Thursday, June 7, 2018

According to St. Thomas Aquinas whom he admires Bishop Barron would be in first class heresy.

On May 10,2018 Bishops Barron posted a video on Youtube titled 'Bishop Barron on Who Can be Saved?' in which his theology is clearly Cushingite.He uses an irrational premise, to interpret Vatican Council II as a rupture with Tradition. If he did not imagine hypothetical cases as being hypothetical, then Vatican Council II would be Feeneyite and not Cushingite.It would not be a rupture with 'the strict interpretation' of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) and the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Catholic Church.So he uses a lie, a deception.
He begins this video with a citation from the Bible which tells us that Jesus is the only Saviour of the world.He does not choose passages which also mention the necessity of membership in the Church for salvation (John 3:5, Matrk 16:16, Matt.7:13 etc).
So he rejects the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus at the onset. He calls it triumphalism.
Then, he is so liberal he even refers to and criticizes   'Christian triumphalism'. So  it is not always necessary to believe in Jesus for salvation for him! So there is no traditional mission motivation.
"So since Jesus is the only way does it mean that no non believer no Jew, no Buddhist can possibily be saved?", he asks.
Note: he will soon assume that 'a possibility' is 'a known case of salvation outside the Church in the present times.This is a subtle error which is common in the Church today and is fed by the liberal.This irrational reasoning marks the video.
He then says that Vatican Council II says that that there are rays of light (4:23) in other religions.
I too could recognise good and holy things in other religions but I cannot say that any one in particular in another religion is saved outside the Church because there is that 'rays of light'. We cannot name any one.Neither can he.
He then goes on to say that 'Vatican Council II goes so far as to say that a non believer,someone who through no fault of his own is a non believer but who is following his conscience sincerely,he can be saved '.
O.K, hypothetically, in theory, speculatively,hopefully. But how does this contradict Jesus saying those who do not believe will be condemned? How does this contradict the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church when there is no real, known person as such?  It is not a contradiction. Since it is a reference only to a hypothetical case, an abstract person.
Bishop Barron then adds that he is not saying that this person will necessarily be saved.He does not know a single real person and he is discussing this case as if there is a known non Catholic saved outside the Church. He then assumes this invisible person is a visible exception to the traditional teaching on exclusive salvation.
Is this not a deception?
This is the familiar Cushingite ploy of the liberals and Masons.Based upon a lie they reject the old ecclesiology of the Catholic Church.
(5:04) He then cites Newman who says that ' the conscience is the aborignal vicar of Christ in the soul. So even a non believer who is in good faith and following his conscience,is in fact following the voice of Christ, though he might fully not realize it.' This is all the New Theology supported by Rahner and Ratzinger. It is a false theology since it is based on possibilties of non Catholics being actual, known people saved outside the Church.There are no such people.We do not and cannot know any one who is saved outside the Church because of a good conscience.
This is false reasoningl.It is based on hypothetical speculation. Then it is assumed that these are concrete examples of salvation outside the Church. They infer that there are practical exceptions to EENS. There are no such people in real life whom we can know.
So with this false reasoning, bad philosophy and theology, Bishop Barron says that there is no clear 'in and out' on salvation for him. Salvation does not mean 'your in and your out for him'. 
So for him there are practical exceptions to his Christological model of salvation too. He says all need to believe in Jesus but....
He would probably say all are welcome to enter the Catholic Church as members for salvation but ....there are known exceptions here too-even when for us human being there cannot be any known exception.
So his Christology and also ecclesiology has exceptions, it is no wonder that he has to evangelize based on beauty, goodness and abstract values. He does not believe all non Catholics are Hell bound and need to be saved.
(6:29) He says there are elements of truth in other religions( Lumen Gentium 8) and he infers that these elements of truth, or good things in other religion, results in salvation outside the Church. So there is salvation outside the Church, the old theology of no salvation outside the Church, the dogma, is rejected, since hypothetical cases are exceptions, possibilities are exceptions, unknown people are known exceptions, abstract cases are concrete exceptions....
(7:25) He refers to first century Christians( and not Catholic) triumphalism) which he admits is supported by St. Thomas Aquinas and St.Augustine and which he rejects and it does not bother him.
He also does not cite Vatican Council II ( AG 7), the Bible (Mk:16-16, John 3:5 etc) which supports this traditional teaching.Since for  him, the present two popes and the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, it is  'triumphalism' and has to be rejected.
With his irrational reasoning he has changed the meaning of the Nicene Creed, the dogma EENS, Vatican Council II( Feeneyite to Cushingite), the Catechisms( Feeneyite changed to Cushingite) and the interpretation of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance.
According to St. Thomas Aquinas whom he admires, Bishop Barron would be in first class heresy.
On May 20,2018 I wrote a blog post 1   and posted to Bishop Robert Barron's diocese and to the organisers of his television apostolate.I do not expect him to reply since he needs to interpret hypothetical cases as being non hypothetical and only then can he create a rupture with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was known to St.Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas.-Lionel Andrades


MAY 20, 2018

For Bishop Robert Barron Lumen Gentium 16( invincible ignorance) refers to objectively seen non Catholics saved outside the Church.So for him and Pope Benedict the dogma EENS is obsolete and they search for substitute reasons to evangelize

No comments: