Michael Voris on Church Militant TV asked Fr.Jonathan Morris to name someone who does not need to enter the Catholic Church for salvation. So on this point Michael Voris is clear.Every one needs to enter the Catholic Church for salvation and there are no known exceptions.Outside the church there is no salvation.He has produced quite a few good videos on this subject.
http://youtu.be/ylVcrYlpOBc
http://youtu.be/ylVcrYlpOBc
In interpreting Vatican Council II however he assumes the Council says there are known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So for him the Council says every one does not have to enter the Church. The Council is ambiguous for him.For Michael Voris Vatican Council II is saying like Fr.Jonathan Morris that every one does not need to enter the Catholic Church for salvation.
This was the view also of the Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Richard Cushing.He assumed every one did not have to enter the Church for salvation since there were known exceptions, saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire.This is Cushingism and Michael is interpreting Vatican Council II with this error.He is probably using Cushingism to interpret other magisterial documents, including the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
So the fault is not with Vatican Council II but with Michael Voris.If he interprets the Council with Feeneyism, no known exceptions to the dogma, then Vatican Council II does not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus or Tradition.The Council is no more ambiguous.
If Michael Voris assumes that those saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16), good conscience (LG 16), seeds of the Word(AG 11), good and holy things in other religions(NA 2), imperfect communion with the Church(UR) etc are visible to us in 2013, then the Council contradicts Tradition, the dogma on salvation and the Syllabus of Errors.The Council is then ambiguous.
If he reasons that these cases are known only to God and are not visible to us on earth, then the Council is traditional and not ambiguous.Since it means that these cases are not exceptions to Outside the Church there is no Salvation.There are no exceptions mentioned in Vatican Council II.So ambiguity, or its absence, depends on whether he chooses Feeneyism or Cushingism for the interpretation.
On the issue of other religions and ecumenism, Ad Gentes 7 says all need 'faith and baptism'.Ad Gentes 7 is also mentioned in the Catechism of the Catholic Church(846) under the title Outside the Church No Salvation. Ad Gentes 7 says all need faith and baptism and all need to enter the Church 'as through a door'- while LG 16,LG 6,AG 7 etc are not exceptions, known or unknown.So we have a traditional Vatican Council on ecumenism and other religions.Protestants need Catholic Faith for salvation and Jews,Muslims and other non Catholics need Catholic Faith with the baptism of water- and Michael Voris knows that no one can name any exceptions.
Yet Cardinal Walter Kaspar and Bishop Athanasius Schneider are interpreting Vatican Council II assuming there are exceptions.
It is important that Michael Voris does a program, in which he can show how the same magisterial text can be interpreted in two ways.One is rational (no visible cases of the dead) and the other is irrational (the dead are visible exceptions).One is is in agreement with the dogma on salvation and Tradition the other is a break with Tradition.One is with Bishop Athanasius Schneiders 's concept of a hermeneutic of continuity. The other is with a hermeneutic of rupture.One is in accord with the Syllabus of Errors the other is liberalism and dissent.One has a traditional ecclesiology the other is the basis for a 'theology of religions'. One is the Deposit of the Faith and the other is heresy, denying a defined dogma and changing the Nicene Creed to 'I believe in three known baptisms for the forgiveness of sin(water,desire and blood)', instead of one(water).It is assuming that in principle- cases, hypothetical cases, are considered to be defacto and known to us in the present times.
Premium Subscribers
It is important that Michael Voris does a program, in which he can show how the same magisterial text can be interpreted in two ways.One is rational (no visible cases of the dead) and the other is irrational (the dead are visible exceptions).One is is in agreement with the dogma on salvation and Tradition the other is a break with Tradition.One is with Bishop Athanasius Schneiders 's concept of a hermeneutic of continuity. The other is with a hermeneutic of rupture.One is in accord with the Syllabus of Errors the other is liberalism and dissent.One has a traditional ecclesiology the other is the basis for a 'theology of religions'. One is the Deposit of the Faith and the other is heresy, denying a defined dogma and changing the Nicene Creed to 'I believe in three known baptisms for the forgiveness of sin(water,desire and blood)', instead of one(water).It is assuming that in principle- cases, hypothetical cases, are considered to be defacto and known to us in the present times.
Premium Subscribers
At Church Militant TV Premium Subscribers have access to programs on the Roman Forum.About all the members of the Roman Forum interpret Vatican Council II, irrationally, with the false premise, with a hermeneutic of rupture, rank Cushingism, heresy, a break with the Syallbus of Errors and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.Using Cushingsim unknowingly they interpret Vatican Council II with ambiguity, with a non traditional ecclesiology, contradicting the traditional teaching on ecumenism and other religions.
If Michael could produce a video on this subject it would help many of us in our personal evangelization. -Lionel Andrades
The saints agree with me! http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2013/05/the-saints-agree-with-me.html#links
When they interpret Vatican Council II according to Cushingism and not Fr. Leonard Feeney it has its influence on the liturgy
Vatican Council II says outside the Church there is no salvation and is in agreement with the Syllabus of Errors, Mystici Corporis,Quanto Conficiamus etc.http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/08/sspx-can-accept-vatican-council-ii-in.html
Posts
8 comments:
Lionel:
In interpreting Vatican Council II however he(Michael Voris) assumes the Council says there are known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So for him the Council says every one does not have to enter the Church. The Council is ambiguous for him.For Michael Voris Vatican Council II is saying like Fr.Jonathan Morris that every one does not need to enter the Catholic Church for salvation.
George:
Are we watching the same video? Are we talking about the same Michael Voris? Where in the world do you draw the conclusion that Michael Voris teaches anything but the necessity of all belonging to the Catholic Church without exception. You have completely missed the point of this video?
You do great injustice to Michael Voris.
JMJ,
George Brenner
Are we watching the same video?
Lionel:
In the video Michael Voris teaches the necessity of belonging to the Catholic Church.
He has also produced videos supporting outside the church there is no salvation, as I have mentioned in the report above.
However you say elsewhere that Vatican Council II is is agreement with the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
So it means the Council is in agreement with the traditional teachings on other religions and ecumenism.
For Michael Voris and other traditonalists the Council is a break with the past.It is ambigous.
Similarly the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary affirm extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to Fr.Leonard Feeney, but when it comes to Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church they interpret it as a break with Tradition. Like Michael they assume that those saved in invincible ignorance etc are explcit for us and so are exceptions.
Similarly Simon Rafe, of ChurchMilitant TV in correspondence with me a few years back, said invincible ignorance etc are exceptions to the dogma. This is irrational.
He also said that this is what the Church teaches. Agreed this is the popular, non official teaching. However the magisterial texts do not make this claim.
Lionel: Like Michael they assume that those saved in invincible ignorance etc are explicit for us and so are exceptions
George: Please cite me the video or specific reference where Michael says the above quote or belief that you say he has.
JMJ,
George
George: Please cite me the video or specific reference where Michael says the above quote or belief that you say he has.
Lionel:
Michael Voris has often said that Vatican Council II is a break with the past.This is a clue.
He has often said that Vatican Council II is ambigous.
Is it ambigous if you interpret it with Feeneyism instead of Cushingism ?.
He has often criticized often liberals and dissenters who Vatican Council II. He may not have been aware that they were using Cushingism and that there was a choice in the interpretation of the Council.
He has never ever said that Vatican Council II is in agreement with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Church's traditional teaching on other religions and Christian communities.
He has done programs on the New Evangelisation ignoring the two ways that all magisterial texts can be interpreted and so the Church still being traditionally ecclesiocentric in its ecclesiology according to Church documents but not according to the cardinals of the new evangelization.
I could go on...
Lionel,
Always remember that we are fighting the same. Have you read or seen the movie about, ' A man for all Seasons' about Saint Thomas Moore. It is a great movie. Do not assume that Michael Voris does have it right. The Popes of VCII have never clarified No Salvation Outside the Catholic Church at their level as St. Peter's successor. And now with profound sadness Pope Francis is taking it to the level where the chair is almost vacant and devoid of truth. As I cited by Pope Pius IX, it is mandatory and with pride and passion that we teach that there is no Salvation outside the Catholic Church and that all must convert to the Catholic Faith without any exceptions whatsoever.
JMJ.
George Brenner
And now with profound sadness Pope Francis is taking it to the level where the chair is almost vacant and devoid of truth.
Lionel:
Even if he is in error the Chair is never empty. He can correct himself in future. He could also clarify a misunderstanding and so much of misreporting by the media.
' A man for all Seasons' about Saint Thomas Moore.
Lionel:
I liked it. I saw it twice as a young man.
George,
We still support the pope.
While we know that the teachings of the Catholic Church do not change.
Post a Comment