Tuesday, January 21, 2014

Verdict on Medjugorje nears as Commission claims apparitions are “no hoax”

Verdict on Medjugorje nears as Commission claims apparitions are “no hoax”
http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/the-vatican/detail/articolo/medjugorje-ruini-31362/


Cardinal: Expect Pope’s verdict this year
 
 

Traditional doctrine depends on the use or rejection of an irrational,false premise

Archbishop Müller recognizes... that the... traditional doctrine on religious liberty, ecumenism, collegiality, etc. cannot be assimilated...(by Vatican Council II). This is what was demonstrated by the doctrinal discussions between the Roman theologians and those of the Society of St Pius X between 2009 and 2011- SSPX, DICI News http://www.dici.org/en/news/concerning-a-statement-by-abp-muller-on-the-schism-of-the-society-of-st-pius-x/
 
The Roman theologians and the Society of St.Pius X did not know that all salvation referred to in Vatican Council II and the Letter of the Holy Office was invisible and not visible for us on earth. So it was not a contradiction to the traditional teaching on other religions and ecumenism.
 
Vatican Council II affirms the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus which says all non Catholics and non Christians need to enter the Church for salvation.

1. If you say Vatican Council II does contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus,the Syllabus of Errors and Tradition on the issue of other religions and Christian communities and churches, it means you consider all salvation, referred to in Vatican Council II as being visible to us, explicit on earth and Heaven. It is true the Council does contradict the dogma.The Council would contradict the dogma when this irrational premise is used!
   
2.If you say Vatican Council II does not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Syllabus of Errors and Tradition on the issue of other religions and Christian communities and churches, it means you consider all salvation, referred to in Vatican Council II as being invisible to us, on earth.They are hypothetical cases, possibilities, known only to God. It is true Vatican Council II does not contradict the dogma.The Council would not contradict the dogma when the irrational premise is not used!
 
The traditional doctrine on other religions, Christian communities and churches is not assimiliated, supported by Vatican Council II :
If you say Vatican Council II does contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus,the Syllabus of Errors and Tradition on the issue of other religions and Christian communities and churches, since all salvation, referred to in Vatican Council II is visible to you, explicit on earth and Heaven. It is true the Council does contradict the dogma.The Council would contradict the dogma when this irrational premise is used!-Lionel Andrades


Pope Benedict XVI had it wrong on doctrine ?

“The fact that the Society of St Pius X does not possess a canonical status in the Church is not, in the end, based on disciplinary but on doctrinal reasons.” -Pope Benedict XVI
1. If you say Vatican Council II does contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus,the Syllabus of Errors and Tradition on the issue of other religions and Christian communities and churches, it means you consider all salvation, referred to in Vatican Council II as being visible to us, explicit on earth and Heaven. It is true the Council does contradict the dogma.The Council would contradict the dogma when this irrational premise is used!
2.If you say Vatican Council II does not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Syllabus of Errors and Tradition on the issue of other religions and Christian communities and churches, it means you consider all salvation, referred to in Vatican Council II as being invisible to us, on earth.They are hypothetical cases, possibilities, known only to God. It is true Vatican Council II does not contradict the dogma.The Council would not contradict the dogma when the irrational premise is not used!
Pope Benedict is using the irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II and considers it the doctrinal teaching of the Catholic Church ?.
 
He has never said that Vatican Council II is in perfect accord with Fr.Leonard Feeney and his traditional interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
 
Some questions and answers :
1. Vatican Council II is ambigous on the issue of other religions and Christian communities, this is the general view held by Catholics?
Answer: If one assumes all salvation referred to in the Council (LG 8, LG 16 etc) are visible to us on earth, then the Council would be a break with the past. The Council would be ambiguous if this irrational premise is used.
2. How can you say that Vatican Council II is pro Fr.Leonard Feeney ?
Ad Gentes 7 affirms the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus when it refers to all needing faith and baptism for salvation and all needing to enter the Catholic Church as through a door. Ad Gentes 7 is placed in the Catechism of the Catholic Church 846 under the sub title Outside the Church No Salvation.
There are no known exceptions to Ad Gentes 7 or extra ecclesiam nulla salus mentioned in Vatican Council II.
3.Why do you say there are no known exceptions mentioned in Vatican Council II to extra ecclesiamn nulla salus?
Since all salvation in Heaven is visible only to God and not visible to us. We do not know any case in 2014 saved in imperfect communion with the Church(UR 3), seeds of the Word (AG 11), invincible ignorance(LG 16) etc.
Vatican Council II just mentions these cases. They are probabilities. The Council does not state that they are exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
4. Fr.Leonard Feeney was condemned for not accepting the baptism of desire etc?
If he was condemned for heresy then it was a mistake, an objective mistake. It would mean that Pope Pius XII assumed that the baptism of desire etc was visible to us in Heaven. It would have to be visible and known for it to be an exception to the dogma on salvation.
5.So did Pope Pius XII make a mistake?
No, Pope Pius XII supported Fr.Leonard Feeney on doctrine/dogma in the earlier part of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 when he referred to 'the dogma', the 'infallible statement' and as the Church knew and taught it for centuries. The text of the dogma does not mention any exceptions.
The latter part of the Letter refers to disobedience/discipline. Fr.Leonard Feeney did not go to Rome when called to defend himself.
The Letter says he was excommunicated for disobedience.
The Letter does not state that there are known exceptions to the dogma or that implicit desire and being saved in invincible ignorance were exceptions to the dogma on exclusive salvation.
-Lionel Andrades

Neither Archbishop Muller or the SSPX leadership is saying that Vatican Council II affirms the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors.













The Society of St.Pius X and  Archbishop Gerhard Muller do not profess the entire Catholic faith.

'Quite obviously, the Society of St Pius X denies no article of the Creed and professes the entire Catholic faith' - SSPX, DICI news


Lionel: The Society of St.Pius X like Archbishop Gerhard Muller do not profess the entire Catholic faith.
In the Nicene Creed we pray 'I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sin'. This is the baptism of water. There is one known baptism, the baptism of water. There are not three known baptisms, the baptisms of water, desire and blood.The baptism of desire and blood are known only to God. Only he can judge.
For the SSPX and the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican, there are known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Nicene Creed.
For the SSPX the baptism of desire is a known exception to the credal statement. See the book written by Fr.Francois Laisney of the SSPX and sold by the SSPX's Angelus Press (N.America District) critical of Fr.Leonard Feeney.
So for the SSPX those persons in Heaven saved with implicit desire or in invincible ignorance are visible exceptions on earth to the dogma on exclusive salvation and the Nicene Creed.This is the SSPX's old 'visible-dead' theory.
So the SSPX has changed the Nicene Creed. It does not profess the entire Catholic faith.
 Similarly Archbishop Gerhard Muller when asked about extra ecclesiam nulla salus in an interview with the National Catholic Register said that there are exceptions to the dogma in Vatican Council II. He told Edward Pentin of the NCR that being saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16) was a known exception.
The Prefect is saying in public that everyone in the present times (2012-2014) do not need the baptism of water and Catholic faith for salvation and there are known exceptions.
This is a denial of the Nicene Creed and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus by the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. The dogma was defined three times by three different Church Councils. Pope Pius XII called it an infallible statement.
So quite obviously both groups are on record for denying the Catholic faith and changing doctrine.
 
1. If you say Vatican Council II does contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus,the Syllabus of Errors and Tradition on the issue of other religions and Christian communities and churches, it means you consider all salvation, referred to in Vatican Council II as being visible to us, explicit on earth and Heaven. It is true the Council does contradict the dogma.The Council would contradict the dogma when this irrational premise is used!
2.If you say Vatican Council II does not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Syllabus of Errors and Tradition on the issue of other religions and Christian communities and churches, it means you consider all salvation, referred to in Vatican Council II as being invisible to us, on earth.They are hypothetical cases, possibilities, known only to God. It is true Vatican Council II does not contradict the dogma.The Council would not contradict the dogma when the irrational premise is not used! 
 
Neither Archbishop Muller or the SSPX leadership has said  that Vatican Council II affirm the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of errors.

Some questions and answers could be as follows:
1. Vatican Council II is ambigous on the issue of other religions and Christian communities, this is the general view held by Catholics?
Answer: If one assumes all salvation referred to in the Council (LG 8, LG 16 etc) are visible to us on earth, then the Council would be a break with the past. The Council would be ambiguous if this irrational premise is used.
2. How can you say that Vatican Council II is pro Fr.Leonard Feeney ?
Ad Gentes 7 affirms the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus when it refers to all needing faith and baptism for salvation and all needing to enter the Catholic Church as through a door. Ad Gentes 7 is placed in the Catechism of the Catholic Church 846 under the sub title Outside the Church No Salvation.
There are no known exceptions to Ad Gentes 7 or extra ecclesiam nulla salus mentioned in Vatican Council II.
3.Why do you say there are no known exceptions mentioned in Vatican Council II to extra ecclesiamn nulla salus?
Since all salvation in Heaven is visible only to God and not visible to us. We do not know any case in 2014 saved in imperfect communion with the Church(UR 3), seeds of the Word (AG 11), invincible ignorance(LG 16) etc.
Vatican Council II just mentions these cases. They are probabilities. The Council does not state that they are exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
4. Fr.Leonard Feeney was condemned for not accepting the baptism of desire etc?
If he was condemned for heresy then it was a mistake, an objective mistake. It would mean that Pope Pius XII assumed that the baptism of desire etc was visible to us in Heaven. It would have to be visible and known for it to be an exception to the dogma on salvation.
5.So did Pope Pius XII make a mistake?
No, Pope Pius XII supported Fr.Leonard Feeney on doctrine/dogma in the earlier part of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 when he referred to 'the dogma', the 'infallible statement' and as the Church knew and taught it for centuries. The text of the dogma does not mention any exceptions.
The latter part of the Letter refers to disobedience/discipline. Fr.Leonard Feeney did not go to Rome when called to defend himself.
The Letter says he was excommunicated for disobedience.
The Letter does not state that there are known exceptions to the dogma or that implicit desire and being saved in invincible ignorance were exceptions to the dogma on exclusive salvation.
-Lionel Andrades

 

Archbishop Muller and the SSPX are both using the irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II with the false premise of being able to see people in Heaven

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/01/archbishop-muller-and-sspx-are-both.html#links
Archbishop Muller and the SSPX have compromised on the faith?
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/01/archbishop-muller-and-sspx-have.html#links

'We must stay in the Barque of Peter for salvation - because it's the only Ark in the Deluge of the world '- Michael Voris



 
We must stay in the Barque of Peter for salvation - because it's the only Ark in the Deluge of the world.
 
Does Vatican Council II also say that we must stay in the Barque of Peter for salvation because it's the only Ark in the Deluge of the World ?
 
For Michael Voris Vatican Council II is ambiguous. This is not a subject of this video.However  he has mentioned an ambigous Vatican Council II in other videos.
 
Can Michael Voris say that Vatican Council II is pro- Fr. Leonard Feeney and affirms the 'rigorist interpretation' of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus?
 
Some questions and answers could be as follows:
 
1. Vatican Council II is ambigous on the issue of other religions and Christian communities, this is the general view held by Catholics?
Answer: If one assumes all salvation referred to in the Council (LG 8, LG 16 etc) are visible to us on earth, then the Council would be a break with the past. The Council would be ambiguous if this irrational premise is used.
 
2. How can you say that Vatican Council II is pro Fr.Leonard Feeney ?
 
Ad Gentes 7 affirms the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus when it refers to all needing faith and baptism for salvation and all needing to enter the Catholic Church as through a door. Ad Gentes 7 is placed in the Catechism of the Catholic Church 846 under the sub title Outside the Church No Salvation.
There are no known exceptions to Ad Gentes 7 or extra ecclesiam nulla salus mentioned in Vatican Council II.
 
3.Why do you say there are no known exceptions mentioned in Vatican Council II to extra ecclesiamn nulla salus?
 
Since all salvation in Heaven is visible only to God and not visible to us. We do not know any case in 2014 saved in imperfect communion with the Church(UR 3), seeds of the Word (AG 11), invincible ignorance(LG 16) etc.
Vatican Council II just mentions these cases. They are probabilities. The Council does not state that they are exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
 
4. Fr.Leonard Feeney was condemned for not accepting the baptism of desire etc?
If he was condemned for heresy then it was a mistake, an objective mistake. It would mean that Pope Pius XII assumed that the baptism of desire etc was visible to us in Heaven. It would have to be visible and known for it to be an exception to the dogma on salvation.
 
5.So did Pope Pius XII make a mistake?
 
No, Pope Pius XII supported Fr.Leonard Feeney on doctrine/dogma in the earlier part of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 when he referred to 'the dogma', the 'infallible statement' and as the Church knew and taught it for centuries. The text of the dogma does not mention any exceptions.
The latter part of the Letter refers to disobedience/discipline. Fr.Leonard Feeney did not go to Rome when called to defend himself.
The Letter says he was excommunicated for disobedience.
The Letter does not state that there are known exceptions to the dogma or that implicit desire and being saved in invincible ignorance were exceptions to the dogma on exclusive salvation.
-Lionel Andrades