Franciscans of the Immaculate, SSPX, SBC can have their situation regularized : the doctrinal puzzle has been solved.
The key is : we do not have to choose. It is not either the baptism of desire or extra ecclesiam nulla salus (Feeneyite.
It is not : if you are affirming Feeneyite EENS you are rejecting the baptism of desire (BOD).
We can have it both ways.
It can be invisible -for -us baptism of desire along with all needing to be incorporated into the Church with no known exceptions.Unknown cases of BOD are not visible exceptions to EENS.
Presently for the Franciscans of the Immaculate, the Society of St. Pius X and the St. Benedict Centers it is either the baptism of desire or Feeneyite EENS. This is an error.They have to give up this mistake.
When they change their position from 'invisible baptism of desire is visible' to 'invisible baptism of desire can only be invisible' their conclusion changes. The interpretation of Vatican Council II changes. This is huge.
Invisible baptism of desire was never an exception to EENS. Unknown people cannot be relevant to EENS.This is common sense.
Similarly invisible for us LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2,GS 22, AG 11 etc are not exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.Vatican Council II does not contradict Feeneyite EENS. Vatican Council II itself is Feeneyite.
There are no known cases of salvation outside the Church mentioned in Vatican Council II. Not a single case.I repeat. Not a single one.
Invisible baptism of desire (LG 14) is not an example of known salvation outside the Church.We do not know of any one saved where the true Church subsists outside the Church.We do not know of any one saved with 'the seeds of the Word'(AG 11), inside or outside the Church.Any one saved with 'elements of sanctification and truth'(LG 8) or those saved 'with a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men'(NA 2) would only be known to God.So there are no known examples of salvation outside the Church. We do not know the name and surname of someone saved 'in imperfect communion with the Church'(UR 3).Not a single exception!
When there is no known salvation outside the Church we automatically are back to what Redemptoris Missio calls the past ecclesiology and suggests it exists no more.Cardinal Ratzinger supported the new ecclesiology founded upon known salvation outside the Church, possibilities were actual cases for him,invisible people were visible.
Now we are back to outside the Church there is no salvation.There is no known salvation. If any one is saved outside the Church he or she would only be known to God.On earth we cannot say ,'Ah ha! Here's an exception'.
For the first time since Vatican Council II traditionalists and sedevacantists can be reconciled with the Church,they can ask for canonical recognition. Since they can affirm the old ecclesiology without rejecting Vatican Council II. It is no more either/or, this or that.
Now for Bishop Donald Sanborn it is the old ecclesiology without Vatican Council II.
For the sedevacantist Bishop Mark Pivarunus and the large CMRI community it is the past ecclesiology without Vatican Council II.It was always either or.
SInce for Bishop Donald Sanborn and Bishop Mark Pivarunas it was always the baptism of desire without Feeneyite EENS.
For the sedevacantist Peter and Michael Dimond it was Feeneyite EENS without the baptism of desire.The opposite.But all of them rejected Vatican Council II.
For the St.Benedict Centers it was Feeneyite EENS but without Vatican Council II. Since LG 16 referred to visible exceptions for them.
For the SSPX it was the baptism of desire without Feeneyite EENS.
Now we have solved the doctrinal puzzle. It no more has to be either-or.
This is a terrific win-win situation.It's unbelievable until you understand the mechanics. Most Catholics are programmed with the either-or confusion.
It is a win-win situation not only for the traditionalists but all religious communities who do not want a theological and doctrinal rupture with their founders (St.Francis, St. Dominic).It is no more a rupture with Tradition.There is no rupture with the Magisterium of the 16th century. There is no rupture with the authentic magisterium of the past.
Now all this has to be understood.Then the Vatican has to be contacted.
The Franciscans of the Immaculate, the SSPX and the SBC can tell Cardinal Luiz Ladaria S.j and Archbishop Guido Pozzo that they affirm Vatican Council II. They accept Vatican Council II !It's no problem anymore. The loose ends have been tied.There is a hermeneutic of continuity with the Syllabus of Errors.
They now affirm the old exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church and the dogma EENS according to the Jesuit missionaries of the Middle Ages.
CATHOLICS DIALOGUE WITH CARD.LADARIA
They now affirm the old exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church and the dogma EENS according to the Jesuit missionaries of the Middle Ages.
CATHOLICS DIALOGUE WITH CARD.LADARIA
"But this cannot be", Cardinal Ladaria would say surprised.
'What about LG 16? It is a rupture with Feeneyite EENS. What about GS 22? It is an example of salvation outside the Church.'He could laugh at what may appear silliness for him.
'Yes.Yes," the traditionalist and conservative Catholics would say,'There is salvation outside the Church only as a theoretical possibility.Since God can do what he wants.However there is no actual person.A possibility is only hypothetical. Also there could be a possibility that there is no one saved outside the Church.A possibility is not a reference to an actual person.We cannot know anyone saved outside the Church.So it is no more an issue,' Catholics would respond confidently and happily."There are no practical exceptions in our life time or since Vatican Council II.There are no practical exceptions to EENS. There could be none known in the past too.Since only God can see who is saved in Heaven".
"Yes there are no practical exceptions to EENS.All of at the CDF would have to agree with this", the CDF Prefect would concede.
"We affirm invisible for us baptism of desire.And also Feeeneyite EENS", the representatives of the Franciscans of the Immaculate, SSPX and SBC would remind him.
"We affirm hypothetical and theoretical cases of being saved in invincible ignorance along with what the media calls 'the rigorist interpretation of EENS.",they would say boldly.
"Is this irrational for you ?", they would ask Cardinal Ladaria.
"It is rational",he Spanish Jesuit cardinal would reply."Invisible and unknown cases of someone cannot be visible and known exceptions to outside the Church there is no salvation,as it was understood to St. Francis Xavier and St. Ignatius of Loyola.'
'So you agree that our interpretation of Vatican Council II is rational?', they would ask.
He would answer, 'Yes', being a truthful cardinal.
"It is traditional too?"
He would say "Yes".
"So there is no development in Vatican Council II for us",they would note. He would agree.
It is in harmony with the old ecclesiology of the Church which you and Cardinal Ratzinger rejected in the International Theological Commission paper,Christianity and the World Religions ?
"Yes", he would say helplessly, since it is an objective error that they made.
It is in harmony with the old ecclesiology of the Church which you and Cardinal Ratzinger rejected in the International Theological Commission paper,Christianity and the World Religions ?
"Yes", he would say helplessly, since it is an objective error that they made.
"Is it the official and magisterial teaching of the Church now?",they would ask expectantly.
"I would have to ask Pope Francis",he would say, sadly.-Lionel Andrades
DECEMBER 21, 2017
It does not have to be either the baptism of desire or extra ecclesiam nulla salus : Just one Religious Superior is needed to understand and affirm this and we will have changed the Church
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/12/it-does-not-have-to-be-either-baptism_92.html
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment