Friday, March 6, 2015

Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict also used the false premise and conclusion from the Letter of the Holy Office 1949

Comments from a previous blogpost.1

Vox Cantorius is spot on correct. How many years have you been rebuked on your private interpretations?
Sorry they are not private revelations.
I affirm Vatican Council II, except that I do not use the irrational premise and conclusion in the interpretation.


The catechism of the catholic Church is part of VCII and not in contradiction of VCII.
I interpret the Catechism and Vatican Council II without the false premise and conclusion.
You do not make this distinction.


You are systematically trying to drag even the most holy of Catholics down with your erroneous conclusions.
I am affirming the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus which does not mention any exceptions.
The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 was a break with the dogma and the Syllabus of Errors.
The magisterium accepted this break with Tradition. It was a new doctrine brought into the Catholic Church.
The break was possible because an irrational inference was used.No one identified it.
The same irrtionality is used to interpret Vatican Council II as a break with traditional teaching.
We have a choice.
We can use the irrational premise or avoid.
I assert my choice. I avoid it.


What is next for you Saint John Paul II when as part of VCII he said in in his encyclical Redemptoris Missio:
Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict I have pointed out in many blogposts also used the false premise and conclusion from the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.
We can see its influence in Redemptoris Missio and Dominus Iesus.


"The universality of salvation means that it is granted not only to those who explicitly believe in Christ and have entered the Church. Since salvation is offered to all, it must be made concretely available to all. But it is clear that today, as in the past, many people do not have an opportunity to come to know or accept the gospel revelation or to enter the Church. The social and cultural conditions in which they live do not permit this, and frequently they have been brought up in other religious traditions. For such people salvation in Christ is accessible by virtue of a grace which, while having a mysterious relationship to the Church, does not make them formally part of the Church but enlightens them in a way which is accommodated to their spiritual and material situation.
He is adapting to the error in the Letter of the Holy Office.
O.K say we agreed with this specuation, how is this case an explicit exception to the strict interpretation of the dogma in 2015?
And if it is not an exception then why did he have to mention it?


This grace comes from Christ; it is the result of his Sacrifice and is communicated by the Holy Spirit. It enables each person to attain salvation through his or her free cooperation"
Yes I agree that this person can be saved and this speculative case, would be saved also with the baptism of water.


Our marching orders are simple in the words of Pope Pius IX in Singulari Quadum: " but, as long as we are on earth, weighed down by this mortal mass which blunts the soul, let us hold most firmly that, in accordance with Catholic
teaching, there is "one God, one faith, one baptism" [Eph. 4:5];
Before 1949 this one faith did not mention any explicit exceptions to the dogma.


it is unlawful to proceed further in inquiry" he was talking to ALL Catholics.
He was also talking to you who accept irrationality and heresy in the name of the Catholic Faith.


This will be my last communication with you until you recant your errors but be assured that you are in my prayers.
O.K however you are free to communicate with me in future if you wish, even though your position keeps changing on this issue.

-Lionel Andrades

For me too Fr.John Hardon was a holy priest and I admire Cardinal Raymond Burke

No comments: