Jimmy Akins begins the video by saying that the Church Fathers are famous for saying outside the Church there is no salvation.But for him, this is not the strict interpretation of the dogma outside the Church there is no salvation. He will not say that Vatican Council II ( AG 7) supports the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) and the Council does not contradict EENS or AG 7 in hypothetical LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22.
The Council Fathers for him refer to the necessity of expressing the Christian faith and not the Catholic faith(0.19).
He then says that the theme outside the Church there is no salvation goes all the way to Jesus in John 14: 6 when Jesus says I am the way the truth and the life, no one comes to the Father but by me (0.28).Jimmy Akins refers to Jesus and not to the Church. He has made the split between Christology and ecclesiocentrism here.
He goes to quote Acts 4:12 'there is no other name' by which we can be saved.Again he separates Jesus from the Church an error pointed out in Pope John Paul II's Dominus Iesus.
He still has not said that Vatican Council II is not only Christological but supports exclusive salvation.
He then goes off into a Cushingite interpretation of Vatican Council II. He assumes there are known exceptions the 16th century interpretation of EENS. There are exceptions to EENS for him with BOD, BOB and I.I. He supports the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 which reasoned that unknown cases of the BOD, BOB and I.I were known exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.
Since Fr. Leonard Feeney was wrong for Jimmy Akins he cannot hold the exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church, there has to be break with the Church Fathers.
So Justin Martyr in the second century is interpreted as projecting invincible ignorance as an exception to exclusive salvation in Jesus in the Catholic Church.
However this is his interpretation. Similarly he projects LG 16( invincible ignorance) as an exception to EENS. Again this is his personal interpretation.
LG 16 is hypothetical and so for me it is not an exception or relevant to EENS.
1.With his irrational interpretation Jimmy Akins has rejected the original interpretation of EENS according to the Church Fathers. This is heresy.
2.With his irrational interpretation of BOD, BOB and I.I etc he has rejected the Athanasius Creed which says outside the Church there is no salvation. This is heresy. How can possibilities of salvation outside the Church be objective and practical exceptions to EENS?
3.He has interpreted Vatican Council II irrationally to create a rupture with Tradition ( past ecclesiology, ecumenism of return, Syllabus or Errors etc). Again this is heretical.I avoid the irrationality and so the Council (AG 7) affirms the strict interpretation of EENS.
4.The Catechism of Pope Pius X would contradict itself for Jimmy Akins. Since it affirms the strict interpretation of EENS and also mentions invincible ignorance. Jimmy Akins interprets invincible ignorance as known salvation outside the Church and an exception to EENS.
This is schism with the past popes on EENS.It is supported by the Left so he does not identify the error and affirm the past exclusivist ecclesiology with an ecumenism of return.-Lionel Andrades
SEPTEMBER 10, 2019
According to Canon Law Bishop Frank Caggiano has no right to be a bishop since he rejects the Athanasius Creed, changes the Nicene and Apostles Creed,interprets Vatican Council II and the Catechisms as a rupture with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS), the Syllabus of Errors and the Oath Against Modernism - all done with an irrational premise to contradict Magisterial documents
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/09/according-to-canon-law-bishop-frank.html
SEPTEMBER 10, 2019
Vatican Council II supports the strict interpretation of EENS in Ad Gentes 7 ( all need faith and baptism for salvation) and there are no exceptions to AG 7 or EENS mentioned in Lumen Gentium. Tim Staples and Catholic Answers do not affirm this
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/09/vatican-council-ii-in-lumen-gentium-etc.html
AUGUST 29, 2019
Yves Congar and the progressive group at Vatican Council II did not know that the Council was being interpreted with a false premise. Without this premise the Council would still have the old ecclesiology, an ecumenism of return and the traditional exclusive salvation theology
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/08/yves-congar-and-progressive-group-at.html
AUGUST 29, 2019
Cardinal Reinhard Marx of Munich organised a meeting on Vatican Council II in Rome. The participants interpreted Vatican Council II with a false premise. So there was a rupture with the old ecumenism of return and EENS
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/08/cardinal-reinhold-marx-of-munich.html
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment