I have received a response from a pontifical university. The following is my reply today morning.
Dear ...thank you for your kind response.
The
issue is that there are no physically visible cases of the baptism of
desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I) without
the baptism of water in the Catholic Church in 2019.
There are no literal cases in December 2019.
We cannot meet or see any one saved outside the Church with BOD, BOB and I.I.
There
are no 'physical bodies' in Newton's time and space of BOD, BOB and
I.I. or, LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, saved outside the
Church.
So there are no practical exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS); or EENS as St Thomas Aquinas knew it.
So
like the popes and saint I affirm BOD, BOB and I.I. I do not reject
them. But for me they can only refer to hypothetical cases. They are
always hypothetical and speculative, as is LG 8 etc in Vatican Council
II.So please do not cite any more cases. I am with you on this point.
The
examples you have provided of people saved allegedly without the
baptism of water or with only the baptism of desire are hypothetical.
They are in Heaven and in only Heaven they could be confirmed.No one on
earth could have confirmed them.
Some could be declared saints but no one on earth could have see them in Heaven without the baptism of water.
They are not physically visible cases on earth to be relevant to the dogma EENS.
So when the saints mentioned EENS and BOD, BOB and I.I there was no contradiction.
We
can affirm both ,BOD, BOB and I.I and LG 8, LG 14,LG 16,UR 3, NA 2, GS
22 etc.It is not either-or. So we cannot postulate them as being
exceptions to the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church.At least
for me they are not.
However from you have written and generally what is taught at the...(name of university), BOD, BOB and I.I and LG 8 etc are exceptions
to the strict interpretation of EENS.They contradict EENS according to
St. Thomas Aquinas or the 16th century missionaries,for you all.
It
is only because they are exceptions for ALL OF YOU, that you ALL can
reject the past ecclesiology, an ecumenism of return and Feeneyite EENS.
For
me BOD etc are not exceptions.They are always physically invisible
cases. So I affirm the strict interpretation of EENS according to
Aquinas and Augustine.
My theology is traditional and is based upon BOD, BOB and I.I being only hypothetical.
At
the pontifical universities they use the New Theology, based upon
allegedly visible and personally known cases of BOD, BOB and I.I which
are alleged examples of salvation outside the Church.The Athanasius
Creed( outside the Church no salvation), the Syllabus of Errors and the
saints on exclusive salvation, would have become obsolete.
______________________________ ______________
So you have not denied the point I made in those posts.
For
the faculty and students of the (university), Vatican Council II is a
rupture with Thomisitic EENS. The rupture is created by assuming
hypothetical cases are objective people in the present times saved
outside the Church.This is un-orthodoxy to say the least.However this
was the way the popes since Paul VI interpreted Vatican Council II and
EENS.
So
now all who seek a doctoral degree in theology at a pontifical
university have to assume that there are personally known and physically
visible cases referenced in LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc.
This is irrational. It is also deceptive.To persist with this irrationality after being informed would be unethical.
Also
to reject a conservative Catholic student, who affirms EENS, Vatican
Council II, all the Catechisms and the Syllabus of Errors is unfair. It
is unfair to tell himthat Vatican Council II, interpreted irrationally, contradicts Tradition.
In Christ with the love of Our Lady
No comments:
Post a Comment