Sunday, March 4, 2012

Catholic Legate, Canada uses a defacto-defacto interpretation of magisterial texts: who gave them permission? No magisterial document recommends this analysis

John Pacecho, Art Sippo and Peter Vere are saying every one defacto needs to enter the Church for salvation but some defacto do not have to. Hence the baptism of desire is an exception. This is irrational and contrary to the Principle of Non Contradiction.

Here is the ‘dogma’ mentioned in the Letter of the Holy Office. Catholic Legate has the choice of using a defacto-defacto interpretation or a defacto-dejure analysis. They choose the defacto-defacto (explicit-explicit) version instead of the rational explicit-implicit interpretation.


LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE

‘… none of those existing outside the Catholic Church... can have a share in life eternal... unless before death they are joined with Her... No one... can be saved, unless he (Defacto) remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.” (Pope Eugene IV, the Bull Cantate Domino, 1441.)

(Defacto) ‘… when a person is involved in invincible ignorance God accepts also an implicit desire…’ - Letter of the Holy Office 1949 (Emphasis added).


POPE PIUS IX (Allocution December 9th, 1854)

Pope Pius IX was saying: (Defacto):'We must hold as of the faith, that out of the Apostolic Roman Church there is no salvation; that she is the only ark of safety, and whosoever is not in her perishes in the deluge…’ and (Defacto): ‘we must also, on the other hand, recognize with certainty that those who are invincible in ignorance of the true religion are not guilty for this in the eyes of the Lord...'


The Catholic Legate website says defacto, explicitly every one needs to be a formal member of the Catholic Church for salvation and defacto, explicitly some non Catholics on earth do not have to be a member and these cases are known to us.

They are known to us so they contradict the dogma outside the church no salvation.This is irrational. This is the interpretation of Fr.Hans Kung .


The Catholic Legate uses a defacto-defacto analysis of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.If one uses the irrational defacto-defacto analysis of the above magisterial texts instead of the traditional dejure-defacto interpretation it would mean the popes contradicted themselves and that Vatican Council II contradicted a defined dogma. It would be a criticism of the infallibility of the popes ex cathedra. It would also be contrary to the Principle of Non Contradiction. It is also heresy to claim that there are defacto exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

With the defacto-dejure analysis we see that the Magisterial texts affirms the traditonal interpretation of the Church Fathers, the saints, the popes and Councils, including Vatican Council II. This was the traditional interpretation of Fr. Leonard Feeney of Boston.


QUANTO CONFICIAMUR

(Defacto) 8. ‘… no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church – Quanto Conficamur, Pope Pius IX 1863

(Defacto) 7. ‘… those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion. Sincerely observing the natural law and its precepts inscribed by God on all hearts and ready to obey God, they live honest lives and are able to attain eternal life by the efficacious virtue of divine light and grace. Because God knows, searches and clearly understands the minds, hearts, thoughts, and nature of all, his supreme kindness and clemency do not permit anyone at all who is not guilty of deliberate sin to suffer eternal punishments...-Quanto Conficamur


There is a choice always:


VATICAN COUNCIL II

(Defacto) ‘The Church…is necessary for salvation… faith and baptism…for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church.’-Lumen Gentium 14, Vatican Council II.

(Dejure or Defacto) ‘…those who have not yet received the Gospel are related in various ways to the people of God…’ (Lumen Gentium 16)

John Pachecho, Art Sippo and Peter Vere contradict each other on the website. They are obviously sincere and are trying to be faithful to the teachings of the Catholic Church not realizing that there was a flaw which originated with the Archbishop of Boston Richard Cushing.


Explicitly known baptism of desire is the Richard Cushing Error. He assumed that those saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance are defacto known to us.


The cardinals who issued the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 could have also been influenced by the Archbishop of Boston stating only those who know would be condemned implying that we know cases of persons saved with the baptism of desire.


Critics of the Letter of the Holy Office point out that this document  was not signed by the Secretary of the Congregation and not published in the Acta Apostolica Sedis. Fr.Karl Rahner was quick to include it in the Denzinger Enchridion.

There were also anomalies in the excommunication for disobedience, and not heresy, of Fr.Leonard Feeney.


George Brenner writes (Feb.12, 2012 )

Hindsight can be 20/20. I would have liked Father Feeney to go to Rome but history does show that Father Feeney was reinstated without recanting one word of his positions on No Salvation Outside the Catholic Church. So, Father was “back in the Church” by professing the very doctrine which many said had “put out!” Father cited the following has his refusal to go to Rome:

****Father Feeney answered with 1917 canon law:

#1715 – requires a formal statement of charges against a defendant.

#1723 – states that a non-canonical summons is void.

#1959 – forbids penalties without a trial.

#1842/1843 – require the defendant be informed both of the charges against him and the nature of the proceedings…

and further went on to say:

Because the first interest of the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary is the preservation of the Faith, we have been reluctant to make any formal representations to the Holy See concerning any secondary matters relating to our activities. Your Excellency is well aware that the first obligation of every Catholic is to defend with his lifeblood every doctrine of his Holy Faith. In doing this, he has the assurance both of his own salvation, and even if persecuted by fellow Catholics, of his ultimate vindication by the Church. The lives of the saints amply demonstrate this. Many of the saints were vilified, interdicted, excommunicated, and even martyred by those of their own Faith. We refer specifically to Saints Athanasius, Ignatius of Constantinople, Alphonsus Ligouri, John the Baptist de la Salle, Thomas of Hereford, Thomas a’Becket, Joan of Arc, John Fisher and Thomas More. http://theblackcordelias.wordpress.com/2008/08/20/no-salvation-outside-the-catholic-church/
The Archbishop of Boston never responded to these questions and neither did he lift the excommunication after the Letter of the Holy Office was issued.

He gave all of us Catholics a new doctrine with a defacto-defacto interpretation of standard magisterial texts.- Lionel Andrades

IF THE LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE 1949 CONSIDERED THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE AS A DEFACTO EXCEPTION TO THE DOGMA IT WOULD BE AN OBJECTIVE ERROR: WE DON’T KNOW ANY SUCH CASE
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2012/03/if-letter-of-holy-office-1949.html

ALL THE CATECHISMS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH HAVE TAUGHT THE RIGORIST VIEW OF EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2012/03/all-catechisms-of-catholic-church-have.html

The Vatican Councils of the Catholic Church have clearly taught that formal membership in the Catholic Church IS absolutely necessary for salvation
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2012/03/vatican-councils-of-catholic-church.html

No pope has said that those saved in invincible ignorance are known to us and so are exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2012/03/no-pope-has-said-that-those-saved-in.html

Being saved in invincible ignorance is not a defacto exception to the teaching of Cantate Domino Council of Florence
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2012/03/being-saved-in-invincible-ignorance-is.html

The Catholic Legate - John Pacecho, Art Sippo,Peter Vere contradict each other ?
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2012/03/catholic-legate-john-pacecho-art.html

Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church is in agreement with the rigorist interpretation of outside the church no salvation
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2012/02/blog-post.html

Whether they know it or not non Catholics with the stain of Original Sin on their soul and mortal sins committed in that state and without the Sacraments outside of which there is no salvation, are all oriented to Hell
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2012/02/whether-they-know-it-or-not-non.html

When one is clear that all those saved are explicit only in Heaven it is not difficult to affirm ‘the formal necessity of belonging to the Church’
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2012/02/when-one-is-clear-that-all-those-saved.html

Ultra Traditonalists in accord with Vatican Council II on extra ecclesiam nulla salus
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2012/02/ultra-traditonalists-in-accord-with.html

DOES THE CATHOLIC CHURCH TEACH THAT MUSLIMS ARE SAVED ?
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2012/02/does-catholic-church-teach-that-muslims.html

No comments: