Tuesday, April 10, 2018

The official teaching of the Church

Image result for Fr.James Martin s.j photo
When Fr. James Martin s.j  says that his views on homosexuality and homosexual acts are the official teaching of the Church he means that they are approved ( not opposed) by the present pontificate even though they are in conflict with past pontificates.
Similarly when he says that not every one needs to be a member of the Catholic Church for salvation and this is the official teaching of the Church today, it means that this is the conclusion of the official interpretation of Vatican Council II with an irrational premise. Of course Vatican Council II can be interpreted without the error and this would be the official teaching of the Church. 
So when I say every one needs to enter the Catholic Church as a member for salvation and there can be no known exceptions, this could be in future the 'official teaching' of the Magisterium, with a rational interpretation of  Vatican Council II.It would differ of course,from the official teaching of the present pontificate, which interprets Vatican Council II irrationally.
If it said that this is my personal opinion only then this would be false.Since anyone can interpret Vatican Council II without the false premise and the conclusion would be the same.
Even the present two popes  could do the same and the conclusion would be the same as me. Then of course my interpretation would be the official teaching of the Church. So when I say that all non Catholics who have died were oriented to Hell, this is the official teaching of Vatican Council II, of the Church,interpreted rationally.
It reminds me, when the excommunication of Fr. Leonard Feeney was lifted he was told to keep it private and do not announce it.Since the official teaching of the Church at that time had become, invisible cases of the baptism of desire etc were visible exceptions to the traditional, official interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.



For Fr.Leonard Feeney the official teaching of the Church was still the dogma EENS interpreted  rationally. Invisible cases of the baptism of desire were not visible exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So the official interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus had been changed with the use of an irrationality.-Lionel Andrades

No comments: