ASK FATHER: Can I baptize myself?
Fr.John Zuhlsdorf has written so much about the baptism of desire(BOD) in a blog post today but does not state that the baptism of desire cannot be administered by oneself or anyone and that we cannot know of any one saved with the BOD in the present times (1949-2021).He does not state that invisible cases of invincible ignorance(I.I) and unknown cases of the BOD could not have been objective exceptions to Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS). So when the saints mentioned the BOD it did not contradict their affirmation of the strict interpretation of EENS.So it would mean that Fr. Leonard Feeney was correct and the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston was objectively wrong.
NICENE CREED
The Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith(CDF)made a factual error in 1949.
He also did not say that the BOD and being saved in invincible ignorance were theoretical and hypothetical only and so are not examples of known salvation outside the Church. So the Nicene Creed is not changed when it states that we believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
APOSTLES CREED
It also means that when the Apostles Creed refers to the Holy,Catholic and Apostolic Church, the Creed, is saying today that outside the Church, there is no known salvation and the BOD and I.I do not refer to objective cases of salvation, without faith and the baptism of water.
VATICAN COUNCIL II
Fr.Z did not say that Lumen Gentium 14( baptism of desire) and Lumen Gentium 16(invincible ignorance) were not objective exceptions to the strict interpretation of EENS, as it was known to the missionaries and saints in the Middle Ages. So it means that Vatican Council II( with LG 8,LG 14,LG 16,UR 3,NA 2,GS 22 etc) do not contradict outside the Church there is no salvation as it was stated in the Athanasius Creed.
FIRST COMMANDMENT
With there being alleged objective cases of the baptism of desire Fr.Z changes the meaning of the First Commandment and suggests that there is true worship outside the Catholic Church.
These are important points which he left out in his politically- correct- with- the- Left blog post.-Lionel Andrades
The Church teaches about three different kinds of baptism, by water, by blood (martyrdom), by desire.
Baptism by desire implies an implicit baptism, that would have taken place, had a person – who is sincerely seeking for and living for the Truth – had the chance to be baptized. Such a person would have been baptized had they had the chance, because they would have accepted Christ as God and would have lived according to the Commandments and in the Church He founded. This is what was also thought about catechumens who were committed already but who had not yet been baptized. Cyprian of Carthage (+258) was confident that catechumens martyred before baptism were baptized with another baptism. The Angelic Doctor holds the same in the Summa (III, q. 82. a .2). St Robert Bellarmine writes of it. Innocent III based on Augustine’s De baptismo writes of it.
Hence, it is possible to obtain the justification and sanctification which are the effects of baptism through true desire for them.
That doesn’t mean that baptism is not necessary. Some kind of baptism is necessary, by water, by blood or by desire. Baptism is necessary for salvation.
https://wdtprs.com/2021/05/ask-father-can-i-baptize-myself/
__________________________________________
Fake premise
Lumen Gentium 8,Lumen Gentium 14, Lumen Gentium 16 etc in Vatican Council II refer to physically visible cases in 1965-2021.
Fake inference
They are objective examples of salvation outside the Church.
Fake conclusion
Vatican Council II contradicts the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).The Athanasius Creed(outside the Church there is no salvation) and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX ( ecumenism of return) were made obsolete.
Here is my interpretation of Vatican Council II in blue.
Rational Premise
LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc in Vatican Council II refer to physically invisible cases in 1965-2021.They are only hypothetical and theoretical. They exist only in our mind and are not solid bodies at Newton's level of time, space and matter.
Rational Inference
They are not objective examples of salvation outside the Church for us human beings.
Rational Conclusion
Vatican Council II does not contradict EENS as it was interpreted by the Jesuits in the Middle Ages.It does not contradict the strict interpretation of EENS of St. Thomas Aquinas( saved in invincible ignorance is invisible), St. Augustine and Fr. Leonard Feeney of Boston.
The Letter of the Holy Office(Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) 1949 made an objective mistake.-Lionel Andrades
Lionel Andrades
Promoter of the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II.
Catholic lay man in Rome,
Writer on the discovery of the two interpretations of Vatican Council II, one is rational and the other is irrational, one is interpreted with the false premise and the other without it. One is Magisterial and the other, the common one, is non Magisterial.
It is the same for the Creeds and Catechisms.There can be two interpretations.
Why should Catholics choose an irrational version which is heretical, non traditional and schismatic, when a rational option is there which is traditional ?
Blog: Eucharist and Mission
____________________
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment