Without the irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II the present two popes and all the bishops become conservative Catholics, whom Bishop Robert Barron would call rad trads.Without the false premise Bishop Barron himself is in the Trad Movement, which he has been criticizing, after he interprets Vatican Council II with the false premise

 

 

Without the irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II the present two popes and all the bishops become conservative Catholics, whom Bishop Robert Barron would call rad trads.Without the false premise Bishop Barron himself is in the Trad Movement, which he has been criticizing, after he interprets Vatican Council II with the false premise. -Lionel Andrades

JANUARY 29, 2020

Bishop Robert Barron interprets Vatican Council II irrationally and this would be unethical even by secular standards in California

Bishop Robert Barron interprets Vatican Council II irrationally and this would be unethical even by secular standards in California.He refers to LG 16, UR 3 etc as exceptions to the Syllabus of Errors and the Catechism of Pope Pius X. There is a rupture with Tradition for him. So he implies that there are objective cases of non Catholics saved outside the Church as if he can see them on Heaven, there without faith and the baptism of water.

For me LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc refer to hypothetical cases only. They can only be invisible and speculative. They are no exceptioins to the Catechism of Pope Pius X when it says the following:-

24 Q. To be saved, is it enough to be any sort of member of the Catholic Church?
A. No, to be saved it is not enough to be any sort of member of the Catholic Church; it is necessary to be a living member. 

27 Q. Can one be saved outside the Catholic, Apostolic and Roman Church?
A. No, no one can be saved outside the Catholic, Apostolic Roman Church, just as no one could be saved from the flood outside the Ark of Noah, which was a figure of the Church.-Catechism of Pope Pius X

But for Bishop Barron, LG 8,LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, Gs 22 etc would be exceptions to 24 Q abd 27 Q of the Catechism of Pope Pius X.It would be the same for Pope Benedict and Cardinal Luiz Ladaria.

 

It is the same Vatican Council II before us, we both accept the Council but he interprets LG 8 etc as referring to physically visible non Catholics saved outside the Church and for they are only hypothetical cases. They can only be hypothetical cases for us human beings. Always hypothetical.

So Bishop Robert Barron's reasoning is irrational and deceptive. Without the false premise and inference he cannot project Vatican Council II as a rupture with Tradition.

I have written about this before and e-mailed him over the years. He still continues with the deception. This is unethical even by secular standards in the USA.

There should be a moratorum on the books being published by Bishop Barron until he corrects this error.

Now   Bishop Barron wants the bishops to continue to maintain the irrational interpretation of the Council in the universities and on social media. He wants the mandatum to be given to only those who use a false premise and inference to interpret Vatican Council II unethically.1

Presently the Ex Corde Ecclesiae is only given to those universities which interpret Vatican Council II as a rupture with the Syllabus of Errors, Athanasius Creed etc.-Lionel Andrades

1

Bishop Barron said he believes the bishops should consider exercising their authority in the digital sphere “just as John Paul II, in Ex Corde Ecclesiae, called for the bishops to exercise greater supervision of universities operating under the aegis of the Church.”

“There are, to be blunt, a disconcerting number of such people on social media who are trading in hateful, divisive speech, often deeply at odds with the theology of the Church and who are, sadly, having a powerful impact on the people of God,” he said.

“I do think that the shepherds of the Church, those entrusted with supervising the teaching office, can and should point out when people on social media are harming the Body of Christ.”

Bishop Barron suggested that it may be time for bishops “to introduce something like a mandatum for those who claim to teach the Catholic faith online, whereby a bishop affirms that the person is teaching within the full communion of the Church.”

https://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/catholics-reflect-on-10-years-of-the-good-bad-and-ugly-of-social-media

MAY 20, 2018

For Bishop Robert Barron Lumen Gentium 16( invincible ignorance) refers to objectively seen non Catholics saved outside the Church.So for him and Pope Benedict the dogma EENS is obsolete and they search for substitute reasons to evangelize  http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/05/bishop-robert-barron-lumen-gentium-16.html

DECEMBER 22, 2018

Bishop Robert Barron follows Placuet Deo of Cardinal Ladaria : does not tell a non Catholic he needs to convert for salvation   https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/12/bishop-robert-barron-follows-placuet.html

__________________________

SATURDAY, DECEMBER 22, 2018

Bishop Robert Barron follows Placuet Deo of Cardinal Ladaria : does not tell a non Catholic he needs to convert for salvation

In the deceptive line of Placeut Deo which denied the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) by assuming hypothetical and speculative cases like Gaudium et Specs 22 and Lumen Gentium 8 were practical exceptions to EENS, Bishop Robert Barron interprets Vatican Council II as saying someone outside the Church can be saved, is saved and known to be saved.So for him a non Catholic does not have to be a member of the Catholic Church to go to Heaven.

He does not tell Ben Shapiro that the Catholic Church says in Vatican Council II that he needs to enter the Church. He does not tell him that the Church says he will  damned, without 'faith and baptism'(Ad Gentes 7) which is the only known way of salvation in the Catholic Church.There are no known cases in real life of non Catholics saved with the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I).

Why? Why does he not tell Shapiro that the Catholic Church says he needs to convert for salvation?

1.He could have cited Ad Gentes 7 which say all need faith and baptism for salvation.

2. He could have cited the popes or the Catechism of Pope Pius X which says all need to be members of the Church for salvation. 

3.He could have cited the Catechism of the Catholic Church which says the Church does not know of any means to eternal beatitude other than the baptism of water(CCC 1257).

4.He could have cited the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus defined by three Church Councils etc, etc...

Why did he not do it?

Since for Bishop Barron like Cardinal Luiz Ladaria a hypothetical case mentioned in Vatican Council II is an exception to the general teaching on no salvation outside the Church. This error is there in one of Bishop Barron's  books.

Similarly at the Placuet Deo Press Conference when  Cardinal Ladaria was asked if the Church still teaches it has an exclusiveness in salvation, the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF), denied it.He cited Lumen Gentium 8 which  was an exception for him.This is not how I interpret Lumen Gentium 8.

Lumen Gentium 8 refers to a hypothetical case how can it be an exception ?

When Ad Gentes 7 says all need faith and baptism for salvation where is the case in 2018 of someone saved without faith and baptism ? There is no such person.

When the Catechism of Pope Pius X says all need to be members of the Catholic Church for salvation, where is the case of a non Catholic saved outside the Church in 2018 with 'elements of sanctification and truth'(LG 8)? There is no such person.

So how can a hypothetical and theoretical case(LG 8) be an objective exception to all needing the baptism of water for salvation(CCC 1257) ?

 A hypothetical case cannot be a practical exception to the dogma EENS.Period. Similarly the baptism of desire was never an exception to Feeneyite EENS.God made it this way. There is no baptism of desire case for us.

There is no case of invincible ignorance, which is an example of salvation outside the Church. There is no such case in real life. Practically we cannot meet or see someone saved in invincible ignorance, within or outside the Catholic Church.God made it this way, just as he made it only possible for women to have babies, water to fall only downwards and men to marry only women.He chose it this way.He also chose salvation to be there in only the Catholic Church.For centuries the Holy Spirit guided the Church to say that every one needs to accept Jesus in the Catholic Church for salvation. Every one needs to be a member of the Catholic Church with faith and baptism.

Bishop Barron and Cardinal Ladaria's reasoning were wrong.They both should not have cited Gaudium et Specs 22 ( good will and good conscience) as being relevant to the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church.

Cardinal Ladaria should not have cited Gaudium et Specs 22 in the text of Placuet Deo nor pulled out Lumen Gentium 8 when responding to the question by the AP reporter, on whether the Church still had exclusive salvation for him.

The norm for salvation is 'faith and baptism' in the Catholic Church.It is not some hypothetical and speculative case mentioned in LG 8 and GS 22. 

For Bishop Barron before Ben Shapiro the exception is someone in another religion who is saved through Jesus and the Church(CCC 846).This is the new theology of Cardinal Ratzinger based on invisible cases of the baptism of desire,baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance being visible exceptions to the dogma EENS.

This person who is theoretically saved by Jesus in another religion for Bishop Barron, becomes an exception to the dogma EENS, Ad Gentes 7, the Catechism of Pope Pius X etc.This was the bad reasoning of Placuet Deo addressed to all bishops.

Bishop Barron then cites Gaudium et Specs 22 and says a man with good will,as an atheist,  can be saved.Once again he means a hypothetical case, a speculative case, completely unknown to any of us humans is an objective exception to the dogma EENS. It would have to be an objective person. An invisible person cannot be an exception to EENS.

This is bad philosophy i.e an invisible non Catholic is alleged to be physically visible.

It is also bad theology ( baron theology) i.e an unknown non Catholic is an example of salvation outside the Church and this invisible person contradicts the dogma outside the Church there is no salvation.

Cardinal Ladaria, Bishop Robert Barron , Pope Benedict... continue to test our intelligence and get away with it.

Bishop Barron refers to an atheist of good will who follows his conscience who can be saved. Who is this atheist? Does he know someone in particular? No.

A theoretical case of an atheist makes Ad Gentes 7 in Vatican Council II irrelevant and obsolete for the liberals American bishops.This is the USCCB policy. This is how Bishop Kevin Rhoades, the new Chairman of the USCCB Doctrinal Committee interprets Vatican Council II.

So when Jesus said to go out and proclaim the Good News, this case of the atheist, would be a general exception for them.

When Jesus said those who do not believe will be condemned ( Mark 16:16) there are exceptions for the liberals in LG 8, LG14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc.?

This is why Pope Benedict in March 2016( Avvenire) asked why was there a need for mission since for him the non existing exceptions of LG 8 etc in Vatican Council II are the objective norm.Similarly for Bishop Barron the theoretical and hypothetical exception is the norm for salvation and so he does not tell Shapiro that he needs to convert to avoid the fires of Hell.--Lionel Andrades

 DECEMBER 22, 2018

First Things produced a naieve report on Placuet Deo

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/12/first-things-produced-naive-report-on.html

MAY 20, 2018

For Bishop Robert Barron Lumen Gentium 16( invincible ignorance) refers to objectively seen non Catholics saved outside the Church.So for him and Pope Benedict the dogma EENS is obsolete and they search for substitute reasons to evangelize  http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/05/bishop-robert-barron-lumen-gentium-16.html

JUNE 7, 2018

According to St. Thomas Aquinas whom he admires Bishop Barron would be in first class heresy

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/06/bishop-barron-on-who-can-be-saved.html

He said EENS was no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century.For him there was ' a development'( rupture) created by Vatican Council II( interpreted irrationally).So non existing non Catholics saved outside the Church existed for him in time and space.




EENS CONTRADICTS VATICAN COUNCIL II AND THE CATECHISMS FOR CMTV

Michael Voris chose not to quote Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II which says all need faith and baptism for salvation.Since BOD, BOB and I,I and Vatican Council II 's LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc would be exceptions for him.

Neither could he cite the Catechism of Pope Pius X which says all need to be members of the Catholic Church for salvation.Again there would be the usual exceptions for him which are not exceptions for me.There is a visible orinvisible. explicit or implicit way to look at things.This is philosophy.It can be rational or irrational.




FOR CMTV OUTSIDE THE CHURCH THERE IS SALVATION

So when CMTV says outside the Church there is salvation they mean theologically, that there is salvation outside the Church with BOD, BOB and I.I. and LG 8 etc.So CMTV finally is also saying like Bishop Robert Barron that outside the Church there is salvation according to Vatican Council II and EENS.

For them, in reality, BOD, LG 8 etc exist.For me there are no such people on earth.

LOHO CONTRADICT CANTATE DOMINO

So when Christine Niles did a Mic'd Up program for CMTV on extra ecclesiam nulla salus 1 she cited Cantate Domino, Council of Florence 1441 but she also quoted the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 which contradicts Cantate Domino's rigorist interpretation of EENS.

Fr.Leonard Feeney rejected the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 since obviously there cannot be any defacto case of BOD, BOB and I.I  which could be practical exceptions to EENS.Fr.Leonard Feeney is quoted as saying there is no BOD. Yes, there is no BOD, literally.

Once CMTV corrects their BOD is visible error the Catholic Church would still be saying for them that Vatican Council II (AG 7) says that everyone needs faith and baptism for salvation. It would mean every one and not just those who follow the natural law and are good people who believe in God.Again this would emerge as another hypothetical exception and it would be a new doctrine.






CMTV DID NOT OBJECT TO BP.BARRON CITING VATICAN COUNCIL II

Due to these limitations Michael Voris did not correct Bishop Barron for citing Vatican Council II.For me Bishop Barron should not have quoted Vatican Council II as mentioning  exceptions to EENS.Similarly at the Placquet Deo Press Conference, Cardinal Ladaria should not have quoted LG 8 with reference to EENS.No one at CMTV could have noticed.Since they interpret LG 8 as referring to known and visible non Catholics saved outside the Church and then wrongly blame Vatican Council II.2

 MY CATHOLIC BELIEFS

Let me reiterate my Catholic beliefs which are free of this error.

1.I affirm EENS and also hypothetical, theoretical and speculative cases of BOD, BOB and I.I.They are not relevant to EENS as exceptions.

2.I affirm Vatican Council II with GS 22, LG 8, etc being only hypothetical in 2018 and not someone whom I could meet or see in the neighbourhood. They are not known people saved outside the Church.

3.I affirm the Nicene Creed which says ' I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins'.There is only one known baptism, the baptism of water for me.There are no known cases of BOD and BOB for me. I cannot administer the BOD or BOB as I can with the baptism of water.BOD and BOB, if they existed without the baptism of water, could only be seen and known to God and not to us human beings.

So membership in the Catholic Church with faith and baptism is the only way of salvation.There is only an ordinary way of salvation and no extraordinary way for us humans.

4.I affirm the Apostles Creed and when we pray, ' I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Holy Catholic Church' for me the Holy Spirit still guides the Church to say outside the Church there is no salvation.CMTV's theology says outside the Church there is salvation.It is interpreted in the same way by the two popes, Cardinal Ladaria and Bishop Robert Barron.

5.I affirm the Athanasius Creed which says outside the Church there is no salvation. BOD, BOB and I.I and LG 8 etc are of course not exceptions for me.
6.I affirm all the Catechisms.BOD, BOB and I.I and LG 8 etc refer to invisible and unknown people in the present times.

Finally I accept the first part of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949(LOHO) which was only an inter-office letter among ecclesiastics. I reject the second part of this Letter which has an objective mistake and contradicts the first part. It violates the Principle of Non Contradiction.So cannot be magisterial. The Holy Spirit cannot make a mistake.

LOHO assumes physically invisible cases of BOD, BOB and I.I are visible examples of salvation outside the Church and objective exceptions to EENS.

ERROR IN VATICAN COUNCIL II

This same error in reasoning is there in Vatican Council II.BOD,BOB and I.I should not have been mentioned in the Council-text with orthodox passages on salvation which support EENS( AG 7,LG 14).BOD, BOB and I.I are not relevant to all needing faith and baptism for salvation(AG 7).This was a mistake the Council Fathers made.

I DON'T REJECT VATICAN COUNCIL II OR EENS

So in general I affirm Tradition without rejecting Vatican Council II or EENS.Cardinal Ladaria and Bishop Barron 3 have to reject EENS and the Syllabus of Errors to affirm their irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II.I don't have this problem.

The Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) has to reject Vatican Council II (interpreted irrationally) to affirm the Syllabus of Errors ( ecumenism of return, past ecclesiology).Again  with a rational interpretation of EENS and Vatican Council II I don't have to do this.

Things couldn't be better.Doctrines do not contradict themselves and a coherence and order which already exists in Catholic teaching is seen clearly.-Lionel Andrades

1.
https://www.churchmilitant.com/video/episode/micd-up-extra-ecclesiam-nulla-salus
https://gloria.tv/article/8Aetwqjv9iRT3nW7cPY4H2zRU
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/02/micd-upextra-ecclesiam-nulla-salus-with.html



2.

MARCH 4, 2018

Vatican Council II , the Catechism of the Catholic Church and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus tell us outside the Church there is no salvation and Cardinal Ladaria says there is no more the superiority and exclusiveness of salvation in the Catholic Church

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/03/vatican-council-ii-catechism-of.html



3.

 FEBRUARY 8, 2018

Even Bishop Robert Barron could say like Michael Voris that all who are in Heaven are Catholic and most people on earth are going there

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018_02_08_archive.html

DECEMBER 22, 2018

Bishop Robert Barron follows Placuet Deo of Cardinal Ladaria : does not tell a non Catholic he needs to convert for salvation

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/12/bishop-robert-barron-follows-placuet.html