They all say say there are no physically visible cases of the baptism of desire(BOD),baptism of blood (BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I) in 2020. This has big implications. They all say like me that there are no physically visible cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in real life. This is something obvious, in Vatican Council II for me.It is common sense. Modernists and traditionalists agree with me. Invisible cases of LG 8 etc are invisible. What we cannot see- we cannot see.
This is my premise when I discuss Vatican Council II. Invisible cases are just invisible. Unknown non Catholics are un- seen objectively.
So far so good when I discuss this issue. Every body agrees with me here.
But then people beome uncomfortable. They realize thy had all along made a mistake. The whole Church has made a mistake. Everyone makes this mistake. They all interpret Vatican Council II assuming LG 8, LG 14, LG 16,UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc are real and visible people in 1965-2020.They mix up what is invisible as being visible . So the New Theology is outside the Church there is known salvation.
This was how Pope Paul VI and Archbishop Lefebvre interpreted Vatican Council II.
This was how Pope Pius XII and Archbishop Lefebvre interpreted extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS). It was EENS with exceptions. Known exceptions.
The popes since then have made the same mistake.
So it is here where I am correcting every body. I interpret 1) EENS 2) BOD, BOB and I.I and 3) Vatican Council II without confusing what is invisible as being visible.
In two theological papers of the International Theological Commission, Vatican, LG 16, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II are mentioned as contradicting Feeneyite EENS. But there is no contradiction for me.Since LG 16 etc refer to only hypothetical and speculative cases. They cannot be exceptions.
But for Cardinal Ratzinger, Fr.Luiz Ladaria sj and Fr Charles Morerod op at the ITC,LG 16 etc are mistaken as visible people saved outside the Church. Known people.Known non Catholics saved outside the Church.Otherwise how could there be exceptions to Feeneyite EENS? An exception has to exist and be known. Invisible people cannot be exceptions.
The premise for the ITC is invisible cases of LG 8, LG 16, GS 22 etc are visible . Only in this way Vatican Council II could contradict the strict interpretation of EENS.They needed the false premise. The false premise is the basis of the New Theology.
So the new inference became outside the Church there is salvation.There is known salvation.This was the new theology of Congar, Cushing, Rahner, Ratzinger, Bea and Murray.They mentioned UR 3,LG 8, LG 16 etc in the text of the Council.All exceptions to EENS for them.
This is the new revelation in the Church. A division with the past popes on EENS. A development of doctrine based upon a false premise, inference and conclusion.
It means, for Catholics, in general, there are exceptions to John 3:5 which says all need the baptism of water for salvation. Known exceptions to Jesus' teaching?!
There are exceptions to the Nicene Creed. We pray, 'one baptism for the forgiveness of sins'. For me it is one known baptism, the baptism of water, which is visible and repeatable.It is not three or more baptisms, which exclude the baptism of water.The baptism of desire is not visible. It cannot be given. It cannot be repeated.
So since there exceptions to EENS for the ITC, Cardinal Ratzinger, Cardinal Ladaria and Bishop Morerod contradict the Nicene Creed.
What is it for you? This is the stuff of first class heresy.
For them there are also exceptions to the Athanasius Creed which says all need Catholic faith for salvation.The false premise, creates here too.
I do not like to say it -but just about every one is in heresy, except for me.
For me there are no visible cases of LG 8 etc.So there can be no real exception to the past teaching on outside the Church there is no salvation.
If someone was saved outside the Church it would only be known to God.Here too every one agrees with me.
It is not enough for Fr. Thomas Weinandy to write on the four marks of the Church. He has also to clarify if he interprets Vatican Council II, EENS and BOD, BOB and I.I with or without the invisible-people-are-visible prmise.With or without the New Theology.
With the New Theology, Catholics are in schism with the past popes on EENS, Atanasius Creed...?
Is this not all a mortal sin of faith? Magisterial documents are interpreted with a false premise, inference and non traditional conclusion.
Would this not be an impediment to offering Holy Mass for a priest ? Holy Mass in English or Latin. Since ecclesiology has been changed with a false premise. The issue never ever was liturgy.
Today for the liberals of the Bologna School and the traditionalists of the Society of St. Pius X, invisible people are visible.This is how they read Vatican Council II, ' the red is not an exception to the blue'( See right hand bar for details).I repeat, this is how they read Vatican Council II, 'the red is an exception to the blue' For me there are only orthodox passages in Vatican Council II and 'the hypothetical ones' do not contradict the orthodox passages.So 'the red is not an exception to the blue' for me.Vatican Council II does not contradict itself.
The confusion comes from the Boston Heresy Case.It was Richard Cushing, the Archbishop of Boston, who was in heresy.The Jesuit priest was correct.There are no baptism of desire cases literally.They do not exist for us human beings.There is no de facto baptism of desire case. There were none in 1949 for Fr. Leonard Feeney and the professors dismissed by Boston College.
But for Cardinal Ladaria at the Placquet Deo Press Conference (March 2016), LG 8 was an exception to EENS. Watch the video. See how he answers the question from the Associated Press reporter.
There were exceptions for Cardinal Muller , when Edward Pentin asked him about EENS. LG 14 referred to visible cases in the present times,non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance, for him.
There were exceptions for Archbishop Augustine di Noia. He told the National Catholic Register that he knew of an Anglican priest who would go to Heaven. Possibly he would be able to see Martin Luther in Heaven, without Catholic faith.
It's not just the liberals at the Vatican. Even the Lepanto Foundation,Una Voce and the Latin Mass Societies,interpret Vatican Council II with exceptions to EENS.They use the New Theology of Rahner and Ratzinger.The foundation of the New Theology is : BOD, BOB and I.I are exceptions to EENS. Without this false premise there is no concept of 'traditionalist' and 'progressivist'.Since the ecclesiology of the Catholic Church would be the same before and after Vatican Council II.-Lionel Andrades
This is my premise when I discuss Vatican Council II. Invisible cases are just invisible. Unknown non Catholics are un- seen objectively.
So far so good when I discuss this issue. Every body agrees with me here.
But then people beome uncomfortable. They realize thy had all along made a mistake. The whole Church has made a mistake. Everyone makes this mistake. They all interpret Vatican Council II assuming LG 8, LG 14, LG 16,UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc are real and visible people in 1965-2020.They mix up what is invisible as being visible . So the New Theology is outside the Church there is known salvation.
This was how Pope Paul VI and Archbishop Lefebvre interpreted Vatican Council II.
This was how Pope Pius XII and Archbishop Lefebvre interpreted extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS). It was EENS with exceptions. Known exceptions.
The popes since then have made the same mistake.
So it is here where I am correcting every body. I interpret 1) EENS 2) BOD, BOB and I.I and 3) Vatican Council II without confusing what is invisible as being visible.
In two theological papers of the International Theological Commission, Vatican, LG 16, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II are mentioned as contradicting Feeneyite EENS. But there is no contradiction for me.Since LG 16 etc refer to only hypothetical and speculative cases. They cannot be exceptions.
But for Cardinal Ratzinger, Fr.Luiz Ladaria sj and Fr Charles Morerod op at the ITC,LG 16 etc are mistaken as visible people saved outside the Church. Known people.Known non Catholics saved outside the Church.Otherwise how could there be exceptions to Feeneyite EENS? An exception has to exist and be known. Invisible people cannot be exceptions.
The premise for the ITC is invisible cases of LG 8, LG 16, GS 22 etc are visible . Only in this way Vatican Council II could contradict the strict interpretation of EENS.They needed the false premise. The false premise is the basis of the New Theology.
So the new inference became outside the Church there is salvation.There is known salvation.This was the new theology of Congar, Cushing, Rahner, Ratzinger, Bea and Murray.They mentioned UR 3,LG 8, LG 16 etc in the text of the Council.All exceptions to EENS for them.
This is the new revelation in the Church. A division with the past popes on EENS. A development of doctrine based upon a false premise, inference and conclusion.
It means, for Catholics, in general, there are exceptions to John 3:5 which says all need the baptism of water for salvation. Known exceptions to Jesus' teaching?!
There are exceptions to the Nicene Creed. We pray, 'one baptism for the forgiveness of sins'. For me it is one known baptism, the baptism of water, which is visible and repeatable.It is not three or more baptisms, which exclude the baptism of water.The baptism of desire is not visible. It cannot be given. It cannot be repeated.
So since there exceptions to EENS for the ITC, Cardinal Ratzinger, Cardinal Ladaria and Bishop Morerod contradict the Nicene Creed.
What is it for you? This is the stuff of first class heresy.
For them there are also exceptions to the Athanasius Creed which says all need Catholic faith for salvation.The false premise, creates here too.
I do not like to say it -but just about every one is in heresy, except for me.
For me there are no visible cases of LG 8 etc.So there can be no real exception to the past teaching on outside the Church there is no salvation.
If someone was saved outside the Church it would only be known to God.Here too every one agrees with me.
It is not enough for Fr. Thomas Weinandy to write on the four marks of the Church. He has also to clarify if he interprets Vatican Council II, EENS and BOD, BOB and I.I with or without the invisible-people-are-visible prmise.With or without the New Theology.
With the New Theology, Catholics are in schism with the past popes on EENS, Atanasius Creed...?
Is this not all a mortal sin of faith? Magisterial documents are interpreted with a false premise, inference and non traditional conclusion.
Would this not be an impediment to offering Holy Mass for a priest ? Holy Mass in English or Latin. Since ecclesiology has been changed with a false premise. The issue never ever was liturgy.
Today for the liberals of the Bologna School and the traditionalists of the Society of St. Pius X, invisible people are visible.This is how they read Vatican Council II, ' the red is not an exception to the blue'( See right hand bar for details).I repeat, this is how they read Vatican Council II, 'the red is an exception to the blue' For me there are only orthodox passages in Vatican Council II and 'the hypothetical ones' do not contradict the orthodox passages.So 'the red is not an exception to the blue' for me.Vatican Council II does not contradict itself.
The confusion comes from the Boston Heresy Case.It was Richard Cushing, the Archbishop of Boston, who was in heresy.The Jesuit priest was correct.There are no baptism of desire cases literally.They do not exist for us human beings.There is no de facto baptism of desire case. There were none in 1949 for Fr. Leonard Feeney and the professors dismissed by Boston College.
But for Cardinal Ladaria at the Placquet Deo Press Conference (March 2016), LG 8 was an exception to EENS. Watch the video. See how he answers the question from the Associated Press reporter.
There were exceptions for Cardinal Muller , when Edward Pentin asked him about EENS. LG 14 referred to visible cases in the present times,non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance, for him.
There were exceptions for Archbishop Augustine di Noia. He told the National Catholic Register that he knew of an Anglican priest who would go to Heaven. Possibly he would be able to see Martin Luther in Heaven, without Catholic faith.
It's not just the liberals at the Vatican. Even the Lepanto Foundation,Una Voce and the Latin Mass Societies,interpret Vatican Council II with exceptions to EENS.They use the New Theology of Rahner and Ratzinger.The foundation of the New Theology is : BOD, BOB and I.I are exceptions to EENS. Without this false premise there is no concept of 'traditionalist' and 'progressivist'.Since the ecclesiology of the Catholic Church would be the same before and after Vatican Council II.-Lionel Andrades
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment