Catholics in heresy

1.The dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) tellls us that all need to enter the Catholic Church for salvation.So when a Catholic says invisible cases of the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) are visible exceptions to EENS, it is heresy.He cannot physically see or meet non Catholics saved in I.I, BOD, BOB.If there are people saved as such they would only be known to God.So we cannot change the meaning of EENS by assuming there are exceptions.Practically there cannot be exceptions.Theoretical possibilities of salvation are not literal cases.There are no literal cases of BOD, BOB and I.I  in 2019 but for most Catholics BOD, BOB and I.I are exceptions to EENS.

2.The popes and saints referred to BOD, BOB and I.I and knew they could be only hypothetical cases. So they were not exceptions to EENS for them.To re-interpret BOD, BOB and I.I as referring to personally known people saved outside the Catholic Church is deceptive.To assume Mystici Corporis, the Catechism of Pope Pius X, Catechism of the Council of Trent etc, when they mentioned BOD, BOB and I.I, as referring to objective and literal exceptions  to EENS, is a heretical reading of magisterial documents.

3.It is first class heresy to change the meaning of the Nicene Creed. We pray, 'I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins'.One baptism refers to the baptism of water.We can only  physically see and repeat  the baptism of water. However for many Catholics there is not one but three known baptisms(BOD,BOD, I.I) and they exclude the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.This is heresy.Who among us can administer the other baptisms which exclude the baptism of water.

4.In the Apostles Creed we pray,' I believe in the Holy Spirit the Holy Catholic Church'.For many Catholics the Holy Spirit teaches the Catholic Church that BOD, BOB and I.I refer to personally known people saved outside the Church. This is irrational.It is also heretical.How can we interpret the Apostles Creed and other Church documents with this irrationality and then consider the conclusion magisterial ?.

5.In Vatican Council II, LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc refer to hypothetical cases.They are not physically seen people saved outside the Church in 1965-2019.There are no such people who exist in our reality. To assume LG 8 etc are exceptions to EENS is heresy.
Vatican Council II does not contradict EENS and the past exclusivist ecclesiology.While AG 7 and LG 14 support Feeneyite EENS.AG 7 says all need faith and baptism for salvation. All - and not just those who know about Jesus and the Church.Those who are in invincible ignorance, through no fault of their own, are not exceptions to EENS.
Most Catholics heretically interpret Vatican Council II as a rupture with Tradition (Syllabus of Errors, ecumenism of return etc).

6.Similarly when the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1994) refers to BOD, BOB and I.I it is not a rupture with the strict interpretation of EENS.While CCC 846 cites AG 7, which supports EENS.
So to re-interpret BOD, BOB and I.I and LG 8, LG 14,LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in the Catechism, as being exceptions to EENS, since there are alleged known people saved outside the Church, is irrational and changes the interpretation of the Catechism. This is heresy. 
The same mistake can be made in the interpretation of the the Catechisms of Pope Pius X and Trent. 
7.The Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX was a Magisterial document.We cannot reject it by assuming there are known exceptions to EENS and an ecumenism of return.There are no visible cases of BOD, BOB and I.I and LG 8, UR 3, GS 22 etc.For Pope Benedict, Cardinal Gerhard Muller, Cardinal Malcolm Ranjit and other ecclesiastics to consider the Syllabus of Errors as now being obsolete, because of known salvation outside the Church, is heresy.

8.The references to hypothetical cases in the Decree on Ecumenism in Vatican Council II (UR 3 etc) must not be seen as exceptions to EENS and an ecumenism of return.Since they cannot be practical exceptions. There is no other option.So Protestants must still return to the Catholic Church for salvation. Yet many Catholics interpret Unitatis Redintigratio as suggesting there is personally known salvation in other Christian religions.There is a rupture with EENS in UR 3.This is heretical.
There is no basis for the New Ecumenism in Vatican Council II.Other Christians, theologically, still need to come into the Catholic Church for salvation.
9. The Catechism of Pope Pius X mentions being saved in invincible ignorance and also the need to be a member of the Catholic Church for salvation.Since invincible ignorance, for example, refers to only a hypothetical case, this Catechism only affirms the strict interpretation of EENS.However the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) and the sedevacantists (CMRI,MHFM etc) interpret invincible ignorance as referring to personally known people.So they are exceptions to EENS.This is irrational and heretical.They have created the exceptions when this Catechism does not mention any.

10.The New Theology is based upon BOD, BOB and I.I being exceptions to EENS( Letter of the Holy Office 1949).BOD, BOB and I.I, we now know, cannot be exceptions to EENS. So the Letter of the Holy Office (LOHO) was heretical.

Redemptoris Missio and Dominus Iesus were written and approved by Cardinal  Joseph Ratzinger based on the heretical New Theology.The same mistake is there in two theological papers of the the International Theological Commission ( Christianity and the World Religions(1997) and The Hope of Salvation for Infants who Die without being Baptised(2007) ).
Similarly the Balamand Declaration and the Joint Declaration on Justification with the Lutherans was based on the heretical New Theology.  
Many of the Council Fathers at Vatican Council II accepted the New Theology.In principle hypothetical cases were assumed to be objective examples of salvation outside the Catholic Church.So LG 14 indicates that only those who know about Jesus and the Church and who do not enter, go to Hell.It excludes those who are in invincible ignorance and are allegedly personally known.This is heresy and the reasoning is convoluted.
REINTERPRETATION
Since 'the red is not an exception to the blue'  1 we can read all Church documents in a rational and non heretical way, in spite of the mistakes of the past. 
The popes and cardinals did not correct the error in the Fr.Leonard Feeney case.It was the Holy Office (CDF) and the Archbishop of Boston, Cardinal Richard Cushing, who were in heresy and not Fr.Leonard Feeney.
So the first part of LOHO affirms the strict interpretation of EENS and the second part which mentions BOD, BOB and I.I does not conflict with it.
Similarly when the Catechisms and the popes and saints  affirm the strict interpretation of EENS they are still Feeneyites.Since BOD, BOB and I.I which they mention, can never be exceptions to EENS. 
Similarly Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church are also Feeneyite, since the red passages  do  not contradict the blue.
So inspite of the New Theology, we can re-read Redemptoris Missio and Dominus Iesus as being Feeneyite, with the red not being an exception to the blue.
So the ecclesiology of the Catholic Church before and after Vatican Council II is still the same.We are back to traditional Catholic mision- doctrine and theology.There is only an ecumenism of return and there is no rational theological basis for the New Ecumenism, New Evangelisation, New Ecclesiolgy, New Theology etc.There were all based upon known salvation outside the Catholic Church. 
So EENS today is the same as it was in the 16th century.Vatican Council II is no  more a rupture with EENS. 
The text of Vatican Council II is heretical though when it suggests BOD, BOB and I.I are exceptions to all needing faith and baptism for salvation (AG 7, LG 14) and that invincible ignorance refers to personally known non Catholics saved outside the Church so only those who know about Jesus and the Church need to enter for salvation(LG 14).
-Lionel Andrades

1

• Red is not an exception to the blue :CCC 846-848 (2)
• Red not an exception to blue mapping(1)

 FEBRUARY 9, 2019

The red is not an exception to the blue' : new extraordinary understanding of Vatican Council II

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/02/the-red-is-not-exception-to-blue-new.html

JANUARY 27, 2019

Repost : The red is not an exception to the blue, the red does not contradict the blue : Catechism of the Catholic Church 846-848

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/01/repost-red-is-not-exception-to-blue-red.html

JANUARY 25, 2019

For me the red does not contradict the blue so there is a hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition ( Graphics)

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/01/for-me-red-does-not-contrradict-blue-so.html


________________________________________

JANUARY 25, 2019

The Social Reign of Christ the King can be proclaimed based on Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church which affirm the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS)

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/01/the-social-reign-of-christ-king-can-be.html

 JANUARY 24, 2019

Vatican Council II's Decree on Ecumenism ( Unitatis Redintigratio) supports the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/01/vatican-council-iis-decree-on-ecumenism.html

JANUARY 11, 2019

Traditionalist cites Vatican Council II in support of Tradition - the Restoration has begun

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/01/traditionalist-cites-vatican-council-ii.html

JANUARY 8, 2019

St.Robert Bellarmine was a Feeneyite and so was St. Thomas Aquinas.So is Vatican Council II

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/01/strobert-bellarmine-was-feeneyite-and.html

JANUARY 5, 2019

Vatican Council II has a heretical theology but in a peculiar way it can be interpreted non heretically

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/01/vatican-council-ii-has-heretical.html

 DECEMBER 31, 2018

The Traditional Latin Mass must not be separated from the exclusive-salvation theology of Vatican Council II (Graphics)

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/12/the-traditional-latin-mass-must-not-be.html

DECEMBER 27, 2018

Even though Cardinal Ratzinger wrote magisterial documents with a false premise and inference we can re-interpret them without the error : Vatican Council II can be Feeneyite or Cushingite

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/12/even-though-cardinal-ratzinger-wrote.html

 DECEMBER 26, 2018

What is the difference between the old and new theology? How is the new theology created ? : important to know

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/12/what-is-difference-between-old-and-new.html

DECEMBER 23, 2018

Edward Pentin supports heresy - and receives the Eucharist at Mass in sacrilege ? He rejects the Syllabus of Errors , Athanasius Creed, past catechisms, original understanding of the Nicene Creed,the dogma EENS and reinterprets Vatican Council II as a rupture with Tradition when it is not

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/12/edward-pentin-supports-heresy-and.html

DECEMBER 17, 2018

The Church is Necessary

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/12/the-church-is-necessary.html




______________________________________

Repost : DOES CARDINAL DANNEELS ASSUME THAT VATICAN COUNCIL II BROKE WITH THE PAST BECAUSE OF THE DEAD VISIBLE TO US INTERPRETATION ?

October 26, 2012

DOES CARDINAL DANNEELS ASSUME THAT VATICAN COUNCIL II BROKE WITH THE PAST BECAUSE OF THE DEAD VISIBLE TO US INTERPRETATION ?

Danneels: Vatican II broke with past-The Tablet

25 October 2012

The Church broke away from its negative and "world-rejecting" past at the Second Vatican Council, a senior cardinal has said.

In a speech given last week at Clifton Cathedral in Bristol and St George's Cathedral in Southwark, south London, Cardinal Godfried Danneels said that Vatican II represented a "discontinuity with past thinking" comparable to that at the Council of Nicaea in AD 325, when the Nicaean Creed was formulated.

Lionel: How can Vatican Council break away from the past unless the cardinal is assuming that in the text of the Council, every time there is a reference to a non Catholic saved, it is of a person known to us , and so this is an exception to the dogmas and tradition in general.

No where in Nostra Aetate is it said that non Catholics do not have to convert into the Church for salvation or that they are saved in general in their religion. Instead Nostra Aetate 4 says Catholics are the new people of God.

Vatican Council II also indicates that all non Catholics need faith and baptism for salvation(AG7). This is in agreement with the dogma on exclusive salvation. There are no known exceptions.LG 16 does not contradict AG 7.


So the cardinal can only mention 'the spirit of Vatican Council II' he cannot cite text from the Council which shows that it is a break from the past especially with reference to the other religions.

In Southwark, where he was speaking, the bishops and priests assume that the baptism of desire is a known exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

According to their Vocations Director, candidates with a religious vocation have to accept that the dead, visible and saved with the baptism of desire, are very visible to them all.

They have to believe this irrationality,according to the Vocation Director, since Fr.Leonard Feeney according to him, was excommunicated for denying the baptism of desire. In other words, Fr.leonard Feeney said that  he could not see the dead saved with the baptism of desire, who are exceptions to the traditional literal interpretation of the dogma .So they excommunicated him.The cardinals who issued the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 could see these cases.

Blogger Fr.Tim Finnigan, from Southwark also affirms this irrationality.Perhaps it is expected of him by the Archbishop of Southwark, Peter Smith. This is also the position of the Conference of Catholic Bishops of England and Wales.

Similar to Archbishop Peter Smith, Cardinal Daneels, could be making the same error as the bishops and priests of the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) and so they all assume that the Council is modernist and a break with the past.

The report continues.

His remarks however appear to conflict with Pope Benedict XVI's analysis that the Council should be understood as reform within continuity. The Pope has also criticised the "hermenuetic of discontinuity" as an analysis of Vatican II.

Lionel: If one uses the false premise of the dead saved being visible to us, then there has to be a hermeneutic of discontinuity.

The Belgian cardinal was speaking as part of lecture series in both dioceses to mark the start of the Year of Faith.

Lionel: In the Year of the Faith it is alleged that we can see the dead who are saved and who visible here on earth. They are not only exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus but  even Vatican Council II (LG 16 etc) is a break from the dogma, the Syllabus and the rest of Tradition.

Danneels, who was present as an expert at the Second Vatican Council in 1962, told audiences that the council had demonstrated that the Church's traditions and practices "need not necessarily remain that [unchangeable] way for eternity".

Lionel: They have changed obviously because a new premise has been accepted by the liberals and traditionalists.-Lionel Andrades

1.

http://www.thetablet.co.uk/latest-news/4706
http://www.rcsouthwark.co.uk/yof_card_danneels_lecture.pdf
http://www.rcsouthwark.co.uk/

 

 

 

 https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2012/10/cardinal-danneels-assume-that-vatican.html

Repost : FOR CARDINAL GODFRIED DANNEELS VATICAN COUNCIL II SAYS THERE IS KNOWN SALVATION OUTSIDE THE CHURCH SO IT IS A BREAK FROM THE PAST

October 27, 2012

FOR CARDINAL GODFRIED DANNEELS VATICAN COUNCIL II SAYS THERE IS KNOWN SALVATION OUTSIDE THE CHURCH SO IT IS A BREAK FROM THE PAST

At his talk in Southwark,England this month Cardinal Godfried Daneels made a wrong assumption.For him the  text of Vatican Council II is a break with the past. It says there is known salvation outside the Catholic Church. So this must contradict Tradition.Every reference to a non Catholic saved is a case of a known person dead, saved but now visible to him. So this is a break from the past.He can see these deceased who are exceptions to the dogma on salvation and the Syllabus of Errors.

This is irrational and there is no text in the Council to support the cardinal.Let us analyse the text briefly.

LUMEN GENTIUM

Lumen Gentium states non Catholics need to convert into the Church (LG 14).

14. This Sacred Council wishes to turn its attention firstly to the Catholic faithful. Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church. (emphasis added)

This is the same message as Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II. Those saved in invincible ignorance or the 'seeds of the word'(AG ) are not known exceptions to AG 7 and LG 14.

So when LG 14 also says the following and it is not contradictory.It is not a known exception.

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.-Lumen Gentium 14.

The above passage is not an exception to the earlier part of LG 14 on the necessity of the Church for salvation.

We do not know any case in 2012 of someone 'knowing that the Catholic Church was ....' and who refused to enter or remain in it and was saved or not saved. Since we cannot judge or know, this is a non issue. It does not contradict the earlier part of LG 14 (or AG 7) which says faith and baptism are needed for all for salvation.

For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, Himself a man, Jesus Christ, who gave Himself as a ransom for all" (1 Tim. 2:45), "neither is there salvation in any other" (Acts 4:12). Therefore, all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church's preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door. -Ad Gentes 7. (emphasis added)

So Vatican Council II (AG 7,LG 14) is in agreement with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.Lumen Gentium is not a break with the past as the cardinal suggests.If we could judge,if we knew who is saved in invincible ignorance etc then it would be break with the past. It would contradict the dogma.

NOSTRA AETATE

Nostra Aetate does not state that non Catholics are saved in general in their religion.Neither does it state that non Catholics do not have to convert into the Catholic Church for salvation.We do not know any 'good and holy' non Catholic in 2012 who is saved.

So Nostra Aetate does not contradict AG 7 and LG 14.Nor does it contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus or the Syllabus of Errors.It is not a break with the past since there are no known exceptions.That a good and holy non Catholic can be saved and this would be known only to God is not a problem. It is not a break with the past because these unknown to us cases in the present times are  irrelevant to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney.They are irrelevant because they are unknown.

DIGNITATIS HUMANAE

Dignitatis Humanae mentions that in a society with a secular Constitution a non Catholic has religious liberty. One cannot physically or legally oppose his freedom of religion.Morally, for a Catholic, outside the church there is no salvation, all need faith and baptism for salvation (AG 7).A non Catholic has an obligation to enter the Church and to remain in it for salvation.Morally he does not have religious liberty.

Among the non Catholics saved who knows and does not know will be decided by God.We cannot judge.This does not contradict AG 7 or LG 14.

So when it is clear that Vatican Council II (AG 7) is in agreement with the dogma on salvation and that LG 16,NA etc do not contradict AG 7 then we Catholics have the religious right according to our Faith, to proclaim Vatican Council II(Dignitatis Humanae) (2)  in agreement with the dogma on salvation. We have the moral right because of our Catholic Faith to say other religions are not paths to salvation. We have a moral right to say non Catholics are on the way to Hell unless they convert into the Catholic Church.

So Vatican Council II is not a break with the past.

For Cardinal Danneels Vatican Council II is a break with the past because:

1) There is known salvation outside the Catholic Church according to Vatican Council II. There is known salvation since the dead saved in invincible ignorance etc are visible to him and so are exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

2) Since there is known salvation outside the Catholic Church Nostra Aetate, Lumen Gentium, Dignitatis Humane etc contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Syllabus of Errors and Tradition in general.

3) Even if in principle (hypothetically) there can be salvation outside the church  for Cardinal Gottfried Danneels, defacto (explictly) we do not know any case. He does not know any such case.So when Vatican Council II refers to de jure (in principle) cases of non Catholics being saved it is not a break with the past but an agreement with Tradition.

Once these errors are corrected Vatican Council II is traditional and in agreement with the past.

-Lionel Andrades

1.http://www.rcsouthwark.co.uk/yof_card_danneels_lecture.pdf

http://www.rcsouthwark.co.uk/

2.

14. In order to be faithful to the divine command, "teach all nations" (Matt. 28:19-20), the Catholic Church must work with all urgency and concern "that the word of God be spread abroad and glorified" (2 Thess. 3:1). Hence the Church earnestly begs of its children that, "first of all, supplications, prayers, petitions, acts of thanksgiving be made for all men.... For this is good and agreeable in the sight of God our Savior, who wills that all men be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth" (1 Tim. 2:1-4). In the formation of their consciences, the Christian faithful ought carefully to attend to the sacred and certain doctrine of the Church.(35) For the Church is, by the will of Christ, the teacher of the truth. It is her duty to give utterance to, and authoritatively to teach, that truth which is Christ Himself, and also to declare and confirm by her authority those principles of the moral order which have their origins in human nature itself. Furthermore, let Christians walk in wisdom in the face of those outside, "in the Holy Spirit, in unaffected love, in the word of truth" (2 Cor. 6:6-7), and let them be about their task of spreading the light of life with all confidence(36) and apostolic courage, even to the shedding of their blood.

The disciple is bound by a grave obligation toward Christ, his Master, ever more fully to understand the truth received from Him, faithfully to proclaim it, and vigorously to defend it, never-be it understood-having recourse to means that are incompatible with the spirit of the Gospel. At the same time, the charity of Christ urges him to love and have prudence and patience in his dealings with those who are in error or in ignorance with regard to the faith.(37) All is to be taken into account-the Christian duty to Christ, the life-giving word which must be proclaimed, the rights of the human person, and the measure of grace granted by God through Christ to men who are invited freely to accept and profess the faith.-Dignitatis Humanae

http://www.rcsouthwark.co.uk/yof_card_danneels_lecture.pdf

http://www.rcsouthwark.co.uk/

 

 https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2012/10/for-cardinal-gottfried-danneels-vatican.html