Lionel:
I am saying that there are no literal cases of BOD, BOB and I.I in 2019
and there were none in the past. You agree with me. Whether it is
important or not is another issue. You agree with me. This is important. You
are also saying like me that there are no physically visible and
personally known cases of BOD, BOB and I.I.There is no denial from
you.So for now we are in the same boat.
Now if a pope or cardinal says that BOD, BOB and I.I are exceptions to EENS then he implies that there are known cases
of BOD, BOB and I.I for them to be exceptions.But you agree and are
saying that there are no objective cases of BOD, BOB and I.I in our
reality.None where you are and none where I am.
If
the ecclesiastics, the present Church, teach that BOB etc are
exceptions to EENS then they violate the Principle of Non Contradiction.
Even a pope can violate the Principle of Non Contradiction. How can
someone saved in Heaven with BOD etc be also present and visible on
earth to be seen as an exception to EENS ? It does not make sense.
Since
the time of Pope Pius XII the popes have been interpreting BOD, BOB and
I.I as being exceptions to EENS and this is irrational and heretical.
None
of the popes before Pius XII stated that BOD, BOB and I.I are
exceptions to EENS since it is obvious that they can be only
hypothetical. I do not have to say it - it is fact, that they can only
be hypothetical.So all the popes before Pius XII supported Fr. Leonard
Feeney, when, it is understood that BOD, BOB and I.I could never ever be
exceptions to EENS.
So
the present two popes are irrational. Their irrationality results in
heresy.They create a schism with the past popes on EENS, the Athanasius
Creed etc.
______________________________
The church does not teach that.
Since Pius XII the Church does not teach this. Agreed.
Since upon visible- for- them- cases of BOD, BOB and I.I a New Theology
was created.It has now spread and has become a New Ecclesiology. It is
all based upon a false premise( visible and not hypothetical cases of
BOD, BOB and I.I).This was the theology of the Declaration issued
yesterday by the cardinals and bishops, including Cardinal Raymond
Burke.
______________________________
Grace is
absolutely necessary for salvation, but water baptism is only a relative
necessity of means to obtaining the grace.
Grace is necessary for salvation and so is water baptism. Please do not pit one against the other.
______________________________
And if you acknowledge that
the state of grace can be obtained without the water (which has been
taught for 2000 years), then this refutes your absolute necessity
argument.
Water
baptism is needed for salvation and it is accompanied by grace. Faith
and grace is a free gift of God. However man also has to cooperate with
the grace freely given.
If
you are saying that the state of grace can be obtained without the
baptism of water and this has been taught for 2000 years, in a
theoretical and speculative sense I would say O.K. As a possibility
known only to God, fine.
If
you are saying that the state of grace can be obtained without the
baptism of water and there are particular people saved as such who are
known to you I would say it is irrational and heretical.
So it is important to clarify, whether you are referring to a hypothetical case or a personally known, objective case.
______________________________
It does not matter if the cases are hypothetical. You
either concede the theological possibility, as ... now does, or you
dont, in which case you depart from the Catholic dogmas on grace.
The
BOD, BOB and I.I are always hypothetical. There are no two ways around
this.This is a given always. It was known as such for centuries in the
Church.This is common sense. So it did not have to be discussed.It is
something taken for granted. They can only be seen as possibilities
known to God...
______________________________
Again, it does not matter if the cases are hypothetical and unknown.
They
are always hypothetical,this is my point. We have to agree that they
are always hypothetical and unknown.Since if you say that BOD, BOB and
I.I are personally known and not theoretical cases for us human beings
in general, then we cannot have a discussion, since our realities would
be different.
______________________________
It does not matter if you cannot discern potency from act in the soul.
This is another philosophical issue. Please do not use it as an analogy.
______________________________
Can
grace be obtained by BOD? You concede the possibility, even if the cases
are unknown.
Theoretically you can decide what you want as along as you do not project it as an exception to EENS.
______________________________
If you die in a state of grace you are saved.
Yes.
______________________________
If you deny
the same (unclear) you are a heretic. It does not matter if the cases are always
hypothetical.
It is not a question of
agreeing if they are always hypothetical. They are always hypothetical
and you do not deny this .So if they are hypothetical for you how can
you and the Church say that they are exceptions to EENS ?
______________________________
You are falsely equating hypothetical with impossible.
I equate hypothetical as theoretical.
Synonyms for hypothetical
- debatable
- imaginary
- speculative
- theoretical
- vague
- academic
- assumptive
- conjecturable
- conjectural
- imagined
- postulated
- suppose
____________________________________________
If you concede the possibility, you agree with the church. If you dont, you depart from the church.
If you concede the possibility, you agree with the church. If you dont, you depart from the church.
I
am saying that hypothetical-for-us-always-of cases of BOD, BOB and I.I
are not practical exceptions to EENS. So I agree with the Church before
Pope Pius XII. The present two popes do not interpret EENS like the
missionaries and Magisterium of the 16th century. This was confirmed by
Pope Benedict (Avvenire,March 2016)
I
am saying that hypothetical-for-us-human beings-always of cases of LG
8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc are not literal exceptions to
EENS. So I disagree with the present two popes and the CDF on their
interpretation of Vatican Council II. For me Vatican Council II (
without the false interpretation) is in harmony with Feeneyite EENS.
For
me the present two popes and the CDF are heretical and irrational.
They violate the Principle of Non Contradiction. It is the same error
made my the traditionalists and sedevacantists in the interpretation of
Vatican Council II.-Lionel Andrades
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment