Bro. Casey Cole ofm gets de railed at about four minutes on his video Is there Salvation Outside the Church.
He smugly refers to being saved in invincible ignorance.As if these people are known to us humans in general.
How would he know that them millions of non Catholics in ignorance of Jesus and the Church will be saved. It is his word against mine. While the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus says they will be damned.Vatican Council II has the same message (AG 7).
The dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) says all need to believe in Jesus in the Catholic Church for salvation. All. So for me those millions of people, whom he refers to, are in Hell. I cannot personally judge but I am following the dogma EENS. This is what the Catholic Church was taught for centuries by the Holy Spirit.
This is a Cushingite Franciscan. At 4.31 on the video he says invincible ignorance is not a new concept.True. But he has interpreted invincible ignorance as referring to known non Catholics saved outside the Church. This is a new concept.In this way there are exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).
He has interpreted the popes and saints( when they refer to invincible ignorance) as referring to literal cases, known to be saved outside the Church.So the popes and saints become a rupture with traditional EENS, or Feeneyite EENS.
Only in this way does invincible ignorance become an exception to the old concept of outside the Church there is no salvation. 1
For Cardinal Richard Cushing and the Jesuits invisible people saved in invincible ignorance were exceptions to traditional EENS.This is Cushingite reasoning.It is Cushingite philosophy. Based upon this new reasoning a new theology had been created. It said outside the Church there is salvation.This I call Cushingism.Generally is it the New Theology whose precise source is not known to Catholics.
But for Fr.Leonard Feeney and the St.Benedict Center invincible ignorance(I.I), the baptism of desire(BOD) and baptism of blood(BOB) were only hypothetical cases.There could not be a literal case, which was known. This was not a theory of Fr. Leonard Feeney but a fact of life. It is something independent of the St. Benedict Center.Invincible ignorance, the baptism of desire etc could not be practical exceptions to traditional EENS.This is how God made it.This is the traditional rational reasoning. It is the old theology on salvation. I call it Feeneyism.
So Cushingism says hypothetical cases ( I.I, BOD etc) are objective and practical examples of salvation outside the Church.So they become objective exceptions to the dogma EENS. Feeneyism says hypothetical cases are just hypothetical and theoretical and are not personally known in the present times.This is a simply tool to clarify what one means.Feeneyism and Cushingism exist independent of these names.
The Franciscan is a Cushingite.He creates a hermeneutic of rupture with EENS, Syllabus of Errors, ecumenism of return etc.He even interprets Vatican Council II with Cushingism instead of Feeneyism.He uses the Cushingite theology to create new doctrine.He has re-interpreted all the Creeds and Catechism.It's a mess.Then he asks if the Church has changed its teaching and answers with a YES.
His error on the video begins with his interpretation of invincible ignorance.
Invincible ignorance can be accepted without postulating it as an exception or relevant to EENS.Those who are 'struggling with invincible ignorance' are known only to God.So for us they are not exceptions to EENS.We can accept hypothetical invincible ignorance.It does not have to be linked to EENS.In itself it was not a problem for centuries.This is how the Church Fathers knew it until the liberal theologians came with their deception.
Lumen Gentium mentions possibilities of salvation outside the Church which are always theoretical for us. So they should not be linked to the dogma EENS. Otherwise it would imply that they are not hypothetical but real people whom we know, who are saved outside the Church.This would be false and irrational.
There could be people of good will who are saved outside the Church,but only hypothetically (GS 22).They are not objective exceptions to the exclusive ecclesiology of the Church. This was the error made at Vatican Council II by Cardinal Richard Cushing and the Jesuits who were active there.This is Brother Casey Cole's reasoning too on this video.
The Franciscan says, " Unless one is visibly and officially associated with the Church there is no salvation ? No. That's not right either.That's called Feeneyism and it is a condemned position by the Magisterium."
He says all who are saved are saved through Jesus and the Church.Since for him invincible ignorance refers to known people saved outside the Church, he has to accomodate this error with this new theology. He cannot outright and directly say all need to be visible members of the Church for salvation.
Even if someone is saved in invincible ignorance all need to be visibly and officially associated with the Catholic Church for salvation.Invincible ignorance cases are unknown cases in our reality.
Even if someone with good will is saved outside the Church it is known only to God.So still all need to be visibly and officially associated with the Catholic Church.
Even if there are elements of sanctification and truth in other religions(LG 8), they known only to God and unknown to us on earth. So all need to be visible members of the Church.
Even if all who are saved are saved through Jesus and the Church,those who are saved with BOD, BOB and I.I, they would only be known to God.So all need to be members of the Catholic Church with faith and baptism for salvation.
So the Catholic Church has not changed its doctrine and 'changed its mind'.
How could Feeneyism be a condemned doctrine? If the popes and cardinals assume possibilities are objective exceptions to Feeneyite EENS they have contradicted the Principle of Non Contradiction.They have made the mistake.
How can invisible people be visible exceptions to EENS? Elementary. Even if a pope or cardinal says this it is wrong. It does not make it right.
For Fr. Leonard Feeney there were no literal cases of the BOD, BOB and I.I. So BOD,BOB and I.I could not be an exception to EENS.There was no one around saved outside the Church.
But the Franciscan and the ecclesiastics imply there are literal cases of BOD, BOB and I.I even though they cannot see or meet people saved outside the Church.
So the Franciscan uses an irrationality ( invincible ignorance refers to personally known people) then he criticizes Fr. Leonard Feeney.He then criticizes and rejects the traditional teaching on no salvation outside the Church.He interprets Vatican Council II with the same irrationality.Then he assumes the Council is a rupture with the strict interpretation of EENS.
The Franciscan has slandered the priest Fr. Leonard Feeney.He has used false reasoning.This is the common deception.
He has not done justice to the St. Benedict Centers in the dioceses of Worcester, Manchester and Los Angeles.
He needs to admit that he has used an irrationality, a falsehood to condemn Fr. Leonard Feeney's traditional interpretation of no salvation outside the Church.Using a falsehood to create a new theology and then change doctrines is not Catholic.
-Lionel Andrades
1
MARCH 26, 2019
Cushingite Franciscan supports the innovation
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/03/is-there-really-no-salvation-outside.html
___________________________________________
___________________________________________
MARCH 28, 2019
Brother Andre Marie MICM is being forced to accept heresy and then be accepted as a Catholic by the Vatican ,while John Henry Weston has accepted this heresy, in a compromise, and he is producing a video series on the heresies of Pope Francis
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/03/the-franciscan-has-slandered-priest-fr.html
https://www.beafranciscan.org/meet-our-student-friars/
https://www.beafranciscan.org/meet-our-student-friars/
Posts
