Fr. John Zuhlsdorf commenting on the 19 Oct: Beatification of Paul VI wrote 'as I thought..the next phase of the canonization of Vatican II will occur 19 October.' In his interpretation of Vatican Council II Fr.Zuhlsdorf also uses 'the inference'.
As I have mentioned in another blog post SSPX'S POSITION HAS DRAMATICALLY CHANGED, the traditionalists can now interpret Vatican Council II without the false premise, without 'the inference'.
This applies also to Fr. Z judging from his past posts. He uses 'the inference' when reading and writing on Vatican Council II. To infer that the dead-saved with ' a ray of the Truth' etc is visible to us is an intellectual observation. It is not Catholic doctrine or theology.
Upon this intellectual observation (inference) is built a theology, that all do not need to enter the Catholic Church for salvation. This is the theology of the liberals using the inference.It is the theology of those who are happy with the beatification of Pope Paul VI and Pope John XXIII, for the wrong reasons.They assume that Vatican Council II is a break with Tradition not realizing that it is a break with Tradition because they use an irrational inference in the interpretation of the Council.
For instance in Ad Gentes 7 the liberals (and traditionalists) infer, that all do not need to enter the Church but only 'those who know' about Jesus and the Church and they are visible on earth.This is how they read Vatican Council II on salvation.This is a new doctrine.This is how they interpret Vatican Council II.Implicit for us statements in Vatican Council II are inferred to be explcit for us.
If they were not visible on earth, it would mean that all need faith and baptism for salvation (AG 7).There would be no exceptions.Vatican Council II would be traditional on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.
This new doctrine on salvation is irrational since only God can know who 'knows' about the Church (AG 11,LG 14) and who was in invincible ignorance(LG 16). They are not exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus. This is a point Fr.Z has missed out in earlier posts on Vatican Council II. Commentators assumed there were known exceptions and he did not correct them.
When Cardinal Gerhard Muller was asked about the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus , he said 'The Second Vatican Council also said this: Lumen Gentium 14 says: “Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.” 1 He is inferring here that 'whosoever knowing' refers to cases visible to us on earth. So they become explicit exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus. This inference is irrational.It is the familiar visible-dead premise.
Once it is understood that the inference is false and irrational the canonical-status position of the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) changes dramatically.Vatican Council II 'changes'. Fr.Z would have to look at Vatican Council II differently.
1.Fr.Z needs to affirm all texts and documents in Vatican Council II in accord with the traditional and literal interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.Affirm the dogma on exclusive salvation according to the Church Councils, the popes, saints,Fr. Leonard Feeney and the SSPX General Chapter Statement 2012. 2
2.Nostra Aetate 2 (saved with a ray of the Truth) does not contradict extra ecclesiam nulla salus.Nostra Aetate is in agreement with the SSPX traditional position on other religions and salvation.
3.Unitatitis Redintigratio 3 ( imperfect communion with the Church) does not contradict the dogma on exclusive salvation.We do not know anyone in 2014 saved in imperfect communion with the Church.We cannot name anyone.
4.Ad Gentes 11 ( seeds of the Word) does not contradict the dogma on exclusive salvation, the Catechism of Pope Pius X or the Syllabus of Errors.
5.Lumen Gentium 8 ( elements of sanctification and truth) does not contradict extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
6.Dignitatis Humanae says a Catholic has a right to proclaim his Faith. This would be done with the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Church.
DH says in a state with a secular Constitution a non Catholic is legally free to profess his religion.This is a defacto situation in which Catholics can still at all levels ( political etc) affirm extra ecclesiam nulla salus i.e non Catholics are oriented to Hell unless they convert into the Catholic Church.
7.Gaudium et Specs does not contradict Ad Gentes 7 which says 'all' need 'faith and baptism' for salvation.AG 7 is in agreement with the dogma on salvation and there are no exceptions mentioned in any text of Vatican Council II to AG 7.
2.Nostra Aetate 2 (saved with a ray of the Truth) does not contradict extra ecclesiam nulla salus.Nostra Aetate is in agreement with the SSPX traditional position on other religions and salvation.
3.Unitatitis Redintigratio 3 ( imperfect communion with the Church) does not contradict the dogma on exclusive salvation.We do not know anyone in 2014 saved in imperfect communion with the Church.We cannot name anyone.
4.Ad Gentes 11 ( seeds of the Word) does not contradict the dogma on exclusive salvation, the Catechism of Pope Pius X or the Syllabus of Errors.
5.Lumen Gentium 8 ( elements of sanctification and truth) does not contradict extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
6.Dignitatis Humanae says a Catholic has a right to proclaim his Faith. This would be done with the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Church.
DH says in a state with a secular Constitution a non Catholic is legally free to profess his religion.This is a defacto situation in which Catholics can still at all levels ( political etc) affirm extra ecclesiam nulla salus i.e non Catholics are oriented to Hell unless they convert into the Catholic Church.
7.Gaudium et Specs does not contradict Ad Gentes 7 which says 'all' need 'faith and baptism' for salvation.AG 7 is in agreement with the dogma on salvation and there are no exceptions mentioned in any text of Vatican Council II to AG 7.
The key to this interpretation of Vatican Council II is the inference.
Once it is understood that we cannot infer that the deceased-saved are visible to us, Vatican Council II 'changes' radically.It is the same Vatican Council II of Pope John XXIII and Pope Paul VI.
It would also mean that Cardinal Richard Cushing and the Jesuits in Boston were in heresy for implying(inferring) that there were explicit exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus. This is the common heresy, the widespread heresy also in 2014.It is being made unknowingly by Catholic religious and laity.
-Lionel Andrades
Once it is understood that we cannot infer that the deceased-saved are visible to us, Vatican Council II 'changes' radically.It is the same Vatican Council II of Pope John XXIII and Pope Paul VI.
It would also mean that Cardinal Richard Cushing and the Jesuits in Boston were in heresy for implying(inferring) that there were explicit exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus. This is the common heresy, the widespread heresy also in 2014.It is being made unknowingly by Catholic religious and laity.
-Lionel Andrades
1
NCR:
Do you, nevertheless, accept there’s been a weakening of the Church’s teaching because of this underlying confusion of terminology? One example sometimes cited is that the teaching of “no salvation outside the Church” seems to have become less prominent.
Archbishop Gerhard Muller:
That has been discussed, but here, too, there has been a development of all that was said in the Church, beginning with St. Cyprian, one of the Fathers of the Church, in the third century. Again, the perspective is different between then and now. In the third century, some Christian groups wanted to be outside the Church, and what St. Cyprian said is that without the Church a Christian cannot be saved. The Second Vatican Council also said this: Lumen Gentium 14 says: “Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.” He who is aware of the presence of Revelation is obliged by his conscience to belong publicly — and not only in his conscience, in his heart — to this Catholic Church by remaining in communion with the Pope and those bishops in communion with him.
http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/archbishop-mueller-the-church-is-not-a-fortress/#ixzz2VLejK3GH
June 5, 2013
Archbishop Gerhard Muller was using the false premise : here is the proof!
2
it seems opportune that we reaffirm our faith in the Roman Catholic Church, the unique Church founded by Our Lord Jesus Christ, outside of which there is no salvation nor possibility to find the means leading to salvation;
http://www.dici.org/en/news/society-of-st-pius-x-general-chapter-statement/
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment