Tuesday, March 18, 2014

Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate : Can Lumen Gentium 16 (being saved in invincible ignorance) be considered hypothetical and invisible for us ?

The 200-plus priests of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate (F.I) who had asked for permission to offer the Traditional Latin Mass (TLM) could also ask the Apostolic Commissioner Fr.Fidenzio Volpi OFM Cap, if they can accept Vatican Council II II with Lumen Gentium 16 (being saved in invincible ignorance) considered hypothetical and invisible for us.This is not asking much.
This will be an education for the Charismatic Renewal, Neo Cathechumenal Way and other Catholic communities which are orthodox on the issue of abortion, contraception etc but are confused on Catholic salvation.
Here is a Catholic Charismatic group in England, who are orthodox on abortion, contraceptions etc and support their local bishop.(1).However they will say that being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So for them every one in 2014 does not need to enter the Catholic Church visibly ( with faith and baptism) to go to Heaven. They interpret LG 16 etc as referring to defacto, objective cases known in the present times.
 
This is a common error in the Catholic Schools of Evangelisation of these communities.
This is also the error of the Vatican Curia and this community's  bishop in England. It is with this heresy that Fr.Fidenzio Volpi would like the Franciscans of the Immaculte to accept Vatican Council II.
1.The F.I priests could clarify that they accept Vatican Council II in which LG 16 refers to invisible cases for us , saved in invincible ignorance.
 
2.The F.I priests could clarify that they do not accept Vatican Council II in which LG 16 refers to visible cases for us, saved in invincible ignorance.
-Lionel Andrades
1.
 

Six months and no Traditional Latin Mass in Rome :misconception over Holy Mass being ideological must be removed

It is over six months and I have not been able to attend Sunday morning Holy Mass in the Traditional Latin Rite offered by the Franciscans of the Immaculate at the church near the Vatican.
 
I don't know why there still has to be all this confusion over the 'ideology' of the TLM when I also attend Holy Mass in Italian and affirm traditional ecclesiology and salvation theology in perfect agreement with Vatican Council II. The Council for me is in accord with extra ecclesiam nulla salus as interpreted by Fr.Leonard Feeney in which the baptism of desire, is unknown, invisible and hypothetical for us and so not relevant or an exception to the traditional interpretation of the dogma according to the saints.
 
So why is this still being made an issue to prevent the TLM being made freely available in Rome for those of us who affirm Tradition and do not consider Vatican Council II as being ambigous ?
 
The Franciscans of the Immaculate accept Vatican Council II as a historical reality. They accept the Novus Ordo Mass. I attended the Novus Ordo Mass numerous times at this church on Sunday mornings offered  by the F.I priests. The Franciscan priests accept the Council which says all need faith and baptism for salvation. They can accept LG 16 as being invisible, hypothetical for us and known only to God and so not an exception to AG 7 which is in agreement with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
 
So they can choose to offer the TLM with the traditional ideology of Vatican Council II.
 
Those 200- plus priests who asked Ecclesia Dei for permission to continue to offer  the TLM could also ask permission to interpret Vatican Council II in which there are no known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as interpreted by St. Alphonsus Ligouri and St.Maximilliam Kolbe.
 
Please make a public and formal request which shows that the Holy Mass, in any Rite, is not ideological and should not be suppressed for this wrong reason. Also the ecclesiology and traditional theology is there in Vatican Council II when LG 16 is considered invisible and not visible for us.With implicit and not explicit for us LG 16, Vatican Council II is not 'ambigous' but traditional.
-Lionel Andrades

Dissenters will use 'the ambiguities' but why do the SSPX and orthodox Catholics have to assume there are ambiguities

absconde_me says
The damage and hurt comes from the intentional ambiguities built into its constitutions.
Lionel:
It is understandable that the liberals and dissenters will use 'the ambiguities' but why does the SSPX and orthodox Catholics have to assume there are ambiguities.
For example Lumen Gentium 16 refers to those who are saved in invincible ignorance.
1.This is ambigous when it is assumed that those saved in invincible ignorance are known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
2.It is not ambigous when it is assumed that those saved in invincible ignorance are known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
Why does the SSPX, the Franciscan Friars of the Immmaculate etc have to choose N.1?
If LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc are interpreted rationally, as being invisible for us, there is no ambiguity in Vatican Council II.
 
absconde_me says :
My friend in the SSPX discloses his sense that "error has no rights." I believe this is the ultimate SSPX escape clause re: Vatican II. The SSPX will always hold that V II is fatally flawed because of the recognition that men ought to have freedom of religion.
Lionel:
Vatican Council II (Dignitatis Humanae) refers to the freedom of religion in a state with a secular Constituion.
The SSPX formally and legally recognizes that in secular states non Catholics have the right to practise their religion.