Cardinal Richard Cushing accepted the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 with the false premise and then gave us Nostra Aetate.However even with his error, Cardinal Michael Fitzgerald could have chosen to interpret Vatican Council II affirming Ad Gentes 7-all need faith and baptism for salvation, with invisible ignorance(LG 16, LG 14) not being practical exceptions.
Cardinals Cushing and Bea made a mistake at Vatican Council II. There were no known examples of salvation outside the Church. So there was no theological basis for Nostra Aetate. There was no known salvation in non Christian religions since it was possible only for God to know of any exception.We humans cannot know of any exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
Neither is there any theological base for a New Ecumenism with Unitatis Redintigratio ( New Ecumenism ).Since there is no known case of a Christian saved outside the Catholic Church in 'imperfect communion with the Church'(UR 3).So there cannot be a development of doctrine on ecumenism with Unitatitis Redintigratio.
There could only be a development of doctrine if a false premise is used . For example, invisible cases mentioned in UR 3 could be imagined to be visible and personally known Christians, saved outside the Catholic Church in 2020.With this error a new ecumenism could be created and there could be a development of doctrine.Since the traditional teaching, outside the Church no salvation,based on John 3:5 and Mark 16:16, would have have become obsolete.
Now without the false premise, Cardinal Fitgeralds Masonic interpretation of Vatican Council II is flawed.
There is no development of doctrine on non Christian religions or Christian religions unless of course the cardinal uses a false premise and inference to create a non traditional conclusion which indicates there is salvation outside the Church.-Lionel Andrades
JULY 15, 2020
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment