The questions were:
Fr.Angelo Geiger F.I : SSPX and Franciscans of the Immaculate must continue to reject Vatican Council II with the dead man walking premise ?
Over four months and he has not answered these questions which I had e-mailed him.
They are rational questions.
Why does he not answer them?
He knows probably that the Franciscans of the Immaculate, and he and the other dissidents, can affirm Vatican Council II in agreement with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.The Council would not be a break with the past.The Council becomes traditional.
It would also mean that he has to rationally assume that all salvation mentioned in Vatican Council II (LG 16,NA 2 etc) would have to be considered known and visible only to God and unknown and invisible for us.
Presently it is the opposite. Fr.Angelo Geiger interprets Vatican Council II in which ' a ray of the Truth'(NA 2), being saved in invincible ignorance(LG 16) are VISIBLE to us. So these cases become known salvation outside the Church. They are explicit exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus .This is irrational.
What decides if Vatican Council II is traditional or a break with Tradition ? It is assuming what is invisible is visible.This is the missing link.It is assuming that salvation mentioned in Vatican Council II is visible for us instead of being invisible.
What decides if Vatican Council II is traditional or a break with Tradition ? It is assuming what is invisible is visible.This is the missing link.It is assuming that salvation mentioned in Vatican Council II is visible for us instead of being invisible.
Fr.Angelo Geiger does not want to affirm extra ecclesiam nulla salus.So he assumes that all salvation in Heaven is visible for him.The alternative could be frightening?
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment