-Lionel Andrades
DECEMBER 21, 2018
Friday, December 21, 2018
Irrationality and heresy Edward Pentin overlooked : Placuet Deo
When Edward Pentin wrote a report on Placuet Deo in the National Catholic Register he did not see the inherent errors, heresy and gnostism in this document.
Pentin writes:
The eight-page Vatican document says that the fullness of life in Christ
means Christians must establish a “sincere and constructive dialogue”
with other religious believers, “confident that God can lead all men of
good will in whose hearts grace works in an unseen way towards salvation
in Christ.”1
Note the document rejects exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church since it is assumed there are known exceptions of non Catholics saved outside the Church since' God can lead all men of good will'(GS 22) to salvation.Yes in theory, speculatively it is possible. But GS 22 does not refer to a concrete case. There is no concrete case. GS 22 is always a hypothetical and unknown case but here it is projected as an objective exception to the 'rigorist' interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam null salus(EENS).This is the inference.
So it is inferred that GS 22 refers to known non Catholics saved outside the Church and so they are objective exceptions to EENS. So the conclusion is that Vatican Council II is a rupture with the past ecclesiology of the Catholic Church.
So it is inferred that GS 22 refers to known non Catholics saved outside the Church and so they are objective exceptions to EENS. So the conclusion is that Vatican Council II is a rupture with the past ecclesiology of the Catholic Church.
Pentin fell for the ruse. It is repeated again and again and no one notices it.
To reject the dogma EENS and that too with unknown people being exceptions is heresy.It is also deception.
Pentin writes:
It also stresses that the Church nevertheless continues to evangelize
and preach Christ’s return “since it is ‘in hope that we are saved.’”
Again note, the document does not affirm exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.Invisible people saved outside the Church are assumed to be visible.This mistake comes from the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.
It assumed invisible cases of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance are visible exceptions to Feeneyite EENS. This is false.
It assumed invisible cases of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance are visible exceptions to Feeneyite EENS. This is false.
The same irrational thinking, which does not come from the Holy Spirit , was there ate Vatican Council II.This could also be a reason for many Catholics to reject Vatican Council II. Since the same objective mistake in the 1949 Letter is there in the Council-text.
Unaware of the error Pentin writes:
At a Vatican press conference Thursday morning, Archbishop Ladaria
said the document came about because “various theologians” had asked the
CDF to study certain aspects of Dominus Iesus, the Congregation’s 2000 declaration that elaborated on the dogma that the Catholic Church is the sole true Church of Christ.
He said there was “no special reason” why it was published now, but
that the Pope encouraged them to publish it “as soon as possible.”
Yes the Catholic Church is the sole true Church of Christ but not every one needs to be a member of the Church for salvation for Cardinal Ladaria. The citation from Gaudium et Specs 22 above shows the cardinal believes there are exceptions.There is salvation outside the Church even if he practically does not know of any exception.
Every one does not need to enter the one sole, true Church of Christ for salvation according to him. At the Placuet Deo Press conference, in answer to a question from an Associated Press reporter, he suggested that Lumen Gentium 8 was an exception to the old exclusivist ecclesiology. So the Church no more has an exclusivness and superiority in salvation for him.
There are objective non Catholics who have been saved outside the Church with 'elements of sanctification and truth'(LG 8).
Every one does not need to enter the one sole, true Church of Christ for salvation according to him. At the Placuet Deo Press conference, in answer to a question from an Associated Press reporter, he suggested that Lumen Gentium 8 was an exception to the old exclusivist ecclesiology. So the Church no more has an exclusivness and superiority in salvation for him.
There are objective non Catholics who have been saved outside the Church with 'elements of sanctification and truth'(LG 8).
Where are these people? Who are they ? What are their names? There are none.
Like Pope Benedict he has projected hypothetical cases as being practical exceptions to EENS in the present times. It is only with this deception that GS 22 and LG 8 could be exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.
It is only by mixing up what is invisible as being visible that Pope Benedict in March 2016 could say that EENS was no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century. There was a development with Vatican Council II for him.Visible cases of LG 8 would also be a development for him.
Edward Pentin sat through all this unaware of what was developing. Then he wrote this piece still assuming that Placuet Deo was harmless. He does not affirm exclusive salvation in the Church, as a Catholic.
The subtle subterfuge continued and Pentin reported it innocently.
Ladaria rejects the dogma EENS and this is expressed in two papers of the International Theological Commission, Christianity and the World Religions and The Hope of Salvation for Infants Who Die Without Being Baptised.
Since outside the Church there was salvation it was hoped that children who were not baptised could go to Heaven and not just limbo.
Since outside the Church there was salvation it was hoped that children who were not baptised could go to Heaven and not just limbo.
While assuming outside the Church there is salvation, known salvation Cardinal Ratzinger wrote Dominus Iesus. BOD, BOB and I.I and LG 8, LG 16, UR 3, GS 22 etc were known non Catholics saved outside the Church.The same mistake is there in Redemptoris Missio.
He added that Vatican II taught that “Christ’s Church subsists in the Catholic Church,” and referred to the Council document Lumen Gentium
which teaches that “many elements of salvation are found in Christian
religious confessions” and “all tend towards Catholic unity.”
This is a heretical and irrational interpretation of Lumen Gentium.
For me no where does Lumen Gentium state that there are known people saved outside the Church.Cardinal Ladaria chooses to infer this and create a rupture with an ecumenism of return and the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church.
For instance, Ad Gentes 7 says all need faith and baptism for salvation and mentions those who have had the Gospel preached to them.However if there is someone saved because he did not have the Gospel preached to him or did have the Gospel preached to him, it would be known only to God. It is a 'zero case' in our reality.If he was saved he could only be seen in Heaven. So it does not contradict the exclusive interpretation of EENS.
Similarly when Lumen Gentium mentions someone saved with the baptism of desire, again it is a hypothetical case. The text in Vatican Council II does not say that we can personally know any such case and so there is an exception to EENS. So I do not make the wrong inference.
Similarly Lumen Gentium 14 says those who know about Jesus and the Church and do not enter are oriented to Hell. Again the text does not state that there is a known person. Cardinal Ladaria makes the wrong inference.He assumes a theoretical possibility is a defacto and concrete example of salvation outside the Church.I avoid this inference.
Archbishop Ladaria said that denominations have “elements of
sanctification” and “we recognize these gladly.” He stressed that “the
fact we don’t enter directly into this [in the Letter] doesn’t mean that
the teaching has changed. It seems to me to have deepened.”
We can cite elements of sanctification but cannot assume that they are responsible for salvation outside the Church in other Christian denominations.
Archbishop Di Noia when
specifically asked about extra ecclesiam nulla salus by Edward Pentin
for the National Catholic Register says the following.
I don’t know if you can blame this on the Council so much as the
emergence of a theological trend that emphasized the possibility of
salvation of non-Christians. But the Church has always affirmed this,
and it has never denied it. …The Council did say there are elements of
grace in other religions, and I don’t think that should be retracted.
I’ve seen them, I know them — I’ve met Lutherans and Anglicans who are
saints.' - Archbishop Augustine di Noia ( 07/01/2012 ), Archbishop Di
Noia, Ecclesia Dei and the Society of St. Pius X, National Catholic
Register.
http://www.ncregister.com/dail...https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2016/11/the-traditionalist-here-are-using-same.html
He then goes on to say that he has met Lutherans and Anglicans who are saints and whom he believes will be saved outside the Church. How can any one us make this judgement?? How can he judge an exception to EENS? How can he read the soul of other people and know how God will judge ?
This is the irrationality and heresy which Edward Pentin overlooked.
Similarly Edward Pentin interviewed Cardinal Gerhard Muller and asked him about extra ecclesiam nulla salus.Here is the citation.
Cardinal Mulle says:-
For Cardinal Muller this is a reference to a known person, past or present, saved outside the Church so it is relevant to the question Pentin is asking him. He suggests that there known non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance outside the Church, so he makes a new category of only those who know. How could any one in the past see someone in Heaven saved without 'faith and baptism'(AG 7) in the Catholic Church? How could this person allegedly seen in Heaven also be on earth to be an exception to EENS? Finally, the person now saved in Heaven who was outside the church would have to be on earth too, to be an exception to EENS? 2
' He who is aware of the presence of Revelation is obliged by his conscience to belong publicly — and not only in his conscience, in his heart — to this Catholic Church by remaining in communion with the Pope and those bishops in communion with him.'? What has this to do with the dogma EENS? Is he referring to someone known to be saved outside the Church just by following his conscience? There is no such person in 2012-2018.So to whom is he referring to ?How can he theologically suggest that there is known salvation outside the Church and then reject the dogma EENS as it was interpreted throughout the centuries ? Where is the practical exception in the present times to the traditional exclusivist ecclesiology of the Catholic Church? These were questions Pentin should at least have asked himself.
Similarly Edward Pentin interviewed Cardinal Gerhard Muller and asked him about extra ecclesiam nulla salus.Here is the citation.
Cardinal Mulle says:-
That has been discussed, but here, too, there has been a development of all that was said in the Church, beginning with St. Cyprian, one of the Fathers of the Church, in the third century. Again, the perspective is different between then and now. In the third century, some Christian groups wanted to be outside the Church, and what St. Cyprian said is that without the Church a Christian cannot be saved. The Second Vatican Council also said this: Lumen Gentium 14 says: “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.” He who is aware of the presence of Revelation is obliged by his conscience to belong publicly — and not only in his conscience, in his heart — to this Catholic Church by remaining in communion with the Pope and those bishops in communion with him.
But we cannot say that those who are inculpably ignorant of this truth are necessarily condemned for that reason. We must hope that those who do not belong to the Church through no fault of their own, but who follow the dictates of their God-given conscience, will be saved by Jesus Christ whom they do not yet know. Every person has the right to act according to his or her own conscience. - Cardinal Gerhard Muller (10/02/2012 ). Archbishop Gerhard Müller: 'The Church Is Not a Fortress', National Catholic Register http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/archbishop-mueller-the-church-is-not-a-fortress/#ixzz3pwkg3Mur
'The Second Vatican Council also said this: Lumen Gentium 14 says: “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.” ? O.K but we do not know any one as such. We cannot judge. This would only be known to God. So this is cannot be a reference to an exception to EENS since this person does not exist. For Cardinal Muller this is a reference to a known person, past or present, saved outside the Church so it is relevant to the question Pentin is asking him. He suggests that there known non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance outside the Church, so he makes a new category of only those who know. How could any one in the past see someone in Heaven saved without 'faith and baptism'(AG 7) in the Catholic Church? How could this person allegedly seen in Heaven also be on earth to be an exception to EENS? Finally, the person now saved in Heaven who was outside the church would have to be on earth too, to be an exception to EENS? 2
' He who is aware of the presence of Revelation is obliged by his conscience to belong publicly — and not only in his conscience, in his heart — to this Catholic Church by remaining in communion with the Pope and those bishops in communion with him.'? What has this to do with the dogma EENS? Is he referring to someone known to be saved outside the Church just by following his conscience? There is no such person in 2012-2018.So to whom is he referring to ?How can he theologically suggest that there is known salvation outside the Church and then reject the dogma EENS as it was interpreted throughout the centuries ? Where is the practical exception in the present times to the traditional exclusivist ecclesiology of the Catholic Church? These were questions Pentin should at least have asked himself.
Why does he mention theoretical and hypothetical cases with reference to the dogma EENS? 'But we cannot say that those who are inculpably ignorant of this truth are necessarily condemned for that reason.' This is vague speculation with goodwill. Finally only God will judge.The Holy Spirit has told the Church that they all, who are outside, are on the way to Hell. But what has this to do with EENS? Is Cardinal Muller philosophically suggesting that there is a defacto known case and so he mentions this new doctrine? Upon this 'unknown people are known', irrationality he has created a new theology on outside the Church there is salvation ? He has used this ruse to reject exclusive salvation in the Church? Yes!
He says 'We must hope that those who do not belong to the Church through no fault of their own, but who follow the dictates of their God-given conscience, will be saved by Jesus Christ whom they do not yet know. ' He could hope but it was irrational to posit this as an exception to the dogma EENS.This is what he wrongly did in the interview and Edward Pentin let him get away in 2012 as he did with Ladaria on March 1,2018.
-Lionel Andrades
1.
Blogs | Mar. 1, 2018
Vatican Reaffirms Teaching on Salvation in Response to ‘Cultural Changes’
http://www.ncregister.com/blog/edward-pentin/vatican-reaffirms-teaching-on-salvation-to-reflect-cultural-changes
2
2
OCTOBER 18, 2017
Maike Hickson could ask for a clarification from Cardinal Muller on the SSPX canonical status :objective error in interview with Pentin
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2017/10/maike-hickson-needs-clarification-from.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
