the Catholic Church. Since these cases are allegedly known to us they are exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.This is the use of the Cushing-Jesuit Factual Error.
Nostra Aetate 2 : Cushing-Jesuit Factual Error
The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions. She regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings which, though differing in many aspects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men.-NA 2, Vatican Council II
'often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men'
Yes there are good and holy things in other religions and if a non Catholic is saved in these religions it would be invisible for us. If a non Catholic is saved with a 'ray of that Truth' it would not be known to us. To assume that these cases are explicit for us and so an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus is to make the Cushing-Jesuit Factual Error. It is a fact that we cannot see the dead saved . Objectively we cannot know these cases. To imply that one can objectively see the deceased is irrational. It is using a false premise to create a new doctrine and an irrational theology in the Catholic Church.
If you consider the baptism of desire as being invisible or visible decides how you interpret Vatican Council II.
If you infer that the baptism of desire is visible you have a Vatican Council II which I call Cushingite.
If you infer that the baptism of desire is physically invisible for us human beings, then you have a Vatican Council II which I call Feeneyite.
If the baptism of desire is visible then Fr. Leonard Feeney was in heresy and the magisterium in 1949 was correct.Since there would be exceptions to Tradition which he refused to acknowledge.
If the baptism of desire is invisible then it is the magisterium which was in heresy and Fr. Leonard Feeney was repeating orthodoxy.It's as simple as this!
I interpret the following terms with Feeneyism and the SSPX does so with Cushingism.The SSPX could agree or disagree with me here.
FEENEYITE-CUSHINGITE MODEL FOR INTERPRETATION
I use Feeneyism and the SSPX uses Cushingism.For me the Baptism of Desire is Feeneyite and for the SSPX it is Cushingite.For me Invincible Ignorance is Feeneyite and for the SSPX it is Cushingite.For me Vatican Council II is Feeneyite and for the SSPX it is Cushingite.For me Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus is Feeneyite and for the SSPX it is Cushingite.For me the Nicene Creed is Feeneyite and for the SSPX it is Cushingite.For me the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston is Feeneyite and for the SSPX it is Cushingite.I avoid the New Theology, while the SSPX uses it. For me the Catechism of the Catholic Church is Feeneyite and for the SSPX it is Cushingite.
For Bishop Bernard Fellay and the SSPX priests subsist it is a break with Tradition. The fault lies with their interpretation.It is Vatican Council II (Cushingite).The Same mistake is made by the SSPX Superior in Italy.
____________________________
Ad Gentes 11- seeds of the Word : Cushing-Jesuit Factual Error'let them gladly and reverently lay bare the seeds of the Word which lie hidden among their fellows'-AG 11
It is often implied that there could be non Catholics saved with 'the seeds of the Word' and so they do not have to convert into the Catholic Church. Since these cases are allegedly known to us they are exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.This is the use of the Cushing-Jesuit Factual Error.
Nostra Aetate 2 : Cushing-Jesuit Factual Error
The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions. She regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings which, though differing in many aspects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men.-NA 2, Vatican Council II
'often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men'
Yes there are good and holy things in other religions and if a non Catholic is saved in these religions it would be invisible for us. If a non Catholic is saved with a 'ray of that Truth' it would not be known to us. To assume that these cases are explicit for us and so an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus is to make the Cushing-Jesuit Factual Error. It is a fact that we cannot see the dead saved . Objectively we cannot know these cases. To imply that one can objectively see the deceased is irrational. It is using a false premise to create a new doctrine and an irrational theology in the Catholic Church.
Always in the interpretation of Vatican Council II we have to be aware of the Cushing-Jesuit Factual Error.
What is the Cushing-Jesuit Factual Error?
Once this distinction is made Vatican Council II no where contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was interpreted by the saints Robert Bellarmine, Francis of Assisi, Maximillian Kolbe and, Fr. Leonard Feeney, who held the traditional interpretation of the dogma on salvation.
Here are examples of ther Cushing-Jesuit Factual Error in Vatican Council II.
1.
Is the Conference of Catholic Bishops of England and Wales assuming here that non Catholics saved with the 'seeds of the Word' and 'a ray of the one Truth' are known to us in 2014 ?
Since they are allegedly known to us they are explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus?
What is a possibility for salvation is a known exception to the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church?
Is this is a new doctrine with implicit for us cases being assumed to be explicit for us ?
What is the Cushing-Jesuit Factual Error?
It is assuming that all references to 'salvation' in Vatican Council II are physically visible to us on earth and since these cases are allegedly seen objectively, they are known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the traditional teaching on other religions and Christian communities.
Also called the Richard Cushing Error it does not make the distinction between the concepts objective-subjective, explicit-implicit, defacto-dejure etc.Instead it implies that what is invisible for us in real life is actually visible.
This is a factual error. We cannot see the deceased now saved in Heaven. There are no explicit exceptions on earth to the traditional teaching on all needing to convert into the Church.This is an objective error. Objectively we cannot name any one in 2014 who is an exception to all needing to convert into the Church for salvation.
In the text of Vatican Council II we see so many statements which are salvation-possibilities but not exceptions to the dogma. They are known only to God. With the Cushing-Jesuit Error what is only a hypothetical possibility for us and known only to God is made to appear relevant to the dogma on salvation and the traditional teaching on other religions and Christian communities.
These dead wood statements, flotsam and jetsam statements, are found in Ad Gentes 7 of Vatican Council II. They refer to what is implicit, invisible for us and not objectively known. So they are not exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus or Ad Gentes 7 ( all need faith and baptism). They are not exceptions since the text of Vatican Council II does not state that they are exceptions to the dogma and in real life they are not explicit for us.
Once this distinction is made Vatican Council II no where contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was interpreted by the saints Robert Bellarmine, Francis of Assisi, Maximillian Kolbe and, Fr. Leonard Feeney, who held the traditional interpretation of the dogma on salvation.
Here are examples of ther Cushing-Jesuit Factual Error in Vatican Council II.
1.
Meeting God in Friend and Stranger Nostra Aetate
..there are elements of truth and holiness in other religions and acknowledges that the Holy Spirit is at work in them. Other religions contain ‘seeds of the Word’ and ‘a ray of the one Truth’. God’s good plan, and the promise of eternal life, applies to every human being. At the same time, Christ is the only one through whom it is possible to come to this eternal life. What is true and holy in other religions does not replace the Good News of Christianity, but can create a fertile environment for it.
http://www.cbcew.org.uk/CBCEW-Home/Departments/Dialogue-and-Unity/Other-Religions/Bishops-Document
Other religions contain ‘seeds of the Word’ and ‘a ray of the one Truth’. God’s good plan, and the promise of eternal life, applies to every human beinghttp://www.cbcew.org.uk/CBCEW-Home/Departments/Dialogue-and-Unity/Other-Religions/Bishops-Document
Is the Conference of Catholic Bishops of England and Wales assuming here that non Catholics saved with the 'seeds of the Word' and 'a ray of the one Truth' are known to us in 2014 ?
Since they are allegedly known to us they are explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus?
What is a possibility for salvation is a known exception to the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church?
Is this is a new doctrine with implicit for us cases being assumed to be explicit for us ?
2.
Having said all this, we must recognize that this doctrine is not as far reaching as some imagine it to be. People will sometimes ask, "Does this means non-Catholics are going to hell?" Not necessarily.
Why not necessarily? Since in 2014 there are known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus?
Invincibly Ignorant
The Church recognizes that God does not condemn those who are innocently ignorant of the truth about his offer of salvation. Regarding the doctrine in question, the Catechism of the Catholic Church (quoting Vatican II document Lumen Gentium, 16) states:... http://www.catholic.com/magazine/articles/what-no-salvation-outside-the-church-means
'The Church recognizes that God does not condemn those who are innocently ignorant of the truth about his offer of salvation'...'
What has this to do with the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ? How is this statement relevant ? Is the writer implying that these cases are objective for us and so an exception to the dogmatic teaching on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church?
In both cases here (1&2) they are implying that there are known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus mentioned in Vatican Council II.They are making the Cushing-Jesuit Factual Error
PART 2
Catholic magisterial documents can be interpreted according to Feeneyism of Cushingism
Catholic magisterial documents can be interpreted according to Feeneyism of Cushingism and in general Catholics use the irrationality of Cushingism.
CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
Cardinal Malcolm Ranjit, the Archbishop of Colombo, has said that if the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX ) is given canonical status he would invite them to his seminary to train students in Colombo;Sri Lanka. What he has not said, is that he would expect the SSPX, like his seminarians, to reject the Syllabus of Errors and also accept Vatican Council II as he does.
Padre Pio Prayer Groups, Neo Catechumenal Way, Charismatic Renewal, Legion of Mary,Opus Dei, all the religious communities, Diocesan priests...interpret Judaism,Islam and other religions with an irrationality.
PART 2
Catholic magisterial documents can be interpreted according to Feeneyism of Cushingism
Catholic magisterial documents can be interpreted according to Feeneyism of Cushingism and in general Catholics use the irrationality of Cushingism.
Feeneyism states that all need to convert into the Cathooic Church for salvation and thre are no known or unknown exceptions.
Cushingism states all do not need to enter the Catholic Church for salvation in the present times and there are known exceptions.
DOMINUS IESUS
Above all else, it must be firmly believed that “the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mk 16:16; Jn 3:5), and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through baptism as through a door”. This doctrine must not be set against the universal salvific will of God (cf. 1 Tim 2:4); “it is necessary to keep these two truths together, namely, the real possibility of salvation in Christ for all mankind and the necessity of the Church for this salvation”.
The Church is the “universal sacrament of salvation”,79 since, united always in a mysterious way to the Saviour Jesus Christ, her Head, and subordinated to him, she has, in God's plan, an indispensable relationship with the salvation of every human being.80 For those who are not formally and visibly members of the Church, “salvation in Christ is accessible by virtue of a grace which, while having a mysterious relationship to the Church, does not make them formally part of the Church, but enlightens them in a way which is accommodated to their spiritual and material situation... -Dominus Iesus 20
The Church is the “universal sacrament of salvation”,79 since, united always in a mysterious way to the Saviour Jesus Christ, her Head, and subordinated to him, she has, in God's plan, an indispensable relationship with the salvation of every human being.80 For those who are not formally and visibly members of the Church, “salvation in Christ is accessible by virtue of a grace which, while having a mysterious relationship to the Church, does not make them formally part of the Church, but enlightens them in a way which is accommodated to their spiritual and material situation... -Dominus Iesus 20
FEENEYISM: The orange text does not contradict the text in yellow since the cases referred to are defacto not known to us, personally .We do not know and cannot know these cases. So they are not exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
CUSHINGISM: The orange text contradicts the text in yellow .It is assumed that thse cases are known to us in the present times. We can see the dead who are known exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to Fr.Leonard Feeney.
CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
"Outside the Church there is no salvation"
846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers?335 Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:
846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers?335 Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:
Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.-Catechism of the Catholic Church 846
FEENEYISM: The orange text does not contradict the text in yellow since the cases referred to are defacto not known to us, personally .We do not know and cannot know these cases. So they are not exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.CUSHINGISM: The orange text contradicts the text in yellow .It is assumed that thse cases are known to us in the present times. We can see the dead who are known exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to Fr.Leonard Feeney.
VATICAN COUNCIL II
Therefore, all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church's preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door. Therefore those men cannot be saved, who though aware that God, through Jesus Christ founded the Church as something necessary, still do not wish to enter into it, or to persevere in it."Therefore though God in ways known to Himself can lead those inculpably ignorant of the Gospel to find that faith without which it is impossible to please Him (Heb. 11:6), yet a necessity lies upon the Church (1 Cor. 9:16), and at the same time a sacred duty, to preach the Gospel...-Ad Gentes 7
FEENEYISM: The orange text does not contradict the text in yellow since the cases referred to are defacto not known to us, personally .We do not know and cannot know these cases. So they are not exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
CUSHINGISM: The orange text contradicts the text in yellow .It is assumed that thse cases are known to us in the present times. We can see the dead who are known exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to Fr.Leonard Feeney.
LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE 1949 (POPE PIUS XII)
Now, among those things which the Church has always preached and will never cease to preach is contained also that infallible statement by which we are taught that there is no salvation outside the Church.
However, this dogma must be understood in that sense in which the Church herself understands it...
Now, among the commandments of Christ, that one holds not the least place by which we are commanded to be incorporated by baptism into the Mystical Body of Christ, which is the Church, and to remain united to Christ and to His Vicar, through whom He Himself in a visible manner governs the Church on earth...
Therefore, no one will be saved who, knowing the Church to have been divinely established by Christ, nevertheless refuses to submit to the Church or withholds obedience from the Roman Pontiff, the Vicar of Christ on earth.
The same in its own degree must be asserted of the Church, in as far as she is the general help to salvation. Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it is necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing.
However, this desire need not always be explicit, as it is in catechumens; but when a person is involved in invincible ignorance God accepts also an implicit desire, so called because it is included in that good disposition of soul whereby a person wishes his will to be conformed to the will of God.
-Letter of the Holy Office 1949
FEENEYISM: The orange text does not contradict the text in yellow since the cases referred to are defacto not known to us, personally .We do not know and cannot know these cases. So they are not exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.CUSHINGISM: The orange text contradicts the text in yellow .It is assumed that thse cases are known to us in the present times. We can see the dead who are known exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to Fr.Leonard Feeney.
QUANTO CONFICIAMUR, POPE PIUS IX
7. Here, too, our beloved sons and venerable brothers, it is again necessary to mention and censure a very grave error entrapping some Catholics who believe that it is possible to arrive at eternal salvation although living in error and alienated from the true faith and Catholic unity. Such belief is certainly opposed to Catholic teaching. There are, of course, those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion...
8. Also well known is the Catholic teaching that no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church. Eternal salvation cannot be obtained by those who oppose the authority and statements of the same Church and are stubbornly separated from the unity of the Church and also from the successor of Peter, the Roman Pontiff, to whom "the custody of the vineyard has been committed by the Savior."[4] The words of Christ are clear enough: "If he refuses to listen even to the Church, let him be to you a Gentile and a tax collector;"[5] "He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you, rejects me, and he who rejects me, rejects him who sent me;"[6] "He who does not believe will be condemned;"[7] "He who does not believe is already condemned;"[8] "He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters."[9] The Apostle Paul says that such persons are "perverted and self-condemned;"[10] the Prince of the Apostles calls them "false teachers . . . who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master. . . bringing upon themselves swift destruction."-Quanto Conficiamur,Pope Pius IX,1863
FEENEYISM: The orange text does not contradict the text in yellow since the cases referred to are defacto not known to us, personally .We do not know and cannot know these cases. So they are not exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
7. Here, too, our beloved sons and venerable brothers, it is again necessary to mention and censure a very grave error entrapping some Catholics who believe that it is possible to arrive at eternal salvation although living in error and alienated from the true faith and Catholic unity. Such belief is certainly opposed to Catholic teaching. There are, of course, those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion...
8. Also well known is the Catholic teaching that no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church. Eternal salvation cannot be obtained by those who oppose the authority and statements of the same Church and are stubbornly separated from the unity of the Church and also from the successor of Peter, the Roman Pontiff, to whom "the custody of the vineyard has been committed by the Savior."[4] The words of Christ are clear enough: "If he refuses to listen even to the Church, let him be to you a Gentile and a tax collector;"[5] "He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you, rejects me, and he who rejects me, rejects him who sent me;"[6] "He who does not believe will be condemned;"[7] "He who does not believe is already condemned;"[8] "He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters."[9] The Apostle Paul says that such persons are "perverted and self-condemned;"[10] the Prince of the Apostles calls them "false teachers . . . who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master. . . bringing upon themselves swift destruction."-Quanto Conficiamur,Pope Pius IX,1863
FEENEYISM: The orange text does not contradict the text in yellow since the cases referred to are defacto not known to us, personally .We do not know and cannot know these cases. So they are not exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
CUSHINGISM: The orange text contradicts the text in yellow .It is assumed that thse cases are known to us in the present times. We can see the dead who are known exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to Fr.Leonard Feeney.
There can be only one rational interpretation of these magisterial texts. If one assumes that the text in orange is an exception to the text in yellow, it would be implying that we can see the dead saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire who are known exceptions to the text in yellow.
So the official teaching of the Catholic Church on salvation,before and after Vatican Council II has not changed-unless one is using Cushingism in the interpretation.
For Cardinal Ranjit the Syllabus of Errors would not be compatible with Vatican Council II 1 since he uses the right hand side ( red) column instead of the left hand side (blue) column in the interpretation of the Council.
If he chose to use the blue column then Vatican Council II would not contradict the Syllabus of Errors.
Here it is.
All salvation referred to in Vatican Council II i.e saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16), imperfect communion with the Church (UR 3).seeds of the Word (AG 11), good and holy things in other religions or ' a ray of the Truth' (NA 2) are either:
LEFT HAND COLUMN................................. RIGHT HAND COLUMN
implicit or explicit for us.
hypothetical or known in reality.
invisible or visible in the flesh.
dejure ( in principle) or defacto ( in fact ).
subjective or objective.
He and his staff are still not willing to interpret Vatican Council II using the rational blue column.
All salvation referred to in Vatican Council II i.e saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16), imperfect communion with the Church (UR 3).,seeds of the Word (AG 11), good and holy things in other religions (NA 2) are either:
LEFT HAND COLUMN................................. RIGHT HAND COLUMN
implicit or explicit for us.
hypothetical or known in reality.
invisible or visible in the flesh.
dejure ( in principle) or defacto ( in fact ).
subjective or objective.
So one can choose from the left hand side or the right hand side column.
If the right hand side column is chosen then Vatican Council II contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Syllabus of Errors and Tradition in general on other religions and Christian communities. There are known exceptions in 2017 to the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Cathlic Church. The dead- saved are visible.So all do not have to convert into the Catholic Church in 2017.
If the left hand side column is chosen then Vatican Council II does not contradict extra ecclesiam nulla salus, nor Tradition on Islam and other religions. All need to convert in 2014 into the Catholic Church to go to Heaven and avoid Hell.
Most people interpret Vatican Council II with the right hand side values.The irrational column.
So the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance was never ever an exception to the literal and traditional interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney, unless one is using the right hand side column.There were and are no known exceptions.
In 2017 the Padre Pio Prayer groups, Neo Catechumenal Way, Charismatic Renewal, all the religious communities and most of the Diocesan priests are using the irrational column in the interpretation of Vatican Council II. The laity have accepted theology based on an irrationality- the ability to physically see the dead on earth!
They have a choice. They can interpret Vatican Council II using the left hand side column.Vatican Council II will then be in accord with extra ecclesiam nulla salus, as it was interpreted by Fr.Leonard Feeney, the Church Councils, popes and saints.
SUPERFLOUS PASSAGES
There are so many passages in Vatican Council II which are there because of the error in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.
LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE 1949
We are bound by divine and Catholic faith to believe all those things which are contained in the word of God, whether it be Scripture or Tradition, and are proposed by the Church to be believed as divinely revealed, not only through solemn judgment but also through the ordinary and universal teaching office (, n. 1792).
Catholic priests, who offer the Traditional Latin Mass and the Novus Ordo Mass have to say that B is an exception to A in the following two examples.Example:
A
Here is the orthodox passage in Ad Gentes 7 which in accord with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
Therefore, all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church's preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door.-AG 7
B
The following passage in Ad Gentes 7 is based on Marchetti assuming being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire were explicit for him in 1949 and so were exceptions to the traditional Feeneyite version of the dogma on salvation.
Therefore those men cannot be saved, who though aware that God, through Jesus Christ founded the Church as something necessary, still do not wish to enter into it, or to persevere in it."(17) Therefore though God in ways known to Himself can lead those inculpably ignorant of the Gospel to find that faith without which it is impossible to please Him (Heb. 11:6)-AG 7
______________________________
A
The following passage from Lumen Gentium 14 is orthodox and in agreement with the rigorist interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism(124) and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church. -LG 14
B
The following passages from Lumen Gentium 14 also comes from the objective mistake Cardinal Francesco Marchetti Selvaggiani made in the Letter of the Holy Office. Why did they have to mention those saved with the baptism of desire (explicit intention) or infer there are those saved in invincible ignorance ? Why would they be relevant to the orthodox passage above.How would they be relevant to the centuries-old dogma if they were not explicit and personally known? Why did they have to mention it in Vatican Council II?
Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.-LG 14
Catechumens who, moved by the Holy Spirit, seek with explicit intention to be incorporated into the Church are by that very intention joined with her. With love and solicitude Mother Church already embraces them as her own.-LG 14
B was placed in Vatican Council II since they assumed Marchetti was correct when he said there was salvation outside the Church. This was accepted by Pope Pius XII and Pope John XXIII.
Now we know that these cases cannot be exceptions since they are not explicit in our reality.So these are really superflous passages, dead wood statements.
SUPERFLOUS PASSAGES
There are so many passages in Vatican Council II which are there because of the error in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.
There are so many passages in Vatican Council II which are there because of the error in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949. They were approved by the Council Fathers since the excommunication of Fr. Leonard Feeney was not lifted by the popes during Vatican Council II. The 1949 Letter issued by Cardinal Francesco Marchetti Selvaggiani during the pontificate of Pope Pius XII mixed up the distinction between what is explicit and implicit. visible and invisible.
The passages in red in the Letter refer to invisible cases. Yet it is assumed that they are visible and known to us human beings. It is assumed these cases are exceptions to all needing to enter the Church.How can invisible cases be exceptions to the Feeneyite version of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ? This was a factual mistake. The same mistake can be read in Ad Gentes 7 and Lumen Gentium 14.
LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE 1949
We are bound by divine and Catholic faith to believe all those things which are contained in the word of God, whether it be Scripture or Tradition, and are proposed by the Church to be believed as divinely revealed, not only through solemn judgment but also through the ordinary and universal teaching office (
Now, among those things which the Church has always preached and will never cease to preach is contained also that infallible statement by which we are taught that there is no salvation outside the Church.
However, this dogma must be understood in that sense in which the Church herself understands it. For, it was not to private judgments that Our Savior gave for explanation those things that are contained in the deposit of faith, but to the teaching authority of the Church.
Now, in the first place, the Church teaches that in this matter there is question of a most strict command of Jesus Christ. For He explicitly enjoined on His apostles to teach all nations to observe all things whatsoever He Himself had commanded (Matt. 28: 19-20).
Now, among the commandments of Christ, that one holds not the least place by which we are commanded to be incorporated by baptism into the Mystical Body of Christ, which is the Church, and to remain united to Christ and to His Vicar, through whom He Himself in a visible manner governs the Church on earth.
Therefore, no one will be saved who, knowing the Church to have been divinely established by Christ, nevertheless refuses to submit to the Church or withholds obedience from the Roman Pontiff, the Vicar of Christ on earth.
Not only did the Savior command that all nations should enter the Church, but He also decreed the Church to be a means of salvation without which no one can enter the kingdom of eternal glory.
In His infinite mercy God has willed that the effects, necessary for one to be saved, of those helps to salvation which are directed toward man's final end, not by intrinsic necessity, but only by divine institution, can also be obtained in certain circumstances when those helps are used only in desire and longing. This we see clearly stated in the Sacred Council of Trent, both in reference to the sacrament of regeneration and in reference to the sacrament of penance (, nn. 797, 807).
The same in its own degree must be asserted of the Church, in as far as she is the general help to salvation. Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it is necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing.
However, this desire need not always be explicit, as it is in catechumens; but when a person is involved in invincible ignorance God accepts also an implicit desire, so called because it is included in that good disposition of soul whereby a person wishes his will to be conformed to the will of God.
These things are clearly taught in that dogmatic letter which was issued by the Sovereign Pontiff, Pope Pius XII, on June 29, 1943, (AAS, Vol. 35, an. 1943, p. 193 ff.). For in this letter the Sovereign Pontiff clearly distinguishes between those who are actually incorporated into the Church as members, and those who are united to the Church only by desire.
Discussing the members of which the Mystical Body is-composed here on earth, the same august Pontiff says: "Actually only those are to be included as members of the Church who have been baptized and profess the true faith, and who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or been excluded by legitimate authority for grave faults committed."
Toward the end of this same encyclical letter, when most affectionately inviting to unity those who do not belong to the body of the Catholic Church, he mentions those who "are related to the Mystical Body of the Redeemer by a certain unconscious yearning and desire," and these he by no means excludes from eternal salvation, but on the other hand states that they are in a condition "in which they cannot be sure of their salvation" since "they still remain deprived of those many heavenly gifts and helps which can only be enjoyed in the Catholic Church" (AAS, 1. c., p. 243). With these wise words he reproves both those who exclude from eternal salvation all united to the Church only by implicit desire, and those who falsely assert that men can be saved equally well in every religion (cf. Pope Pius IX, Allocution, , in , n. 1641 ff.; also Pope Pius IX in the encyclical letter, , in , n. 1677).
But it must not be thought that any kind of desire of entering the Church suffices that one may be saved. It is necessary that the desire by which one is related to the Church be animated by perfect charity. Nor can an implicit desire produce its effect, unless a person has supernatural faith: "For he who comes to God must believe that God exists and is a rewarder of those who seek Him" (Heb. 11:6). The Council of Trent declares (Session VI, chap. 8): "Faith is the beginning of man's salvation, the foundation and root of all justification, without which it is impossible to please God and attain to the fellowship of His children" (Denzinger, n. 801).
From what has been said it is evident that those things which are proposed in the periodical , fascicle 3, as the genuine teaching of the Catholic Church are far from being such and are very harmful both to those within the Church and those without.
From these declarations which pertain to doctrine, certain conclusions follow which regard discipline and conduct, and which cannot be unknown to those who vigorously defend the necessity by which all are bound' of belonging to the true Church and of submitting to the authority of the Roman Pontiff and of the Bishops "whom the Holy Ghost has placed . . . to rule the Church" (Acts 20:28).
Hence, one cannot understand how the St. Benedict Center can consistently claim to be a Catholic school and wish to be accounted such, and yet not conform to the prescriptions of canons 1381 and 1382 of the Code of Canon Law, and continue to exist as a source of discord and rebellion against ecclesiastical authority and as a source of the disturbance of many consciences.
Furthermore, it is beyond understanding how a member of a religious Institute, namely Father Feeney, presents himself as a "Defender of the Faith," and at the same time does not hesitate to attack the catechetical instruction proposed by lawful authorities, and has not even feared to incur grave sanctions threatened by the sacred canons because of his serious violations of his duties as a religious, a priest, and an ordinary member of the Church.
Finally, it is in no wise to be tolerated that certain Catholics shall claim for themselves the right to publish a periodical, for the purpose of spreading theological doctrines, without the permission of competent Church authority, called the "" which is prescribed by the sacred canons.
Therefore, let them who in grave peril are ranged against the Church seriously bear in mind that after "Rome has spoken" they cannot be excused even by reasons of good faith. Certainly, their bond and duty of obedience toward the Church is much graver than that of those who as yet are related to the Church "only by an unconscious desire." Let them realize that they are children of the Church, lovingly nourished by her with the milk of doctrine and the sacraments, and hence, having heard the clear voice of their Mother, they cannot be excused from culpable ignorance, and therefore to them apply without any restriction that principle: submission to the Catholic Church and to the Sovereign Pontiff is required as necessary for salvation.
In sending this letter, I declare my profound esteem, and remain,
Your Excellency's most devoted,
F. Cardinal Marchetti-Selvaggiani.
A. Ottaviani, Assessor.
(Private); Holy Office, 8 Aug., 1949.
https://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDFFEENY.HTM
VATICAN COUNCIL II
The passages in red refer to invisible for us cases. They are theoretical and hypothetical. They would only be known to God. Yet they are placed after orthodox passages which say all need to enter the Church for salvation.Since, it was wrongly assumed that these persons, in the red passages , are personally known.The mistake has come from the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 cited above. The passages in red should not have been placed in Vatican Council II.Since there is no link with the previous orthodox passage or the dogma on salvation.
7. This missionary activity derives its reason from the will of God, "who wishes all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, Himself a man, Jesus Christ, who gave Himself as a ransom for all" (1 Tim. 2:45), "neither is there salvation in any other" (Acts 4:12). Therefore, all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church's preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door. Therefore those men cannot be saved, who though aware that God, through Jesus Christ founded the Church as something necessary, still do not wish to enter into it, or to persevere in it."(17) Therefore though God in ways known to Himself can lead those inculpably ignorant of the Gospel to find that faith without which it is impossible to please Him (Heb. 11:6), yet a necessity lies upon the Church (1 Cor. 9:16), and at the same time a sacred duty, to preach the Gospel. And hence missionary activity today as always retains its power and necessity.
By means of this activity, the Mystical Body of Christ unceasingly gathers and directs its forces toward its own growth (cf. Eph. 4:11-16). The members of the Church are impelled to carry on such missionary activity by reason of the love with which they love God and by which they desire to share with all men the spiritual goods of both its life and the life to come. -Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II
14. This Sacred Council wishes to turn its attention firstly to the Catholic faithful. Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism(124) and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church. Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.
They are fully incorporated in the society of the Church who, possessing the Spirit of Christ accept her entire system and all the means of salvation given to her, and are united with her as part of her visible bodily structure and through her with Christ, who rules her through the Supreme Pontiff and the bishops. The bonds which bind men to the Church in a visible way are profession of faith, the sacraments, and ecclesiastical government and communion. He is not saved, however, who, though part of the body of the Church, does not persevere in charity. He remains indeed in the bosom of the Church, but, as it were, only in a "bodily" manner and not "in his heart."(12*) All the Church's children should remember that their exalted status is to be attributed not to their own merits but to the special grace of Christ. If they fail moreover to respond to that grace in thought, word and deed, not only shall they not be saved but they will be the more severely judged.(13*)
Catechumens who, moved by the Holy Spirit, seek with explicit intention to be incorporated into the Church are by that very intention joined with her. With love and solicitude Mother Church already embraces them as her own.
We have to interpret the passages in red as referring to invisible cases and so they are not relevant or exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. They are not relevant to the passages in blue.In this way Vatican Council II will not contradict it self or the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.
16. Finally, those who have not yet received the Gospel are related in various ways to the people of God.(18*) In the first place we must recall the people to whom the testament and the promises were given and from whom Christ was born according to the flesh.(125) On account of their fathers this people remains most dear to God, for God does not repent of the gifts He makes nor of the calls He issues.(126) But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator. In the first place amongst these there are the Muslims, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful God, who on the last day will judge mankind. Nor is God far distant from those who in shadows and images seek the unknown God, for it is He who gives to all men life and breath and all things,(127) and as Saviour wills that all men be saved.(128) Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience.(19*) Nor does Divine Providence deny the helps necessary for salvation to those who, without blame on their part, have not yet arrived at an explicit knowledge of God and with His grace strive to live a good life. Whatever good or truth is found amongst them is looked upon by the Church as a preparation for the Gospel.(20*) She knows that it is given by Him who enlightens all men so that they may finally have life. But often men, deceived by the Evil One, have become vain in their reasonings and have exchanged the truth of God for a lie, serving the creature rather than the Creator.(129) Or some there are who, living and dying in this world without God, are exposed to final despair. Wherefore to promote the glory of God and procure the salvation of all of these, and mindful of the command of the Lord, "Preach the Gospel to every creature",(130) the Church fosters the missions with care and attention.- Lumen Gentium 16
8. Christ, the one Mediator, established and continually sustains here on earth His holy Church, the community of faith, hope and charity, as an entity with visible delineation (9*) through which He communicated truth and grace to all. But, the society structured with hierarchical organs and the Mystical Body of Christ, are not to be considered as two realities, nor are the visible assembly and the spiritual community, nor the earthly Church and the Church enriched with heavenly things; rather they form one complex reality which coalesces from a divine and a human element.(10*) For this reason, by no weak analogy, it is compared to the mystery of the incarnate Word. As the assumed nature inseparably united to Him, serves the divine Word as a living organ of salvation, so, in a similar way, does the visible social structure of the Church serve the Spirit of Christ, who vivifies it, in the building up of the body.(73) (11*)
This is the one Church of Christ which in the Creed is professed as one, holy, catholic and apostolic, (12*) which our Saviour, after His Resurrection, commissioned Peter to shepherd,(74) and him and the other apostles to extend and direct with authority,(75) which He erected for all ages as "the pillar and mainstay of the truth".(76) This Church constituted and organized in the world as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church, which is governed by the successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him,(13*) although many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside of its visible structure. These elements, as gifts belonging to the Church of Christ, are forces impelling toward catholic unity. -Lumen Gentium 8
2. From ancient times down to the present, there is found among various peoples a certain perception of that hidden power which hovers over the course of things and over the events of human history; at times some indeed have come to the recognition of a Supreme Being, or even of a Father. This perception and recognition penetrates their lives with a profound religious sense.
Religions, however, that are bound up with an advanced culture have struggled to answer the same questions by means of more refined concepts and a more developed language. Thus in Hinduism, men contemplate the divine mystery and express it through an inexhaustible abundance of myths and through searching philosophical inquiry. They seek freedom from the anguish of our human condition either through ascetical practices or profound meditation or a flight to God with love and trust. Again, Buddhism, in its various forms, realizes the radical insufficiency of this changeable world; it teaches a way by which men, in a devout and confident spirit, may be able either to acquire the state of perfect liberation, or attain, by their own efforts or through higher help, supreme illumination. Likewise, other religions found everywhere try to counter the restlessness of the human heart, each in its own manner, by proposing "ways," comprising teachings, rules of life, and sacred rites. The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions. She regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings which, though differing in many aspects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men. Indeed, she proclaims, and ever must proclaim Christ "the way, the truth, and the life" (John 14:6), in whom men may find the fullness of religious life, in whom God has reconciled all things to Himself.(4)
The Church, therefore, exhorts her sons, that through dialogue and collaboration with the followers of other religions, carried out with prudence and love and in witness to the Christian faith and life, they recognize, preserve and promote the good things, spiritual and moral, as well as the socio-cultural values found among these men.-Nostra Aetate 2,Vatican Council II.
PART 3
PART 3
It has been a few years, since I have been asking the CDF to clarify if the Society of St.Pius X can accept Vatican Council II(Feeneyite) for canonical status.There is no comment from the CDF,SSPX or traditionalist bloggers.
The traditionalist bloggers and the SSPX have been conditioned to think of the baptism of desire as being explicit and so they infer it is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
They have also been conditioned to think that Fr.Leonard Feeney was in heresy, since the baptism of desire refers to explicit cases.
They cannot conceive of the Holy Office 1949 making a mistake by assuming that the baptism of desire is explicit when it really is implicit and invisible for us.So the position of the magisterium in 1949 and that of the Archbishop of Boston was an innovation. It was Fr.Leonard Feeney who was teaching orthodoxy.
By now the CDF should have been able to accept that there are two interpretations of Vatican Council II and one has the hermeneutic of continuity and the other does not.
Catholic priests are only allowed to offer Mass if they say B is an exception to A
Catholic priests, who offer the Traditional Latin Mass and the Novus Ordo Mass have to say that B is an exception to A in the following two examples.Example:
A
Here is the orthodox passage in Ad Gentes 7 which in accord with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
Therefore, all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church's preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door.-AG 7
B
The following passage in Ad Gentes 7 is based on Marchetti assuming being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire were explicit for him in 1949 and so were exceptions to the traditional Feeneyite version of the dogma on salvation.
Therefore those men cannot be saved, who though aware that God, through Jesus Christ founded the Church as something necessary, still do not wish to enter into it, or to persevere in it."(17) Therefore though God in ways known to Himself can lead those inculpably ignorant of the Gospel to find that faith without which it is impossible to please Him (Heb. 11:6)-AG 7
______________________________
A
The following passage from Lumen Gentium 14 is orthodox and in agreement with the rigorist interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism(124) and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church. -LG 14
B
The following passages from Lumen Gentium 14 also comes from the objective mistake Cardinal Francesco Marchetti Selvaggiani made in the Letter of the Holy Office. Why did they have to mention those saved with the baptism of desire (explicit intention) or infer there are those saved in invincible ignorance ? Why would they be relevant to the orthodox passage above.How would they be relevant to the centuries-old dogma if they were not explicit and personally known? Why did they have to mention it in Vatican Council II?
Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.-LG 14
Catechumens who, moved by the Holy Spirit, seek with explicit intention to be incorporated into the Church are by that very intention joined with her. With love and solicitude Mother Church already embraces them as her own.-LG 14
B was placed in Vatican Council II since they assumed Marchetti was correct when he said there was salvation outside the Church. This was accepted by Pope Pius XII and Pope John XXIII.
Now we know that these cases cannot be exceptions since they are not explicit in our reality.So these are really superflous passages, dead wood statements.
The contemporary magisterium interprets B as being an exception to A and the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.So ecclesiology has changed. The 'Feeneyite' version of the dogma is no more accepted.
So what if a priest says B is not an exception to A ? He would be rational but he would not be politically correct. He would be affirming the Feeneyite version of extra ecclesiam nulla salus. This would be considered 'crypto Lefebvre' by the Vatican.The priest offering the Traditional Latin Mass would then be affirming traditional ecclesiology with the Traditional Mass.It would be the old ecclesiology with the old rite.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSION
The faculty at the University of St.Thomas Aquinas(Angelicum),Rome do not come to Vatican Council II with the baptism of desire not being an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, as I do.They use an irrational premise.They assume invisible cases are visible. So their conclusion is non traditional with the hermeneutic of rupture. They mix up invisible baptism of desire as being visible baptism of desire.They choose Cushingism instead of Feeneyism, they use the Right Hand Column instead of the Left Hand Column mentioned above.They grant students academic degrees who interpret magisterial documents with an irrationality.This is unethical and a deception.-Lionel Andrades
__________________________________
RELATED LINKS
March 19, 2017
Rapid Response Team needed at the Angelicum University : unethical academics teach factual and objective errors http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/03/rapid-response-team-needed-at-angelicum.html
March 20, 2017
VATICAN STOP THE DECEPTION AT THE ANGELICUM UNIVERSITY
VATICAN STOP THE DECEPTION AT THE ANGELICUM UNIVERSITY
March 22, 2017
The Angelicum University does not come to Vatican Council II knowing that the baptism of desire cannot be an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus : since then the interpretation of the Council changes
March 21, 2017
Vatican Council II has a continuity with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus but the Angelicum hides this Catholic teaching
__________________________________
March 18, 2017
The Fatima Network unlike Archbishop Lefebvre, can interpret Vatican Council II with Feeneyism
March 17, 2017
Don't bring the Leftist, Masonic agenda into the Catholic Church : Anglicans at St.Peter's basilica http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/03/dont-bring-leftist-masonic-agenda-into.html
March 16, 2017
Pope Benedict XVI and the other liberal theologians( Rahner, Kung etc) made an objective mistake. Based on bad philosophy they created a new bad theology
March 15, 2017
Pope Benedict XVI means there is known salvation outside the Church when he states 'when they can be saved even without it?” '. He is a Cushingite. He assumes invisible cases are visible
March 12, 2017
Catholic-Protestant debates, discussions use irrational theology of Cushingism: Scott Hahn, Kenneth Samples unaware of magisterial error http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/03/catholic-protestant-debates-discussions.html
March 11, 2017
English Christian theologians nonplussed : first exposure to factual errors in Vatican Council II http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/03/english-christian-theologians.html
March 8, 2017
No denial from Archbishop Kevin Mcdonald, Tom O' Loughlin : there is an objective error in the text of Vatican Council II http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/03/no-denial-from-archbishop-kevin.html
March 7, 2017
There is no Christian theology of religious pluralism : Masons, Pope Benedict and Pope Francis are wrong
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/03/there-is-no-christian-theology-of.html
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/03/there-is-no-christian-theology-of.html
March 6, 2017
Rome Mayor must ask university professors to avoid deception and not lie : academically unethical
February 7, 2014
Franciscans of the Immaculate seminarians have to accept objective error at Pontifical Universities : approved by Fr. Fidenzio Volpi
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/02/franciscans-of-immaculate-seminarians.html
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/02/franciscans-of-immaculate-seminarians.html
May 23, 2012
Vatican Council II states all Jews and other non Catholics need to convert for salvation and so the comments were pulled down. The comments were contrary to the political propaganda at the University by the rabbi http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/02/franciscans-of-immaculate-seminarians.html
May 20, 2012
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/05/jewish-rabbi-to-teach-catholic.html
January 15, 2016
Pope Francis to visit the Jewish Left synagogue in Rome
September 22, 2013
Americans funding heretical new department at the Gregorian University, Rome
May 20, 2012
Koch’s SSPX must accept Jews do not have to convert to receive canonical status talk reported by Catholic News Service downplayed on Rorate Caeli
________________________________________
December 15, 2016
UNPRECEDENTED!PHILOSOPHICAL MISTAKES DISCOVERED IN VATICAN COUNCIL II
DECEMBER 14, 2016
Catholic professors in Rome now tell lies : pontifical universities don't want to be quoted on a philosophical subject
DECEMBER 13, 2016
Traditionalists too unaware of major philosophical mistake : many errors in Vatican Council II
DECEMBER 13, 2016Too many mistakes in Vatican Council II
DECEMBER 12, 2016
Vatican Council II riddled with philosphical error : two popes in principle support objective error in text http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/12/vatican-council-ii-riddled-with.html
DECEMBER 11, 2016
The source of the present Arian-like heresy throughout the Church today is due to the following points http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/12/the-source-of-present-arian-like-heresy_11.html
DECEMBER 10, 2016
The present magisterium has made a major philosophical mistake
DECEMBER 11, 2016
Priest confirms philosophical error : Lefebvre excommunication a mistake
DECEMBER 10, 2016
Scholars supporting four cardinals in major philosophical mistake
DECEMBER 1, 2016
There is a mistake in Vatican Council II and once the error is identified and avoided, the interpretation of the Council radically changes.There is no 'spirit of Vatican Council II ' excuse anymore
NOVEMBER 29, 2016
So it is only by using an irrationality that the present magisterium can re-interpret magisterial documents and say Vatican Council II indicates all Jews and Muslims in Italy do not need to convert into the Catholic Church in 2016
NOVEMBER 28, 2016
Yet it is with this reasoning that cardinals Ratzinger,Kasper and other liberals interpret Vatican Council II. They use an irrational premise to create a non traditional and heretical conclusion.They with their executive power in the Vatican, they call it magisterial
NOVEMBER 23, 2016
The Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate have set a precedent for all religious communities.They have announced that they accept Vatican Council II without Rahnerian theology.This is extra ordinary. Since they are not denying the Council and neither are they denying Tradition
NOVEMBER 21, 2016 Can the SSPX accept Vatican Council II like the Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate to get canonical status ? : No one tells the pope that he is interpreting Vatican Council II with bad philosophy and bad theology which has now been exposed http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/11/can-sspx-accept-vatican-council-ii-like.html
NOVEMBER 20, 2016
When we get rid of the Rahnerian theology to interpret Vatican Council II then Catholics in general can know the importance of the Social Reign of Christ the King over all political legislation : Feast of Christ the King
NOVEMBER 14, 2016
Don Francesco Riscossa has made an objective error. Lumen Gentium 8 refers to a hypothetical case and so it is not relevant or an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus which he has cited in part one of the conference.
NOVEMBER 13, 2016
Don Allessandro Minutella does not deny it : there is no theology in Vatican Council II to contradict the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and an ecumenism of return, Vatican Council II is in accord with the Lefbrists and 'integralists' whom he criticizes in the video
NOVEMBER 8, 2016Today the magisterium wants the SSPX to affirm Vatican Council II with hypothetical cases being objective in the present times and they are not doing so.Neither would I.http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/11/today-magisterium-wants-sspx-to-affirm.html
NOVEMBER 8, 2016Once we avoid the new theology, with the irrational premise then the conclusion is traditional. We have the old ecclesiology and upon it we base the teaching on religious liberty, ecumenism and inter-religious dialogue http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/11/once-we-avoid-new-theology-with.html
NOVEMBER 8, 2016 Once you have identified the new theology and avoided it,it is possible to view Vatican Council II in the light of Tradition. We would be back to the old ecclesiology at any Mass http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/11/once-you-have-identified-new-theology.html
NOVEMBER 7, 2016 Pope Benedict XVI was promoting the hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/11/pope-benedict-xvi-was-promoting.html
DECEMBER 13, 2016
PHILOSOPHICAL QUESTIONS FOR A PROFESSOR OF PHILOSOPHY : ASK HIM ABOUT MISTAKES IN VATICAN COUNCIL II
PHILOSOPHICAL QUESTIONS FOR A PROFESSOR OF PHILOSOPHY : ASK HIM ABOUT MISTAKES IN VATICAN COUNCIL II
MARCH 17, 2017
The practical result now is that Vatican Council II can be interpreted as a rupture or a continuity with the past, depending upon the use of the irrational premise; invisible cases are visible or not visible in 2017
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/03/the-practical-result-now-is-that.html
_________________________________
TERMS EXPLAINED
Cushingism: It is the new theology and philosophical reasoning, which assumes there are known exceptions, past and present, to the dogma EENS, on the need for all to formally enter the Church.It assumes that the baptism of desire etc are not hypothetical but objectively known.In principle hypothetical cases are objective in the present times.
Baptism of Desire (Feeneyite): It refers to the hypothetical case of an unknown catechumen who desires the baptism of water but dies before he receives it and is saved. Since this is an invisible case in our reality it is not relevant to the dogma EENS.
Baptism of Desire (Cushingite): It refers to the known case of a catechumen who desires the baptism of water but dies before he receives it and is saved. Since this is a visible case or the SSPX it is relevant to the dogma EENS.
Invincible Ignorance ( Feeneyite): This refers to the hypothetical case of someone allegedly saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church, since he was in ignorance.
Council of Florence.One of the three Councils which defined the dogma EENS.It did not mention any exceptions.It did not mention the baptism of desire. It was Feeneyite.
Liberal theologians:They reinterpreted the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance, as objective cases, known in the present times.
Vatican Council II (Cushingite): It refers to the interpretation of Vatican Council II with Cushingism.LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc refer not to hypothetical but known cases in the present times. So Vatican Council II emerges as a break with the dogma EENS.
Vatican Council II (Feeneyite):It refers to the interpretation of Vatican Council II with Feeneyism.LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc refer to hypothetical cases, which are unknown personally in the present times.So Vatican Council II is not a break with EENS, the Syllabus of Errors, ecumenism of return, the Nicene Creed ( Feeneyite-one baptism),the teaching on the Social Reign of Christ the King over all political legislation and the non separation of Church and State( since all need to convert into the Church to avoid Hell).
Letter of the Holy Office 1949 ( Feeneyite). It means accepting the Letter as Feeneyite based on the first part .It supports Fr. Leonard Feeney of Boston.The traditional interpretatiion of the dogma EENS does not mention any exceptions.
Baltimore Catechism. It assumed that the desire for the baptism of an unknown catechumen, who dies before receiving it and was saved, was a baptism like the baptism of water. So it was placed in the Baptism Section of the catechism. In other words it was wrongly assumed that the baptism of desire is visible and repeatable like the baptism of water or that we can administer it like the baptism of water.
TERMS EXPLAINED
Feeneyism: It is the old theology and philosophical reaoning which says there are no known exceptions past or present, to the dogma EENS.There are no explicit cases to contradict the traditional interpretation of EENS.
Cushingism: It is the new theology and philosophical reasoning, which assumes there are known exceptions, past and present, to the dogma EENS, on the need for all to formally enter the Church.It assumes that the baptism of desire etc are not hypothetical but objectively known.In principle hypothetical cases are objective in the present times.
Baptism of Desire (Feeneyite): It refers to the hypothetical case of an unknown catechumen who desires the baptism of water but dies before he receives it and is saved. Since this is an invisible case in our reality it is not relevant to the dogma EENS.
Baptism of Desire (Cushingite): It refers to the known case of a catechumen who desires the baptism of water but dies before he receives it and is saved. Since this is a visible case or the SSPX it is relevant to the dogma EENS.
Invincible Ignorance ( Feeneyite): This refers to the hypothetical case of someone allegedly saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church, since he was in ignorance.
Invincible Ignorance (Cushingite): This refers to the explicit case of someone allegedly saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church, since he was in ignorance.Since it is an exception to the dogma EENS it is assumed to be objectively known in particular cases.This reasoning is irrational.
Council of Florence.One of the three Councils which defined the dogma EENS.It did not mention any exceptions.It did not mention the baptism of desire. It was Feeneyite.
Vatican Council II (Cushingite): It refers to the interpretation of Vatican Council II with Cushingism.LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc refer not to hypothetical but known cases in the present times. So Vatican Council II emerges as a break with the dogma EENS.
Vatican Council II (Feeneyite):It refers to the interpretation of Vatican Council II with Feeneyism.LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc refer to hypothetical cases, which are unknown personally in the present times.So Vatican Council II is not a break with EENS, the Syllabus of Errors, ecumenism of return, the Nicene Creed ( Feeneyite-one baptism),the teaching on the Social Reign of Christ the King over all political legislation and the non separation of Church and State( since all need to convert into the Church to avoid Hell).
Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston. It assumed hypothetical cases were defacto known in the present times. So it presented the baptism of desire etc as an explicit exception, to the traditional interpretation of the dogma EENS.It censured Fr.Leonard Feeney and the St.Benedict Center.Since they did not assume that the baptism of desire referred to a visible instead of invisible case.The Letter made the baptism of desire etc relevant to EENs.From the second part of this Letter has emerged the New Theology.
Letter of the Holy Office ( Cushingite). It is based on the second part of the Letter.It rejects the traditional interpretation of EENS. Since it considers the baptism of desire ( Cushingite-explicit) and being saved in invincible ignorance ( Cushingite-explicit cases) as being exceptions to EENS ( Feeneyite).It worngly assumes hypothetical cases are objectively visible and so they are exceptions to the first part of the Letter.
Baltimore Catechism. It assumed that the desire for the baptism of an unknown catechumen, who dies before receiving it and was saved, was a baptism like the baptism of water. So it was placed in the Baptism Section of the catechism. In other words it was wrongly assumed that the baptism of desire is visible and repeatable like the baptism of water or that we can administer it like the baptism of water.
(The Baltimore Catechism is accepted with the confusion)
Catechism of Pope X. It followed the Baltimore Catechism and placed the baptism of desire in the Baptism Section.
Catechism of Pope X. It followed the Baltimore Catechism and placed the baptism of desire in the Baptism Section.
Nicene Creed ( Cushingite) It says 'I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins' and means there are more than three known baptisms. They are water, blood, desire, seeds of the Word etc.
Nicene Creed ( Feeneyite). It says 'I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins and means there is one known baptism the baptism of water.
New Theology: It refers to the new theology in the Catholic Church based on hypothetical cases being objective in the present times.So it eliminates the dogma EENS.With the dogma EENS made obsolete the ecclesiology of the Church changes. There is a new ecclesiology which is a break with Tradition.
Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus ( Cushingite) .It refers to the dogma but with exceptions.All do not need to defacto convert into the Church in the present times, since there are exceptions.
Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus ( Feeneyite).It refers to the dogma as it was interpreted over the centuries.There are no known exceptions to all needing to formally enter the Church, with faith and baptism, to avoid Hell.
Catechism of the Catholic Church ( Cushingite).CCC 1257 contradicts the Principle of Non Contraduction. Also CCC 848 is based on the new theology and so is a rupture with the dogma EENS( Feeneyite).
Catechism of the Catholic Church ( Feeneyite).CCC 1257 does not contradict the Principle of Non Contradiction since there are no known exceptions to all needing the baptism of water for salvation. There are no known exceptions, since God is not limited to the Sacraments.
When CCC 846 states all who are saved are saved through Jesus and the Church,CCC 846 does not contradict the dogmatic teaching on all needin to formally enter the Church. CCC 846 does not contradict Ad Gentes 7 which states all need faith and baptism for salvation.
________________________
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment