S.D Wright on Life Site News Catholic Edition cannot go back to the old theological manuals and expect theology to be the same as the past. Unlike in the past, the Church today interprets the baptism of desire(BOD) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) as being exceptions to the traditional strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus. This is a new non traditional conclusion. The premise is that there are known cases of BOD and I.I for them to be exceptions. So today it is said that not every one needs to enter the Catholic Church for salvation. This is the theological position of the popes, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican, the liberals and the Lefebvrists.
The initial mistake was there in the Baltimore Catechism when the baptism of desire was placed in the Baptism Section of that Catechism.The baptism of desire is not physically visible or repeatable like the baptism of water. It cannot be administered and it is not a Sacrament like the Baptism of Water.
Then in 1949 the Letter of the Holy Office (CDF) to the Archbishop of Boston projected unknown cases of BOD and I.I as being known exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.This Letter( LOHO) was referenced in Vatican Council II .In principle the Council Fathers assumed invisible and unknown cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc were relevant to EENS as exceptions.
So a New Theology entered the Catholic Church.It says outside the Church there is known salvation. It made the dogma EENS and the Athanasius Creed obsolete. So the New Ecumenism, New Ecclesiology etc is based upon there being known salvation outside the Church. This is a false premise which was not there in the old theological manuals. There cannot be any such known case of a non Catholic being saved outside the Church. This could only be known to God if it happened.It is common sense. So it was not mistaken before the 1930's.
The bottom line is that the 1930 theology no more exists for most Catholics in the Church. Since they use the false premise to interpret Vatican Council II.
We have two options now.
1. LG 8,LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II is the conclusion of the use of a false premise.The false premise is assuming LG 8 etc refers to known and visible, non Catholics saved outside the Church. They are exceptions to EENS since they are known and visible. Invisible cases cannot be exceptions.So traditional exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church is made obsolete.
2.LG 8,LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II is the conclusion without the use of a false premise.LG 8 etc refer to unknown, hypothetical and theoreteical cases only. They are not known non Catholics saved outside the Church. So they cannot be practical exceptions to EENS.They do not exist in our human reality. They are not moving bodies in the Newton's time and space.So traditional exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church is not contradicted. It is not obsolete.
So we can be a true Catholic community, one Body, one Spirit, one Lord and one Baptism, and one Faith with the second option. There is no rupture with the past.We are still in the one, holy Catholic and Apostolic Church outside which there is no known salvation.There could be Catholics who have chosen option number 1 but they would be in schism with the past Magisterium and the rejection of the Creeds and EENS is heresy.It would be heresy and schism created with a false premise.
And what is to be professed? Vatican I teaches that:
By divine and catholic faith all those things are to be believed
which are contained in the word of God as found
in scripture
and tradition,
and which are proposed by the Church as matters to be believed as divinely revealed,
whether by her solemn judgment or
in her ordinary and universal magisterium.[iv]
[Our separation into bullet points]
Wilhelm and Scannell teach, as do many others, that “it must be a union of belief not simply in so-called fundamental doctrines, but in all revealed truths”.[v] These sources do not teach that the object of profession is just limited to those truths solemnly defined by the extraordinary magisterium.
But what do you do when the popes since Vatican Council II have interpreted the Council with an irrational premise, inference and conclusion and the popes since Pius XII have interpreted EENS with an irrational, premise,inference and conclusion ?--Lionel Andrades
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment