The religious community Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary,at the St. Benedict Center, Richmond, New Hampshire, USA are mentioned in the legal suit filed by Fr.Georges de Laire against Michael Voris.They also cite the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).
The problem emerged after Fr. Georges de
Laire, Judicial Vicar of the Diocese of Manchester and pastor, issued a Decree
of Prohibitions against the religious
community at the St.Benedict Center(SBC), for holding the traditional strict interpretation of the
dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Michael Voris went to New Hampshire and interviewed Brother
Andre Marie MICM, Prior, at the SBC.Fr.Georges de Laire did not want to talk about the theology of the issue and be interviewed by Michael Voris.
The Congregation for the Doctrine of the
Faith, Vatican, for whom also the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood (BOB) and being
saved in invincible ignorance(I.I), are exceptions for the strict
interpretation of the dogma EENS,
supported Fr. Georges de Laire.For the CDF invisible and unknown cases of being saved in invincible ignorance ( CCC 847-848 ) are objective and practical exceptions for the strict interpretation of EENS.
So the defendents may now ask Judge Joseph A. Diclerico Jr., if for him too BOD, BOB and I.I are exceptions for EENS ? Or are they only hypothetical ? Are there objective cases in New Hampshire in 2021 for him ?
Of course he could not know of any one saved with, for example, with the baptism of desire and without the baptism of water, since the person saved would be in Heaven and not on earth. Even references in Vatican Council II to LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, etc, can only be theoretical for the judge.They can only be speculative and hypothetical.So there can be no practical exceptions for EENS and there are none mentioned in Vatican Council II.
So the Judge would have to affirm EENS like the SBC and not the CDF and Fr. Georges de Laire.This point has a direct bearing on the professional competence of Fr. Laire.
If Fr. Georges de Laire considers BOD, BOB and I.I as being objective cases in 2021 then his objective reality is not that of the average person in New Hampshire.He should not judge marriage cases, at the diocesan tribunal.Someone who believes invisible people( saved outside the Catholic Church) in New Hampshire are visible in general and then makes irrational conclusions, is not competent.
Similary if BOD BOB and I.I and LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, GS 22 etc, are not objective cases then he affirms the same strict interpretation of EENS as the SBC? But he has issued a Decree of Prohibitions upon the SBC,for holding the strict interpretation of EENS.
The Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary at the St. Benedict Center, N.H accept the BOD and I.I as being hypothetical only. So they do not have to reject them. BOD and I.I are not practical exceptions for the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS. It is the same with Vatican Council II ( LG 8 etc). The SBC does not have to choose between BOD,BOB and I.I and EENS.It is not either-or.
But it is either-or for Fr.Georges de Laire.He has to choose between BOD and EENS. Since BOD, BOB and I.I are exceptions for EENS.If there were no exceptions he would be affirming EENS like Fr. Leonard Feeney.
But there are exceptions for him. So he implies that BOD, BOB and I.I are objective cases fpr them to be practical examples of salvation outside the Church.
But who among as can see or meet non Catholics saved with BOD and I.I on earth, who among us can see or meet exceptions for EENS ?
The CDF and Fr. Georges de Laire have imposed a Decree of Prohibitions on the SBC for not interpreting the dogma EENS and Vatican Council II with the common false premise (invisible people are visible in 2021). The SBC refuses to confuse invisible people( saved with the baptism of desire etc) as being visible ( literal and visible cases of the baptism of desire in 2021) and then suggest that there are objective examples of salvation in the present times, outside the Church( saved with the baptism of desire for example and without Catholic faith and the baptism of water). So they are being coerced with the Decree to accept the irrational premise, inference and non traditional conclusion, which is official for the CDF and the Diocese of Manchester.
The CDF Secretaries Archbishops Giacomo Morandi and Augustine Di Noia, confuse what is invisible as being physically visible.This is politically correct for them.So even the Catechism of Pope Pius X would contradict itself for them. Since 29Q ( invincible ignorance) would contradict 24 Q and 27 Q ( outside the Church there is no salvation). They would also have to interpret the Creeds, Catechisms and Vatican Council II with the same irrationality.
So traditional EENS, though Magisterial is shelved.There is the 'nuanced' understanding of EENS and Vatican Council II which the CDF wants Brother Andre Marie to accept.This is dishonest and unethical.
SUMMARY
1.If Fr.Georges de Laire considers BOD, BOB and I.I as being objective cases in 2021 then his concept of reality is not that of the average person in New Hampshire.He should not judge marriage cases in the diocesan tribunal.He is not competent. Someone who believes invisible cases of the BOD, BOB and I.I are physically visible and then makes non traditional conclusions is not rational.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment