At least some of the Council Fathers at Vatican Council II
assumed invisible cases of the baptism of desire(BOD) and invincible
ignorance(I.I) were physically visible exceptions to Feeneyite extra ecclesiam
nulla salus (EENS) and so they wrongly thought, or wanted to think, that there was known salvation
outside the Church in 1965.So the traditional strict interpretation of the
dogma EENS had become obsolete for them.But now we know that BOD and I.I are always
invisible.Always.But in 1965 the excommunication of Fr. Leonard Feeney was not
lifted.The popes were still saying that BOD and I.I were not invisible cases.
There was a new theology in the Church .It would claim that
every one did not need to be a formal member of the Catholic Church for
salvation.Since BOD and I.I were explicit and objective cases for them.The
Letter of the Holy Office 1949(LOHO) to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr. Leonard Feeney states that not every one needs to be a formal
member of the Catholic Church.Cardinal Cushing the Archbishop of Boston
approved the Letter. He was then active at Vatican Council II.He too was saying that BOD and I.I were not invisible cases. If they were invisible cases then he and the Jesuits could not say that there were exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.Cushing removed Fr. Leonard Feeney's priestly faculties and the Jesuits expelled him from the community. Boston College expelled him along with other Catholic professors.So this was something important at that time.
Cardinal Cushing gave us much of Nostra Aetate and in principle
assumed hypothetical cases were objective exceptions to EENS. This was a new
salvation doctrine in the Church.We still have EENS with exceptions.
So Lumen Gentium 14 says not every one needs to enter the Church
but only those who know about Jesus and the Church.Those who know and do not
enter will go to Hell.Those who are in invincible ignorance and do not ‘know’
could be saved.Being saved in invincible ignorance was an explicit case for them.So the Council indicated that the Orthodox Christians, saved in
their religion, and with no need to convert, are ‘particular churches’, in the
Catholic Church.This error comes from the now common false premise and New
Theology of LOHO and Vatican Council II.It is accepted by the popes.
They make the same mistake with Lumen Gentium 8,’subsists in’,It is as
if there are physically visible non Catholics saved outside the Church
allegedly who are known.This is fantasy.We do not know who is saved where the
true Church subsists outside the visible boundaries of the Catholic Church.This is fantasy theology.
Similarly we cannot know of someone saved outside the Church,
without faith and baptism, but instead with ‘elements of sanctification and
truth’ in other religions (LG 8) or goodwill (GS 22).This could only be known to God if it happened.
But Pope Francis and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the
Faith(CDF) accept this false reasoning and so Traditionis Custode mentions
particular churches.
Pope Francis could want the Orthodox Christians, Evangelicals
and Lutherans to be considered ‘particular
churches’ in the Catholic Church.So the traditionalists ,who do not accept
the conclusion of Vatican Council II interpreted with the fake premise, are an
obstacle.
Vatican Council II has an objective error from the LOHO so in this sense it cannot be Magisterial.However if the Council is interpreted without the error, without the false premise, the Council is in harmony with the past Magisterium on their being exclusive salvation in only the Catholic Church.The Council would be in harmony with the Tradition of the traditionalists.-Lionel Andrades
No comments:
Post a Comment