Cardinal Luiz Ladaria takes the cake : What has 'the river of interpretations of Lumen Gentium 8 subsist it ' to do with EENS when they are all hypothetical and invisible cases?

Cardinal  Luiz Ladaria takes the cake : What has 'the river of interpretations of Lumen Gentium 8 subsist it in have  'to do with extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) when they are all hypothetical and invisible case?

When the lady journalist from the Associated Press observed that after Dominus Iesus many people believed that the Church was saying that it had the superiority and exclusiveness in salvation.So she asked if this was still the teaching of the Church today. Does the Church still teach that outside the Church there is no salvation like in the past centuries,is what she was asking.

Cardinal Luiz Ladaria in trying to answer that question looked at the Public Relations Director on his left and laughed and said with arms extended that there could be 'a river of interpretations' of Lumen Gentium 8 which says that the true Church subsists it in the Catholic Church and that there are elements of sanctification and truth in other religions.

Cardinal Ladaria, even if there are many liberal interpretations of LG 8( subsist it in) for you, what have these hypothetical and theoretical cases, speculative possibilities, to do with the question by the journalist? How can unknown and invisible people, in our reality, be exceptions to the centuries old teaching on exclusive salvation in the Church? 

How long more will you continue with this deception?

WHY WAS LUMEN GENTIUM 8 CITED ?

We do not know any one saved in another religion in 2018 because that religion subsist it in the Catholic Church. We do not know any one who is saved in another religion with 'elements of sanctification and truth'. So why was Lumen Gentium 8 cited as an exception, when that journalist asked about outside the Church there is no salvation ?

According to the old teaching Protestants are outside the Church and are on the way to Hell. Where are the known exceptions in 2018? How can we tell that someone is not living in mortal sin outside the Church ? How can we tell that a particular non Catholic will be saved without Catholic faith and instead with elements of sanctification and truth, or imperfect communion with the Church(UR 3) or seeds of the Word (AG 11). This can only be known to God. The norm for salvation is 'faith and baptism'. The norm is not LG 8 etc.

According to the old teaching there can only be an ecumenism of return.So how can Lumen Gentium 8 which refers to speculative possibilities known only to God, be relevant to the old exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church ?

How long more will the cardinals and bishops at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith continue with these falsehoods and deception?

INJUSTICE DONE TO ABP. LEFEBVRE 

An injustice was done by the CDF(1949) when they excommunicated Fr.Leonard Feeney even though there were no known exceptions to EENS at that time of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance.The Jesuits expelled him and the Archbishop put restrictions on the priests.

Also an injustice was done by the CDF when they excommunicated Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre for correctly saying that Vatican Council II interpreted with LG 16,LG 8, LG 14, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc as being known and visible people saved outside the Church, was a rupture with the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church. There was no clarification or correction from the CDF saying that Vatican Council II could also be interpreted without the invisible people are visible in the present times, false premise.

For me Fr. Leonard Feeney was orthodox and the CDF and the Jesuits were heretical.Since there are no objective exceptions to EENS for us human beings and they postulated that there were exceptions.

Also for me Vatican Council II with LG 16 etc referring to hypothetical cases only, does not contradict the exclusive understanding of salvation in the Catholic Church.So Vatican Council II is not a rupture with the Apostolic teaching and that of the Church Fathers saying the Catholic Church has superiority and exclusiveness in salvation.

CDF IN SCHISM AND HERESY

So for me Cardinal Ladaria, like the present two popes is in schism. They are interpreting Vatican Council II as a rupture with the past ecclesiology of the Church and have changed the meaning of the dogma EENS, as having exceptions.So for me there is EENS and Vatican Council II without the premise and without exceptions. While for them there is Vatican Council II and EENS with exceptions. They use the hermeneutic of rupture with the past.

NICENE CREED REINTERPRETED

Since BOD,BOB and I.I refer to known people saved outside the Church they have changed the meaning of the Nicene Creed. It now says, for them, 'I do not believe in only one known baptism for the forgiveness of sins, but three or more, they are the baptisms of desire, blood, invincible ignorance, elements of sanctification and truth etc, all which exclude the baptism of water in the Church.'

They have changed the interpretation of the past popes in Mystici Corporis, Catechism of Pope Pius X, Trent etc.Since they interpret references to BOD, BOB and I.I as being  known people saved outside the Church. So they become a rupture with the Feeneyite and traditional interpretation of the dogma EENS, which says there are no exceptions.

Similarly the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1994) is interpreted as a rupture with the past because of this mixing up  of what is invisible as being visible, unknown as being known, hypothetical as being objective, implicit as being explicit.

RECANTATION NEEDED

Cardinal Luiz Ladaria needs to correct his error in public. A recantation is in order.

I affirm all these magisterial documents but I interpret them with the for and neutral to EENS method. I avoid the false premise with Feeneyite theology and so the ecclesiology of the Church before and after Vatican Council II is the same for me.I affirm Vatican Council II ( premise-free) and the strict interpretation of EENS along with the Syllabus of Errors.I affirm the Catechism of the Church (1994) in harmony with the Catechism of the Council of Trent.

I afirm the first part of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 which affirms Feeneyite EENS and I reject the second part which contradicts the first part by assuming BOD,BOB and I.I refer to known people saved outside the Church.

I AFFIRM MAGISTERIAL DOCUMENTS

So like Cardinal Ladaria I affirm all Magisterial documents, but he interprets them with Cushingism( hypothetical cases are not hypothetical but visible in the present times) and I use Feeneyism( hypothetical cases are just hypothetical).So since our premises are different our conclusions are traditional or non traditional, heretical or orthodox.

-Lionel Andrades

MARCH 3, 2018

Jesuit Cardinal Ladaria review the case of Jesuit Fr.Leonard Feeney he was set up by your office 

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/03/jesuit-cardinal-ladaria-review-case-of.html

MARCH 2, 2018

Cardinal Ladaria made a major mistake at the Press Conference for Placuit Deo

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/03/cardinal-ladraian-made-major-mistake-at.html

MARCH 2, 2018

Fr.John Zuhlsdorf - Don't Touch

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/03/frjohn-zuhlsdorf-dont-touch.html

 MARCH 2, 2018

Cardinal Luiz Ladaria chose to interpret Vatican Council II with the for and against EENS method instead of the for and neutral to EENS method : journalists and conservatives unaware

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/03/cardinal-luiz-ladaria-chose-to.html