A Protestant could say that Jimmy Akins and the apologists at Catholic Answers intentionally do not interpret Vatican Council II in harmony with extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) as it was known to the Church Fathers and the Magisterium of the 16th century.There is no denial from Catholic Answers.
They interpret EENS withunknown cases of the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I) being known exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.There is no denial from Catholic Answers.
They also do not deny that they interpret Vatican Council II with LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 as being known and practical exceptions to Feeneyite and 16th century EENS.
So Catholic Answers is not following the teachings of the Catholic Church according to the Church Fathers and Vatican Council II interpreted rationally.
In this video (0.29) there is a reference to Jimmy Akins book The Drama of Salvation. Akins interprets the Bible as a rupture with the dogma EENS. He re-interprets the dogma EENS with Cushingism.He uses an irrational premise. EENS has been infallibly defined by three Church Councils which did not mention any known exceptions.
-Lionel Andrades
SEPTEMBER 10, 2019
Karlo Broussard a speaker at the Catholic Answers Convention 2019 this month does not say that Vatican Council II supports the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS)
Karlo Broussard a speaker at the Catholic Answers Convention 2019 this month does not say that Vatican Council II supports the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS). So in the video he does not say that all who leave the Catholic Church are on the way to Hell.
I can judge that a Catholic who leaves the Catholic Church is on the way to Hell based upon Vatican Council II.This is Vatican Council II interpreted without the false premise.
So I can judge.
Since it is the the Catholic Church which teaches this in Vatican Council II (AG 7) with LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc not being objective exceptions.
Broussard does not affirm Feeneyite EENS but Cushingite EENS with BOD, BOB and I.I being objective exceptions. So he cannot judge in individual cases.
With Cushingite EENS there is a new theology (EENS with exceptions), new ecclesiology, new ecumenism etc.
But Vatican Council II interpreted rationally rejects a Cushingite interpretation of EENS.
So it is only by being irrational that there can be a new ecumenism etc.-Lionel Andrades
Jimmy Akins in another video once again rejects the Athanasius Creed, changes the Nicene and Apostles Creed,interprets Vatican Council II and the Catechisms as a rupture with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS), the Syllabus of Errors and the Oath Against Modernism - all done with an irrational premise to contradict Magisterial documents. He does not tell a Protestant that the Church teaches in Vatican Council II that outside the Church there is no salvation and all need faith and baptism for salvation(AG 7, Vatican Council II).All need Catholic faith which include the faith and moral teachings of the Catholic Church and the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
Over the years Jimmy Akins has not denied this charge.He will not respond and say that he affirms the Athanasius Creed which says outside the Church there is no salvation.
He will not say that he affirms EENS like the Magisterium and missionaries of the 16th century.
Invisible cases of the baptism of desire,baptism of blood and invincible ignorance are visible exceptionsto EENS for him and he does not deny this.
Since he rejects EENS according to the Church Fathers and the Medieval popes mixed marriages are not a mortal sin of adultery.
Jimmy Akin will not affirm the Syllabus of Errors since Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally contradicts it for him.He has to contradict the Syllabus of Errors with alleged known exceptions to create a new ecumenism and new ecclesiology. The New Theology which is supports is based upon the false premise (invisible non Catholics saved outside the Catholic Church are physically visible) and inference ( outside the Church there is salvation so the old ecclesiology is now obsolete).
So he cannot tell a Protestant that outside the Church is he is damned since Vatican Council II ( GS 22,UR 3 etc) refer not to theoretical cases but practical exceptions to EENS.BOD, BOB and I.I refer to literal cases.-Lionel Andrades
SEPTEMBER 10, 2019
Vatican Council II supports the strict interpretation of EENS in Ad Gentes 7 ( all need faith and baptism for salvation) and there are no exceptions to AG 7 or EENS mentioned in Lumen Gentium. Tim Staples and Catholic Answers do not affirm this
According to Canon Law Bishop Frank Caggiano has no right to be a bishop since he rejects the Athanasius Creed, changes the Nicene and Apostles Creed,interprets Vatican Council II and the Catechisms as a rupture with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS), the Syllabus of Errors and the Oath Against Modernism - all done with an irrational premise to contradict Magisterial documents
Jimmy Akins writes a book on salvation which does not comment on the issue of Cushingism and Feeenyism in the interpretation of EENS, Vatican Council II and other Magisterial documents
Jimmy Akins begins the video by saying that the Church Fathers are famous for saying outside the Church there is no salvation.But for him, this is not the strict interpretation of the dogma outside the Church there is no salvation. He will not say that Vatican Council II ( AG 7) supports the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) and the Council does not contradict EENS or AG 7 in hypothetical LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22.
The Council Fathers for him refer to the necessity of expressing the Christian faith and not the Catholic faith(0.19).
He then says that the theme outside the Church there is no salvation goes all the way to Jesus in John 14: 6 when Jesus says I am the way the truth and the life, no one comes to the Father but by me (0.28).Jimmy Akins refers to Jesus and not to the Church. He has made the split between Christology and ecclesiocentrism here.
He goes to quote Acts 4:12 'there is no other name' by which we can be saved.Again he separates Jesus from the Church an error pointed out in Pope John Paul II's Dominus Iesus.
He still has not said that Vatican Council II is not only Christological but supports exclusive salvation.
He then goes off into a Cushingite interpretation of Vatican Council II. He assumes there are known exceptions the 16th century interpretation of EENS. There are exceptions to EENS for him with BOD, BOB and I.I. He supports the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 which reasoned that unknown cases of the BOD, BOB and I.I were known exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.
Since Fr. Leonard Feeney was wrong for Jimmy Akins he cannot hold the exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church, there has to be break with the Church Fathers.
So Justin Martyr in the second century is interpreted as projecting invincible ignorance as an exception to exclusive salvation in Jesus in the Catholic Church.
However this is his interpretation. Similarly he projects LG 16( invincible ignorance) as an exception to EENS. Again this is his personal interpretation.
LG 16 is hypothetical and so for me it is not an exception or relevant to EENS.
1.With his irrational interpretation Jimmy Akins has rejected the original interpretation of EENS according to the Church Fathers. This is heresy.
2.With his irrational interpretation of BOD, BOB and I.I etc he has rejected the Athanasius Creed which says outside the Church there is no salvation. This is heresy. How can possibilities of salvation outside the Church be objective and practical exceptions to EENS?
3.He has interpreted Vatican Council II irrationally to create a rupture with Tradition ( past ecclesiology, ecumenism of return, Syllabus or Errors etc). Again this is heretical.I avoid the irrationality and so the Council (AG 7) affirms the strict interpretation of EENS.
4.The Catechism of Pope Pius X would contradict itself for Jimmy Akins. Since it affirms the strict interpretation of EENS and also mentions invincible ignorance. Jimmy Akins interprets invincible ignorance as known salvation outside the Church and an exception to EENS.
This is schism with the past popes on EENS.It is supported by the Left so he does not identify the error and affirm the past exclusivist ecclesiology with an ecumenism of return.-Lionel Andrades
SEPTEMBER 10, 2019
According to Canon Law Bishop Frank Caggiano has no right to be a bishop since he rejects the Athanasius Creed, changes the Nicene and Apostles Creed,interprets Vatican Council II and the Catechisms as a rupture with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS), the Syllabus of Errors and the Oath Against Modernism - all done with an irrational premise to contradict Magisterial documents
Vatican Council II supports the strict interpretation of EENS in Ad Gentes 7 ( all need faith and baptism for salvation) and there are no exceptions to AG 7 or EENS mentioned in Lumen Gentium. Tim Staples and Catholic Answers do not affirm this
Yves Congar and the progressive group at Vatican Council II did not know that the Council was being interpreted with a false premise. Without this premise the Council would still have the old ecclesiology, an ecumenism of return and the traditional exclusive salvation theology
Cardinal Reinhard Marx of Munich organised a meeting on Vatican Council II in Rome. The participants interpreted Vatican Council II with a false premise. So there was a rupture with the old ecumenism of return and EENS
In this video Tim Staples of Catholic Answers in response to a comment does not say that Vatican Council II supports the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS). He does not say that the Council supports the past exclusive ecclesiology and an ecumenism of return.
Why not ?
Since Lumen Gentium( LG 8,LG 14, LG 16) refers to visible and known non Catholics saved outside the Church for him.So the dogma EENS is made obsolete.For him the Council rejects EENS and the doctrines related to EENS. There is no more an EENS( Feeneyite) for him but an EENS ( Cushingite) in which BOD, BOB and I.I 1 are visible examples of salvation outside the Catholic Church.
It is with this irrationality that the speakers of the Catholic Answers National Convention will interpret Vatican Council II this month.
Later in this video Staples cites Lumen Gentium 14 as an exception to the dogma EENS.
He says "there is no essential change in dogma"(4:47) when really he has rejected EENS and the Athanasius Creed and changed the interpretation of the Nicene and Apostles Creeds.With BOD, BOB and I.I being exceptions to EENS, the dogma EENS has been changed.
He says(4:53)' in fact Vatican Council II has affirmed in Lumen Gentium 14 that there is no salvation outside of the Catholic Church" ,and then he goes on to contradict himself and mentions (4:57), " however we understand that people outside the visible boundaries of the Catholic Church(an be saved or are saved/ there is salvation) through invincible ignorance(6:09) of the person, who is not responsible for being wherever he is etc... then there is that possibility of salvation"(outside the Church).Then he adds that 'none of this is heretical'.
He has rejected the dogma EENS, he has rejeced the Athanasius Creed, he has rejected the Catechism of Pope Pius X on EENS etc and has interpreted invincible ignornance as an exception to EENS and says none of this is heretical.
He has cited a pope on invincible ignorance, as if that popes knew of non Catholics saved outside the Church in invincible ignorance and so invincible ignorance is a known exception to EENS.He assumes the popes are also heretical and irrational like him.
Then he suggests that Jesus also mentions exceptions to all needing the baptism of water in the Catholic Church for salvation(John 3:5). He goes on to interpret passages in the Bible contradicting John 3:5 and Mark 16:16, which are the basis for the teaching on no salvation outside the Catholic Church.
He calls this 'a development' that goes all the way back to Jesus Christ i.e unknown cases of being saved in invincible ignorance are known exceptions to all needing faith and baptism for salvation( AG 7, Vatican Council II).
He criticizes modernism and then does not cite Vatican Council II to affirm the strict interpretation of EENS.This is not modernism for him.
He does not say that when Lumen Gentium 8 refers to the true Church of Christ subsisting in the Catholic Church it means there is no known salvation outside the visible boundaries of the Catholic Church to contradict EENS.
When Pope Pius IX (5:08) mentioned the possibility of salvation outside the Church, he did not project it as an exception to the traditional 'rigorist' interpretation of EENS. Since a possibility refers to an unknown and hypothetical case only. It is speculative and in the mind only.Tim Staple has projected a possibility as an exception to EENS, the past ecclesiology, an ecumenism of return, the Syllabus of Errors, Jesus teaching in John 3:5 etc.
St. Justin Martyr to whom Tim Staples refers to, in the second century , affirmed the strict interpretation of EENS.
So the bottom line is thatVatican Council II supports the strict interpretation of EENS in Ad Gentes 7 ( all need faith and baptism for salvation) and there are no exceptions to AG 7 or EENS mentioned in Lumen Gentium. Tim Staples and Catholic Answers do not affirm this.-Lionel Andrades
1 BOD(baptism of desire), BOB(baptism of blood) and I.I (invincible ignorance) _____________________________________________
SEPTEMBER 10, 2019
According to Canon Law Bishop Frank Caggiano has no right to be a bishop since he rejects the Athanasius Creed, changes the Nicene and Apostles Creed,interprets Vatican Council II and the Catechisms as a rupture with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS), the Syllabus of Errors and the Oath Against Modernism - all done with an irrational premise to contradict Magisterial documents
When I say there is a schism from the Left I am identifying a reality which can be corrected.It is not permanent.The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) can make an announcement and correct the common mistake
Poland, Hungary and Slovakia follow the irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II and extra ecclesiam nulla salus .So there is no tension with a schismatic Vatican.The bishops conferences support the leftist schism in the Catholic Church
According to Canon Law Bishop Frank Caggiano has no right to be a bishop since he rejects the Athanasius Creed, changes the Nicene and Apostles Creed,interprets Vatican Council II and the Catechisms as a rupture with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS), the Syllabus of Errors and the Oath Against Modernism - all done with an irrational premise to contradict Magisterial documents.
Bishop Caggiano and his Curia do not deny this charge.They will not respond stating that they affirm the Athanasius Creed which says outside the Church there is no salvation.
They will not say that they affirm EENS like this Magisterium and missionaries of the 16th century. They don't and they know it.The 'magisterium' today is a rupture with the Magisterium of the past.So at one time the Church had to be wrong.
Invisible cases of the baptism of desire,baptism of blood and invincible ignorance cannot be visible exceptions.
They will not choose to interpret Vatican Council II with hypotheticals just being hypothetical and not a reference to objective people in the present times, allegedly saved outside the Church. It is rational but they will not do it. They have to project the Council as a rupture with the past ecclesiology and an ecumenism of return.
They will not say that they affirm the Syllabus of Errors. Since Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally contradicts it.They need to contradict the Syllabus of Errors to proclaim the new ecumenism and new ecclesiology. It is all based upon a new theology based upon a false premise and inference.
With all this heresy, irrationality and confusion which is obligatory for a bishop, rector, superior or other judicial person,today, they are not obliged to sincerely make an Oath Against Modernism. Visible cases of LG 8, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc is modernism.But this is the heretical norm.
There will be no denial from Bishop Caggiano to these accusations of heresy and schism with the past Magisterium.They will prefer to ignore it.
He could point out that the Cardinal-Prefect and the Archbishop-Secretaries of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF) are also in manifest heresy and schism.They are in public mortal sins of faith.This has been approved by the popes since Paul VI.
Pope Pius XII and John XXIII allowed EENS to be interpreted with an irrationality.
So there is a change in ecclesiology and ecumenism with this error.Mission was no more based on exclusive salvation and had become Christological only. With EENS changed other related doctrines were also automatically changed.-Lionel Andrades
September 9, 2019
Bishop Frank J. Caggiano at the Catholic Answers Conference this month
will officially support irrationality and heresy and the common schism
The Bishop of Bridgeport, Connecticut, USA and apologists of Catholic
Answers at their annual conference in San Diego this month, will
knowingly interpret Vatican Council II with an irrational premise; with
Cushingite philosophy and theology, to create an artificial rupture with
Tradition; the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS),past exclusivist
ecclesiology, an ecumenism of return, the Syllabus of Errors, Oath
Against Modernism and the Creeds and Catechisms.They will wrongly
interpret Lumen Gentium as a rupture with Feeneyite EENS
Catholic Answers will have their annual 2019 conference this month and
all the speakers will interpret Vatican Council II with a false premise
to create a rupture with Tradition. So they admit that the conference
will be Christological and not with an ecclesio-centric ecclesiology.
They will incorrectly interpret Lumen Gentium as a rupture with
Feeneyite EENS and EENS according to the magisterium of the 16th
century
Catholic Answers will have their annual 2019 conference this month and
all the speakers will interpret Vatican Council II with a false premise
to create a rupture with Tradition. So they admit that the conference
will be Christological and not with an ecclesio-centric ecclesiology.
They will incorrectly interpret Lumen Gentium as a rupture with
Feeneyite EENS and EENS according to the magisterium of the 16th
century
Traditional Mission based on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church
with an ecumenism of return has not changed with Vatican Council II
interpreted rationally. Since Lumen Gentium etc does not contradict
16th century extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS)
Speakers at the Catholic Identity Conference(CIC) are in schism with the
past Magisterium on EENS, Athanasius Creed, Syllabus of Errors, past
ecclesiology, ecumenism of return etc.They interpret Vatican Council II
with a false premise to maintain the common schism with the Left. In
this way they remain speakers at these conferences
Pope Francis must affirm Vatican Council II without the false
premise,and in harmony with the past exclusive ecclesiology of the
Church otherwise he remains in schism with the past popes before Pius
XII on extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS), and other doctrines related to
EENS
Conservatives are still on the defensive and allow the National Catholic
Reporter to quote Vatican Council II with an irrationality, a false
premise.Catholics do not correct the NCR and affirm the Council
rationally in harmony with Tradition ( Syllabus of Errors, Athanasius
Creed, EENS etc)
Repeatedly there are references made to Vatican Council II in the
mainstream media and there is no correction or clarification made by the
correspondents of LifeSiteNews in their Catholic Edition
Posts
