The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) does not proclaim the Faith on exclusive salvation in the Church instead it is deceptively changing the teaching by using a false premise, inference and non traditional conclusion.For political reasons the traditionalists, conservative and liberal Catholics are going along with the public error.This is a scandal.
With the use of the false premise- to reject the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS), the CDF changes the meaning of the Creeds ( Athanasius, Apostles, Nicene), the Catechisms and Vatican Council II. So heresy is the norm in the Church. There is division with the popes over the centuries before the 1930's, who did not need to use the false premise to change doctrine and dogma.This is official schism.
A 'new revelation' is brought into the Church which the secular media calls 'the revolution of Vatican Council II'.
They do not mention that without the false premise, Vatican Council II supports exclusive salvation in the Church with Ad Gentes 7 - while there are no exceptions to Ad Gentes 7 mentioned in Vatican Council II( unless one is using the false premise to interpret LG 8, LG 16 etc).
The CDF cardinal and archbishops remain in office with the convenient lie which they uphold in public.
There is no revolution with Vatican Council II without the false premise.
There is no new revelation with Vatican Council II without the false premise. They need the false premise to create a new and special revelation in the Catholic Church.
There is no rupture with the past in Vatican Council II without the false premise.
There is no more CDF schism without the false premise.
It was Pope Benedict who interpreted Vatican Council II with the false premise and created schism with the pre-Vatican Council II popes. Then he wanted the Society of St.Pius X(SSPX) to do the same for canonical recognition.He said the issue is doctrine! Meanwhile the secular media accused the SSPX of being in schism and Pope Benedict supported the charge with his silence.
He did not tell the SSPX, that they could interpret Vatican Council II without the false premise and there would be no schism and they would be recognised canonically. Instead he supported the Masonic agenda as the Prefect of the CDF.
There will no more be a CDF schism in the Church without the false premise. A clarificatioin is needed from the Vatican choosing no more to use the false premise to interpret Magisterial documents.
Religious communities must not be forced to support the deception for canonical recognition. Neither must vocations be accepted only from candidates who agree to interpret Vatican Council II with the irrationality.
Archbishop Guido Pozzo and Archbishop Augustine Di Noia must comment on this artificial 'hermeneutic of rupture'. The would say that Vatican Council II has a hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition. So let them now confirm it with a public announcement, with reference to what I have written.Is there is a continuity with the traditional teaching on exlucive salvation in the Catholic Church? Will they not use the false premise any more ?'-Lionel Andrades
_____________________________
REPOST
MARCH 9, 2019
Liberal Bishop Schneider does a great PR job for himself
The Pope explicitly stated that Bishop Schneider could share the contents of their exchange on this point. “You can say that the phrase in question on the diversity of religions means the permissive will of God,” he told the assembled bishops, who come from predominantly Muslim regions.
The auxiliary of Astana in turn asked the Pope to officially clarify the statement in the Abu Dhabi document 1
The Holy Father has criticized triumphalism and this was confirmed by Cardinal Luiz Ladaria at the Placquet Deo Press Conference when he indicated that the Catholic Church no more claims an exclusiveness and superiority in salvation. This was also confirmed by Pope Benedict in 2016 (Avvenire) when he said that extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) was no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century. Like Cardinal Ladaria, Pope Benedict was saying Lumen Gentium 8 (elements of sanctification and truth) etc were objective examples of salvation outside the Church in the present times. So for them LG 8 etc referred to practical exceptions to the traditional interpretation of EENS.There was no triumphalism any more for them too.
So at the Abu Dhabi meeting Pope Francis did not state that non Catholics, in this case Muslims, need to convert into the Catholic Church for salvation, since the dogma EENS was superseded for him with objective and personally visible cases, mentioned in Vatican Council II.
He was on the same wavelength as Bishop Athanasius Schneider who interprets LG 8, LG 16 etc as referring to personally known non Catholics saved outside the Church for us human beings. So for him, they are exceptions to the traditional interpretation of EENS. Similarly he does not affirm Feeneyite EENS since invisible cases of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance are physically visible exceptions to the centuries- old interpretation of EENS. This is also the understanding of the SSPX and the traditionalists in general, with the exception of the St. Benedict Center, in New Hampshire, USA.
Since traditional EENS is rejected by Pope Francis, Pope Benedict and Bishop Schneider, there can no more an ecumenism of return for them. Unitatitis Redintigratio 3 in Vatican Council II, would refer to known Protestants, or other Christians, saved outside the Church. They would be exceptions to the past exclusivist ecclesiology, the past triumphalism. So Bishop Schneider and Fr. Davide Pagliarani, the new Superior General of the Society of St. Pius X, supported an ecumenical Christ, with a Christian Theology of Religious Pluralism and Salvation, which Pope John Paul II officially rejected (Notification, CDF ,Dupuis 2001, Ecclesia di Asia, Ecclesia de Eucharistia etc).
With all this heresy and irrational interpretation of Magisterial documents, including the Nicene Creed and Apostles Creed,a rupture with Tradition is created. This is a mortal sin of faith. They are rejecting( by changing the meaning with a false premise) de fide teachings which are obligatory for all Catholics to believe and affirm in public.
They are really saying that God in his permissive will, permits salvation outside the Church, which is personally known to them and human beings in general. They are saying that God permits known exceptions to the dogma EENS as it was taught to the Church by the Holy Spirit over the centuries. They are saying that God has permitted the Nicene Creed to have a new meaning over the last 70 or more years.For them we must interpret the past Catechisms , as referring to known and personally known cases of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance.
So inter faith marriages are no more adultery since there is personally known salvation outside the Church for Bishop Schneider too.A Catholic who marries a Protestant or Muslim is not living in adultery for the ecclesiastics and the popes.This is the praxis of the new doctrines on salvation.This is the new pastoral approach in mission in which non Catholics do not have to convert into the Catholic Church to avoid Hell.
These points were not brought out by LifeSites News in the interview with Bishop Schneider who still comes across as a liberal like the present two popes. He is a modernist.He supports gnosticism. The bishop will not clearly say that all Protestants, Jews. Muslims etc in 2019 are oriented to Hell and there are no practical exceptions. They must enter the Catholic Church with Catholic Faith.He is indifferent. Theologically he supports syncretism, he is saying there is known salvation in other religions and these are exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So there is no more traditional mission.Inter faith marriages are acceptable.The Profession of Faith with the Nicene Creed, no more has the same meaning as in the 16th century. He believes in three or more known baptisms outside the Church(desire, blood, invincible ignorance) which exclude the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
So he remains a bishop in good standing with the pope. The CDF does not tell him that he legally is not a Catholic.There is a picture of him smiling with the pope. Diane Montagne lets him off the hook with a non controversial and harmless issue like - does God in his permissive will allow non Catholic religions. It was a fruitcake question for the pope.
The difficult questions related to Vatican Council II not being a rupture with the pope's understanding of triumphalism was not asked. She did not mention that Vatican Council II itself supports triumphalism with Ad Gentes ( all need faith and baptism for salvation) and with LG 8 not being an objective exception.
She did not ask if Pope Benedict (Avvenire) and Cardinal Ladaria(Placquet Deo) made an objective mistake.
It was a great PR job for Bishop Schneider and probably one of amusement for Pope Francis, seeing that a critic had come onto his side.He supports the political Left on salvation.They tell the Vatican what Catholic theology is acceptable for them.-Lionel Andrades
1
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/bishop-schneider-extracts-clarification-on-diversity-of-religions-from-pope-francis-brands-abuse-summit-a-failure
____________________________________
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment