The Apologist Joe Six-pack mentions the indefectibility of the pope and the Four Marks of the Church. But Pope Pius XII made a mistake in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949(LOHO).
There are no
explicit cases of St. Thomas Aquinas explicit baptism of desire said Dr.Taylor Marshall.
There are no literal cases of the baptism of desire agreed Bishop Athanasius Schneider.
But for the LOHO, BOD is an exception for Feeneyite EENS.Not everyone needs to
enter the Church for salvation says the LOHO placed in the Denzinger and
referenced in Vatican Council II (LG 16). This is the mistake the popes from Pius XII have made on extra ecclesiam nulla salus( EENS) an ex cathedra teaching.
Now we have two interpretations of Vatican Council II with the baptism of desire(LG 14) being an exception for EENS and so a visible case 2) and for Bishop Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshall they are invisible and not literal cases.
It is a visible case for
the popes from Paul VI and invisible for Schneider and Taylor.
The baptism of desire is
invisible in 2021. Of course, this is obvious. It is common sense.
So we have two
interpretations of Vatican Council II in the Church with the Four Marks (one,
holy, Catholic and Apostolic).There is a baptism of desire visible and
invisible, known and unknown, literal and not literal, explicit and implicit.
How can both positions
be apostolic?
The indefectibility of
the pope? Infallibility on the Nicene Creed and extra ecclesiam nulla salus?
The Athanasius Creed
says everyone needs to enter the Catholic Church as a member and the Letter of
the Holy Office 1949 denies this and says not everyone needs to do so.
The same in its own degree must be asserted of the Church;
in as far as she is the general help to salvation. Therefore, that one may
obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated
into the Church actually as a member, but it is necessary that at least he be
united to her by desire and longing.-Athanasius Creed
Whosoever will be
saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith. Which
faith unless every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall
perish everlastingly. -Letter of the Holy Office 1949
Which of the two is correct? Which of the two is Magisterial?
One has to be correct and the other wrong.
So one pope at some time was wrong.
Pope Francis in Traditionis Custode says that Vatican
Council II is inspired by the Holy Spirit. He is referring to Vatican Council
II with LG 14 (BOD) being visible.
Where are the cases of BOD in 2021? There are none.
For the missionaries and Magisterium in the 16th
century EENS had no exceptions. For Pope Francis and Pope Benedict EENS has
exceptions.
For Cardinal Ladaria and the CDF invisible cases of
being saved in invincible ignorance (CCC 847-848) are exceptions for EENS and the Athanasius Creed.
So what is invisible is projected as being visible and
exceptions are created for EENS.
This is irrational and it contradicts the past
Magisterium inspired by the Holy Spirit. This is Traditionis Custode of Pope
Francis too.
This is not Catholic it is political.
A bishop has a moral obligation to interpret Vatican Council II rationally and traditionally and not schismatically. The
interpretation of Vatican Council II by Traditionis Custode is irrational, nontraditional and
schismatic.
Bishops must correct the error of Traditionis Custode
by affirming Vatican Council II in harmony with the strict interpretation of
EENS and the exclusivist ecclesiology of the Roman Missal in 1580.
We Catholics have a right to follow the popes before the 1940’s who did not use the false premise for political reasons.-Lionel Andrades
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment