Lifesite News has a contradictory report. It supports the Athanasius Creed but not Fr. Leonard Feeney. 1
For me, the Jesuit priest in Boston was repeating what is said in the Athanasius Creed.This Creed says all need the Catholic Faith for salvation. The priest said the same thing.Nothing new.
All need the baptism of water and Catholic faith for salvation.
This is also the message in the Catechism of Pope Pius X.The baptism of water is given to an adult who has Catholic faith.
This is also the message in the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX(24 Q, 27Q).
This is also the message of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ( Cantate Domino, Council of Florence 1441) etc, etc.So why does the editor of LifeSites assume that this was not at least the teaching of the popes over the centuries.
May be it is because when the popes mention the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance, and he assumes that these are examples of salvation outside the Church. He assumes that these cases are exceptions to the strict interpretation of EENS. There are literal exceptions to EENS, in the statements of the popes and saints for him.
So the writer of the report, John Paul Meenan and the editor say that what Fr. Leonard Feeney believed was not the teaching of the Church, since there were 'distinctions' to EENS for the writer.
So the writer of the report, John Paul Meenan and the editor say that what Fr. Leonard Feeney believed was not the teaching of the Church, since there were 'distinctions' to EENS for the writer.
For the Lefebvrists EENS has exceptions and with the same reasoning Vatican Council II would also have exceptions to EENS.They interpret Vatican Council II with exceptions and then ask what is wrong with the Council.
The second and important point, which the writer missed out was, Vatican Council II does not contradict the Athanasius Creed in LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc.Unless the false premise is used.
On the website of the English Bishops Conference , GS 22 is seen as an exception to EENS.This is a false premise. Similarly LG 16 is an exception to EENS for the International Theological Commision.It can be read on their website.Again what is invisible is confused as being visible.
Why?
One reason is that for them, like it is common for the Lefebvre traditionalists, they assume there are literal cases of non Catholics saved outside the Church in invisible ignorance (LG 16), good will(GS 22), baptism of desire(LG 14), imperfect communion with the Church(UR 3) etc. This was the mistake of the CDF in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr. Leonard Feeney.The cardinals who issued that Letter assumed there were visible and known non Catholics saved outside the Church.So a new theology was created which said outside the Church there is salvation. It wa based on an error in observation. A false premise created the new theology.
The point is missed out in the LifeSite report.
An earlier report on LifeSite, by Maike Hickson projected UR 3 and LG 8 as exceptions to EENS. So it means UR 3 and LG 8 refer to a known person in the present times, for example, of non Catholics saved outside the Church. As if they can known.
This is irrational Since an unknown person cannot be an example of salvation outside the Church.We are not God.We cannot known.
How could Maike Hickson know of someone saved outside the Church?
The norm for salvation is faith and baptism and if someone is saved outside the Church it could only be known to God.We humans cannot judge, in a particular case, as being an exception to the norm.
But most people judge an exception to the norm and yet they all say that we cannot judge who will go to Heaven and who will not.
Even the Lifesite writers have judged exceptions to the norm, as if they could tell who will go to Heaven outside the Church.There is a new norm for them.It is EENS with distinctions.
Now a new Catechetical Directory has been issued by the Vatican and it is approved by the USCCB. It interprets Vatican Council II with LG 16, LG 8, LG 14, GS 22, UR 3 etc as being exceptions to the Athanasius Creed . This point will be ignored by LifeSite News. -Lionel Andrades
1
JUNE 27, 2020
Lifesites and Lefbvrists continue to remain politically correct on Vatican Council II
Catholic prof: Abp Viganò is right in calling for reform, but Church cannot simply repudiate Vatican II
By John Paul Meenan
It is with these distinctions in mind that we should interpret the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus – outside the Church there is no salvation. Here again is the Archbishop, quoting from the ancient Athanasian Creed, which cemented Nicene Trinitarian orthodoxy: “Whosoever wishes to be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic faith; For unless a person shall have kept this faith whole and inviolate, without doubt he shall eternally perish..."
Lionel:
“Whosoever wishes to be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic faith; For unless a person shall have kept this faith whole and inviolate, without doubt he shall eternally perish.." This is what the missionaries in the 16th century taught about extra ecclesiam nulla salus. That 'one must be a baptized Roman Catholic'. This is the Catholic faith.
They did not say unknown and hypothetical cases of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance were known exceptions to all needing the Catholic faith for salvation.
This was a common sense mistake of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.
The writer misses this point which is central to understanding Vatican Council II, as being in harmony with the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS and the Athanasius Creed.
He uses the false premise to interpret the Council and then says it should not be repudiated.The Council interpreted with the false premise has to be repudiated. It is heretical and schismatic.
________________
Yet we must also not take too restrictive a view, as Father Leonard Feeney (+1978) did, that one must be a baptized, Roman Catholic with all the three visible bonds of unity to be saved. The Church has never taught this, and Father Feeney was condemned for teaching such.
Lionel: The Church has never taught this ? Check out extra ecclesiam nulla salus on Wikipedia.There will be a list ofof popes supporting this view, which originated before the birth of Fr. Leonard Feeney.
When Vatican Council II is interpreted rationally then Ad Gentes 7 says all need faith and baptism for salvation. It uses the word all. Ad Gentes 7 is placed in the Catechism of the Catholic Church n. 846 under the title Outside the Church No Salvation. CCC 846 can be read with or without the false premise and the conclusion of course will be different. It is the same with Vatican Councol II.
-Lionel Andrades
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment