The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) interprets Quanto Conficiamur of Pope Pius IX, Quanta Cura,Mortalium Animus, Mystici Corporis and other Church-texts with a false premise. So all references of the baptism of desire(BOD), invincible ignorance(I.I) and the baptism of blood(BOB) in these texts are wrongly assumed to refer to visible and known non Catholics saved outside the Church without faith and baptism.The CDF reads these documents in an irrational way and then projects them as exceptions to the traditional teaching on the Church having exclusive salvation with no known exceptions.
So it is deceptively said that Mystici Corporis etc contradict Fr. Leonard Feeney's strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS). The CDF implies that BOD, BOB and I.I are visible examples of salvation outside the Church. This is false and irrational.
BOD,BOB and I.I are always implicit and unknown in personal cases. They never were exceptions to the Athanasius Creed for the popes and saints over the centuries.
St. Thomas Aquinas held the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS and said that if a man in the jungle in invincible ignorance, was to be saved God would send a preacher to him.The man in the forest was obviously only a hypothetical case. It couldn't be anything else.
There are no practical cases of BOD, BOB and I.I in 1965-2020.
The confusion came into the Church some time before the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.The CDF overlooked this error. However until the 1930's, there was no confusion in the Church, for St.Maximillian Kolbe.
Quanto Conficiamur, Quanta Cura,Mortalium Animus, Mystici Corporis etc affirm the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS and do not mention any exceptions with BOD, BOB and I.I.-Lionel Andrades
________________________________________
________________________________________
JULY 14, 2015
Vatican Council II (UR ,DH) would contradict Mortalium Animos, Quanta Cura, Syllabus of Errors only if B is an exception to A
Comment on Twitter:
@AndradesLionel V.gr., U.R. and D.H. contradict "Mortalium Animos" and "Quanta Cura-Syllabus"; they oppose and deny each other per diametrum
Lionel:
Vatican Council II (UR and DH) would contradict Mortalium Animos, Quanta Cura and the Syllabus of Errors only if B is an exception to A.1
1.
2.
7. Here, too, our beloved sons and venerable brothers, it is again necessary to mention and censure a very grave error entrapping some Catholics who believe that it is possible to arrive at eternal salvation although living in error and alienated from the true faith and Catholic unity. Such belief is certainly opposed to Catholic teaching. There are, of course, those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion...
8. Also well known is the Catholic teaching that no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church. Eternal salvation cannot be obtained by those who oppose the authority and statements of the same Church and are stubbornly separated from the unity of the Church and also from the successor of Peter, the Roman Pontiff, to whom "the custody of the vineyard has been committed by the Savior."[4] The words of Christ are clear enough: "If he refuses to listen even to the Church, let him be to you a Gentile and a tax collector;"[5] "He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you, rejects me, and he who rejects me, rejects him who sent me;"[6] "He who does not believe will be condemned;"[7] "He who does not believe is already condemned;"[8] "He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters."[9] The Apostle Paul says that such persons are "perverted and self-condemned;"[10] the Prince of the Apostles calls them "false teachers . . . who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master. . . bringing upon themselves swift destruction."-Quanto Conficiamur,Pope Pius IX,1863
@AndradesLionel V.gr., U.R. and D.H. contradict "Mortalium Animos" and "Quanta Cura-Syllabus"; they oppose and deny each other per diametrum
Lionel:
Vatican Council II (UR and DH) would contradict Mortalium Animos, Quanta Cura and the Syllabus of Errors only if B is an exception to A.1
For me B is not an exception to A. There can be no text in Unitatis Redintegratio or Dignitatis Humanae to contradict the Syllabus of Errors, the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus or other traditional teachings.2
This mistake is made by the sedevacantist and traditionalist websites.Since they assume B is an exception to A. So Vatican Council II would contradict Tradition and in particular the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. There would be explicit, known exceptions to the dogma in the present times due to the irrational reasoning.The fault is not with the Council but with the irrational premise and inference used.Instead of defending Feeneyism, which is traditional, they are supporting irrational and heretical Marchettiism.
-Lionel Andrades1.
2.
Vatican Council II says outside the Church there is no salvation and is in agreement with the Syllabus of Errors, Mystici Corporis,Quanto Conficiamus etc.
No text in Quanto Conficiamur Moerore or the Council of Trent says there are exceptions to the traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/04/no-text-in-quanto-conficiamur-moerore.html
___________________________________
MARCH 31, 2015
The Council of Trent does not state that these cases are physically or personally known to us to be exceptions to the dogma.This has to be wrongly inferred.
wineinthewater
If the Church ever actually held the rigorist interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus, then she threw it away long before 1949. Pope Pius XI rejected the rigorist interpretation in his encyclical Quuanto Conficiamur Moerore.
Lionel:
Please cite the text.
I don't think it says any where that there are known exceptions to the rigorist interpretation of the dogma.
_______________________
Trent rejected it.
Lionel:
The same with Trent.
If the Church ever actually held the rigorist interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus, then she threw it away long before 1949. Pope Pius XI rejected the rigorist interpretation in his encyclical Quuanto Conficiamur Moerore.Lionel:
Please cite the text.
I don't think it says any where that there are known exceptions to the rigorist interpretation of the dogma.
_______________________
Trent rejected it.
Lionel:
The same with Trent.
The Council of Trent mentions the posibility of a person being saved with implicit desire in a way known to God.
The Council of Trent does not state that these cases are physically or personally known to us to be exceptions to the dogma.
This has to be wrongly inferred. The text does not make this claim._____________________
Thomas Aquinas rejected it with his embrace of baptism of repentance and baptism of desire.
Lionel:
St.Thomas Aquinas like St.Augustine held the strict interpretation of the dogma.
He mentions the man in the forest in invincible ignorance. He also says that God will send a preacher to him. So he will be baptised before he dies.
It has to be inferred wrongly that the man in the forest refers to a known case and so it is an exception to the dogma.The text does not state this.Liberal theologians make the irrational inference.
__________________
The Council of Trent does not state that these cases are physically or personally known to us to be exceptions to the dogma.
This has to be wrongly inferred. The text does not make this claim._____________________
Thomas Aquinas rejected it with his embrace of baptism of repentance and baptism of desire.
Lionel:
St.Thomas Aquinas like St.Augustine held the strict interpretation of the dogma.
He mentions the man in the forest in invincible ignorance. He also says that God will send a preacher to him. So he will be baptised before he dies.
It has to be inferred wrongly that the man in the forest refers to a known case and so it is an exception to the dogma.The text does not state this.Liberal theologians make the irrational inference.
__________________
This is obviously quite the issue for you. But as for me, I will put my faith in the Church.
Lionel:
So will I.
The Church according to magisterial texts including Vatican Council II. None of them are interpreted by me, with the irrational proposition that persons saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance are exceptions to the rigorist interpretation of the dogma. This would be implying that we can personally see or know these persons on March 31, 2015 for them to be exceptions.
_______________________
If she has erred on this, then she is not the Church founded by Jesus and cannot be trusted about anything.
Lionel:
I see it as an oversight of the magisterium after 1949. It can be corrected and we are back to the rigorist interpretation of the dogma.
______________________
You can toss her non-rigorist view of EENS if you like, but you must likewise be willing to give up her authority behind every teaching.
Lionel:
It is the non rigorist vew of EENS which clashes with her Authority, the Bible and Tradition.
________________________
So will I.
The Church according to magisterial texts including Vatican Council II. None of them are interpreted by me, with the irrational proposition that persons saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance are exceptions to the rigorist interpretation of the dogma. This would be implying that we can personally see or know these persons on March 31, 2015 for them to be exceptions.
_______________________
If she has erred on this, then she is not the Church founded by Jesus and cannot be trusted about anything.
Lionel:
I see it as an oversight of the magisterium after 1949. It can be corrected and we are back to the rigorist interpretation of the dogma.
______________________
You can toss her non-rigorist view of EENS if you like, but you must likewise be willing to give up her authority behind every teaching.
Lionel:
It is the non rigorist vew of EENS which clashes with her Authority, the Bible and Tradition.
________________________
In an irony, by claiming that she is wrong now, you invalidate any claim to your rigorist position that is based on her authority.
Lionel:
With the rigorist interpretation of EENS the teaching of the Church is the same before and after Vatican Council II.
It is the non rigorist interpretation, the popular one, which is heresy. It rejects a defined dogma and changes the meaning of the Nicene Creed's 'I beleive in one baptism for the forgiveness of sin'.
There is only one known baptism, the baptism of water. We cannot administer the baptism of desire or blood to anyone. These are graces from God.
So it is wrong to imply that there is salvation outside the Church, without Catholic Faith and the baptism of water. None of us knows of an exception in the present times. -Lionel Andrades
Lionel:
With the rigorist interpretation of EENS the teaching of the Church is the same before and after Vatican Council II.
It is the non rigorist interpretation, the popular one, which is heresy. It rejects a defined dogma and changes the meaning of the Nicene Creed's 'I beleive in one baptism for the forgiveness of sin'.
There is only one known baptism, the baptism of water. We cannot administer the baptism of desire or blood to anyone. These are graces from God.
So it is wrong to imply that there is salvation outside the Church, without Catholic Faith and the baptism of water. None of us knows of an exception in the present times. -Lionel Andrades
SUNDAY, AUGUST 4, 2013
SSPX is not following Tradition : Quanto Conficiamur Pope Pius IX problem
The Society of St.Pius X(SSPX) bishops have stated that they are waiting for the rest of the Catholic Church to get back to Tradition and they reject Vatican Council II which is non traditional.The SSPX is not traditional in its interpretation of Quanto Conficiamur, Mystici Corporis, Letter of the Holy Office 1949 etc. While interpreting these magisterial documents the SSPX irrationally assumes there are known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
The SSPX bishops and priests are saying that they can see the dead saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire who are known exceptions to the dogmatic teaching on all needing to convert into the Church, 'as through a door'(CCC 846) in the present times.
This is not part of the Deposit of Faith nor Tradition.Instead this is a non traditional interpretation of the SSPX which is a break with Tradition, the dogma on salvation and the Syllabus of Errors.
The SSPX has extended this irrationality to a book written by Fr.Francois Laisney on Fr.Leonard Feeney and which is sold by the SSPX (USA) Angelus Press.This irationality is also extended to Vatican Council II and so they assume that the Council is a break with the past on other religions, on an ecumenism of return and religious liberty in a Catholic political state.
The SSPX needs to come back to Tradition first as an example to the Vatican Curia.
For example in Quanto Conficamur Pope Pius IX has not stated that we can physically see those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion...'.
Yet the SSPX like the liberals and the Americanist movement of the 1930's and 40's assumes we can physically see these cases for them to be relevant to 'the Catholic teaching that no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church. Eternal salvation cannot be obtained by those who oppose the authority and statements of the same Church and are stubbornly separated from the unity of the Church and also from the successor of Peter, the Roman Pontiff, to whom "the custody of the vineyard has been committed by the Savior."[4] The words of Christ are clear enough: "If he refuses to listen even to the Church, let him be to you a Gentile and a tax collector;"[5] "He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you, rejects me, and he who rejects me, rejects him who sent me;"[6] "He who does not believe will be condemned;"[7] "He who does not believe is already condemned;"[8] "He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters."[9] The Apostle Paul says that such persons are "perverted and self-condemned;"[10] the Prince of the Apostles calls them "false teachers . . . who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master. . . bringing upon themselves swift destruction. - Quanto Conficaumur Pope Pius IX (1)
The error which the SSPX makes in the Fr.Leonard Feeney case they extend also to Quanto Conficamur. This is not tradition.Pope Pius IX could not be a break with the past, a break with the defined dogmas of Church Councils.
The error which the SSPX makes in the Fr.Leonard Feeney case they extend also to Quanto Conficamur. This is not tradition.Pope Pius IX could not be a break with the past, a break with the defined dogmas of Church Councils.
-Lionel Andrades
- Quanta Cura (2)
- Quanto Conficiamur (2)
- Quanto Conficiamur Moerore (2)
- Quanto Conficiamus (2)
1.
7. Here, too, our beloved sons and venerable brothers, it is again necessary to mention and censure a very grave error entrapping some Catholics who believe that it is possible to arrive at eternal salvation although living in error and alienated from the true faith and Catholic unity. Such belief is certainly opposed to Catholic teaching. There are, of course, those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion...
8. Also well known is the Catholic teaching that no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church. Eternal salvation cannot be obtained by those who oppose the authority and statements of the same Church and are stubbornly separated from the unity of the Church and also from the successor of Peter, the Roman Pontiff, to whom "the custody of the vineyard has been committed by the Savior."[4] The words of Christ are clear enough: "If he refuses to listen even to the Church, let him be to you a Gentile and a tax collector;"[5] "He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you, rejects me, and he who rejects me, rejects him who sent me;"[6] "He who does not believe will be condemned;"[7] "He who does not believe is already condemned;"[8] "He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters."[9] The Apostle Paul says that such persons are "perverted and self-condemned;"[10] the Prince of the Apostles calls them "false teachers . . . who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master. . . bringing upon themselves swift destruction."-Quanto Conficiamur,Pope Pius IX,1863
_______________________
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment