There can be no physically visible exceptions on earth in 2020 to the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) and so Vatican Council II does not mention any.
So if any of the Curia members in the Catholic Diocese of Manchester, USA claim there are exceptions to EENS for them in real life, there is a credibility problem.
So it is assumed that the Curia members in Manchester also hold on to the strict interpretation of EENS since they personally do not , and cannot, know of any exceptions i.e people saved outside the Church without 'faith and baptism'(AG 7).
So it is assumed that the Curia members in Manchester also hold on to the strict interpretation of EENS since they personally do not , and cannot, know of any exceptions i.e people saved outside the Church without 'faith and baptism'(AG 7).
The norm for salvation is 'faith and baptism' and only God would know of any exceptions.This was confirmed the other day by a Maronite priest at the Pontifical Maronite College in Rome.
So why are there sanctions placed against Brother Andre Marie MICM and the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary in the Diocese of Manchester,when everyone in Manchester would agree that there are no known exceptions to the strict interpretation of EENS?
For Brother Andre Marie there are no exceptions to Feeneyite EENS. He also affirms Vatican Council II, in which there are no exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.
Also for Mary Ellen Mahon, the Director of Education in Manchester and a member of the Curia, there are no exceptions to the strict interpretation of the EENS. There are none mentioned in Vatican Council II.
Similarly for Fr. Georges de Laire, Judicial Vicar, of the diocese there are no physically visible exceptions to the dogma EENS. He does not personally know of any one saved outside the Church without faith and the baptism of water.
So why does he expect Brother Andre Marie MICM to say the Catechism of the Catholic Church 847-848 ( invincible ignorance) are exceptions to Feeneyite EENS?
The Letter of the Holy Office 1949(LOHO) and then Vatican Council II made a mistake. Hypothetical and unknown cases were assumed to be objective examples of salvation outside the Church and were considered practical exceptions to EENS.
So now when the error has been identified Brother Andre Marie does not have to reject hypothetical cases of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance. Since they are always hypothetical and cannot be exceptions to EENS.
He affirms Feeneyite EENS since this was the teaching of the popes and saints over the centuries and it was the dogma of the Church, defined by three Church Councils. Vatican Council II interpreted rationally does not contradict EENS, the past ecclesiology, and ecumemism of return, the Syllabus of Errors, the Catechism of Pope Pius X, the Athanasius Creed and the rest of Tradition.
So why are there sanctions placed only against Brother Andre Marie and not against Mary Ellen Mahon and the catechists of the diocese?
Mary Ellen Mahon agrees that she does not know of any exceptions to EENS in the present times. There are no exceptions for her. This is enough.She is affirming the dogma EENS and Vatican Council II.The rest of Tradition is not contradicted by her, with hypothetical cases of BOD, BOB and I.I.
For me like all of them in Manchester there is one,holy and apostolic Church outside of which there is no salvation and the BOD, BOB and I.I are not exceptions to Feeneyite EENS. Vatican Council II (AG 7) supports the dogma EENS.While LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc do not contradict Cantate Domino, Council of Florence 1441 on EENS.
So why should Fr. Laire be considerd a Catholic by the diocese and not Brother Andre Marie, when for the priest too there are no known exceptions in Manchester to 16th century EENS ? Even Fr.Laire is a Feeneyite.
Mr.Thomas Bebbington, Director of Communications, does not say that he and Fr. Laire know of exceptions to EENS in 2020.
So why is there a prohibition for the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary to refer to themselves as a Catholic organisation and the other religious communities in the diocese, who also say there are no known exceptions to EENS, be considered Catholic ?
What about the saints of the past who affirmed the strict interpretation of EENS and also hypothetical BOD, BOB and I.I. Are they not Catholic? St. Thomas Aquinas was not Catholic?
If Catholic members of the judiciary in Manchester were asked if they could see any exception to EENS in the present times, they would answer no.Do they believe there can be any exceptions to the strict interpretation of EENS? They would say 'no'. Do they personally know of any ? No.
So would the judiciary consider Curia members who say there are exceptions to EENS, as being rational and responsible and be allowed to hold an office e.g Child Safety ?
If Bishop Peter Libasci, the Bishop of Manchester, says there are exceptions to EENS then can he be considered a responsible administrator ?
The Secretaries of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF) must acknowledge that they have made a factual mistake when they asked the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary at the St.Benedict Center, N.H to accept the Catechism of the Catholic Church 847-848 on invincible ignorance, as being an exception to Feeneyite EENS.Objectively CCC 847-848 cannot be exceptions to Feeneyite EENS or EENS as it was known in the Patristic period.It is a fact of life that we cannot see people in Heaven, including the saints, saved without the Catholic faith and the baptism of water.
So why are there sanctions against Brother Andre Marie and not against Mary Ellen Mahon, since even she acknowledges that there are no known exceptions to EENS.This is also a common knowledge observation.-Lionel Andrades
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment