Thursday, June 12, 2014

First they assume those saved with ‘a ray of the Truth’ are explicit. Then they criticize NA 2 for inferring there is salvation outside the Church

First they assume that those saved with ‘a ray of the Truth’ are explicit. Then they criticize NA 2 for suggesting that there is salvation outside the Church.
 
Editor:
the root of your confusion, it seems to me, is that you think that some people see baptism of desire as “an exception to extra ecclesiam…”
Lionel:
Yes.
Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre sees the baptism of desire as an exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.So does Bishop Bernard Fellay.
Fr.Francois Laisney, Fr.Peter Scott and Fr.Joseph Pfieffer
in the links you have provided, see the baptism of desire as an exception to the literal interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney.
All salvation for them ( baptism of desire, being saved in invincible ignorance, a ray of the Truth, imperfect communion with the Church etc) is an exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus. For them it is saying there is salvation outside the Church. It means, for them,  every non Catholic does not need to enter the Church. So they reject Vatican Council II.
Why do they reject Vatican Council II?

Since first they assume that those saved with ‘a ray of the Truth’ are explicit. Then  they criticize NA 2 for suggesting that there is salvation outside the Church.
Is it not the same with you?
Is NA 2 ( a ray of the Truth) an exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Syllabus of Errors etc ? Is it not saying for you that there is salvation ( known) outside the visible limits of the Church? Every one does not need ‘faith and baptism’(AG 7) in Britain in 2014 for salvation?
Editor:
That is utter nonsense. The “desire” (of those who die without baptism) is precisely to die “within the Church”.
Lionel:
Yes they die within the Church and they are saved.
The issue is : are these cases relevant to extra ecclesiam nulla salus? Is the baptism of deisre an  exception to the traditional interpretation of the dogma whose text does not mention any exception ?
-Lionel Andrades
http://catholictruthblog.com/2014/06/08/will-pope-francis-inter-faith-peace-prayers-please-god-if-so-which-one/#comment-16338

So when I meet a non Catholic, I know he is on the way to Hell since the Church tells us so and it is not because I can read souls

Anyone who says there are exceptions, infers they can see the dead.They infer there is salvation outside the Church.
 
Editor:
“The Church” never points to individuals and says he/she is not saved.
Lionel:
And except for the saints the Church never says he or she is in Heaven, including Judas, whom Scripture indicates is damned.
Editor:
That is prohibited to us – only God sees the soul and knows its disposition.
Lionel:
We  cannot read souls and neither the do popes claim that they can read souls.
However the  Church does tell us that all need 'faith and baptism' (AG 7,Vatican Council II) for salvation.
The Church does tell us that those who do not convert into the Church are oriented to Hell which has fire.(Cantate Domino, Council of Florence 1441, extra ecclesiam nulla salus).
So the Church is telling us that all Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, Muslims, Protestants and other non Catholics are on the way to Hell unless they convert with 'faith and baptism'.
The Church is saying that all the Jews,Muslims and others in England in 2014 are on the way to Hell without Catholic Faith and the baptism of water.
The Church is telling us that in Heaven there are only Catholics there who have died without mortal sin and with Catholic Faith and the baptism of water.
Jesus tells us that those who do not believe will be condemned. The Bible and the Church tell us that mortal sins lead to Hell.
So when I meet a non Catholic, I know he is on the way to Hell since the Church tells us so and it is not because I can read souls.
Editor:
 Anyone who IS saved, however, can only be saved through the Church.
Lionel:
Agreed.
Editor:
So, give up chasing this nonsensical straw man, Lionel. Life is too short. If you think bloggers will read these lengthy posts, read again – I can see your heresy in the first few lines and don’t read further, so you can bet your bottom dollar that nobody else will plough through these lengthy comments.
Lionel:
'I can see your heresy'?
It is heresy to allege that you can see the dead saved with the baptism of desire who are visible to you in Scotland and so you reject the traditional interpretation of the ex cathedra dogma on salvation. You rejct it with visible- in- Scotland exceptions.
Anyone who says there are exceptions, infers they can see the dead.They infer there is salvation outside the Church.
-Lionel Andrades

Make an announcement : Say the Franciscans of the Immaculate affirm extra ecclesiam nulla salus in accord with Vatican Council II.Ask the CDF to do the same.

Franciscans of the Immaculate must announce that they are accepting Vatican Council II but without the explicit exceptions theory. This is an irrational theory being used by the Vatican Curia and the political Left in the interpretation of the Council.

Franciscans of the Immaculate
 

 If the Vatican Curia would ask the Franciscans of the Immaculae (FFI) if they endorsed Vatican Council, they would answer, "Yes we accept Vatican Council II in accord with the traditional interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus".

If the Vatican Curia ask the FFI if they reject Nostra Aetate 2 they would respond, " We do not reject Nostra Aetate 2. We affirm it as being being implicit for us and explicit only for God. So it is not an exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.We reject Nostra Aetate 2 ( a ray of the Truth) as being physically explicit for us in 2014".

If they are further questioned, "Do you accept the traditional interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to Fr.Leonard Feeney"?, they would respond, "Yes we accept the traditional interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus and reject an explicit for us baptism of desire.Instead we accept an implicit for us baptism of desire. So we affirm the baptism of desire (implicit desire)  along with the traditional interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus".

If the CDF/Ecclesia Dei,Vatican asks them to clarify, how can they affirm the baptism of desire and also the traditional interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney they could respond, "Since implicit baptism of desire is not visible to us it does not conflict with the teaching which says every one needs to be a visible member of the Catholic Church. There is no conflict with the Principle of Non Contradiction. Defacto every one needs to be a visible member of the Catholic Church and there are no exceptions. De jure there could be those saved with the baptism of desire.This is hypothetical so it is not an exception to the traditional interpretation of the dogma".

So the bottom line is that they can affirm Vatican Council II and also Catholic Tradition.Things couldn't be so good. It's a win-win situation. They can have their cake and eat it too!

So make an announcement!

Say the FFI affirm extra ecclesiam nulla salus in accord with Vatican Council II without the irratonal inference of being able to see the dead-saved who are living exceptions to Tradition.

The FFI affirms extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors along with the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC 846) in which those who are saved through Jesus and the Church are not known exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

The FFI affirms extra ecclesiam nulla salus in accord with the Catechism of Pope Pius X and Vatican Council II.

The FFI would invite the Vatican Curia to confirm if they also interpret Vatican Council II according to Tradition, especially the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as interpreted by the Church Councils, popes, saints and Fr.Leonard Feeney of Boston.-Lionel Andrades

SSPX, Franciscans of the Immaculate can affirm Vatican Council II and also Catholic Tradition : eat your cake and have it too http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/06/sspx-franciscans-of-immaculate-can.html

You are denying teachings which are obligatory for all Catholics to believe in.This is a sin.It is the sin of faith.

Ecumenist:
ok, thx Lionel.
But I still think that's a hyper-trad position, which is mus-interpreting the church (like the Fundees can misinterpret the Bible, by over-focusing on the words -- like missing the meaning by studying the font face).
Lionel:
The word trad is pejorative. It is now clearly ideological.
I am a Catholic. I affirm the traditional teachings of the Catholic Church in harmony with Vatican Council II, a Council which the political Left interprets with an irrational premise.
Trad, hyper-trad, liberal,etc are words  been created by the new division, the new dividing element which has come into the Catholic Church.They are supported by political organisations which enforce pro -Satanic  values like abortion, euthanasis, atheism etc.
It is like at he time of the Protestant revolt in Europe. Along with the political help of the German princes, Luther brought new doctrines into the Catholic Church and division also.The result was violence, wars, apostasy and evil.
You are bringing new doctrines into the Church supported by the political Left, which include the Masons and the other enemies of the Church.You could become a 'Fundee' from the Left.
Ecumenist:
All the key data points line up
watch Pope Francis video (hardly a hyper-trad)
http://www.davenevins.com/loveofgod/topics/more/charismatic-gifts_4all_francis.htm
Lionel:
I haven't watched the video.
Last year Pope Francis said that we cannot find Jesus outside the Church and he cited St.Igantius of Loyola and Pope Paul VI. Then he contradicted  himself.
Usually he is speaking in the context of particular people whom he is meeting or addressing.
Catholic Herald:
"Pope Francis also said Catholic charismatics have a special role to play in healing divisions among Christians by exercising "spiritual ecumenism" or praying with members of other Christian churches and communities who share a belief in Jesus as lord and savior
."
Lionel:
Whenever someone says 'Pope Francis said', this or that , it has to be seen in the context of  other popes and Catholic Tradition.Since Jesus is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow and the road to Heaven and Hell does not change with the changing times.
Protestants need to enter the Catholic Church for salvation is the teaching of Catholic Tradition, including Vatican Council II.
The kerygma must include accepting Jesus in the Catholic Church.
Ecumenist:
Read this. It's unmistakable again -- spiritual ecumenism
http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/pope-francis-comments-and-address-at-charismatic-renewal-convention
Read JP2 encylical:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ut_Unum_Sint

...There is no rational response, because hyper-trads put the church over the Greatest Commandment. Christ is bigger, not smaller.
 Lionel:
I love all people even those whom I know are being lost.
You are so impressed by 'miracles' that you willing to  reject the teachings of the Catholic Church.You are denying teachings which are obligatory for all Catholics to believe in.This is a sin.It is the sin of faith. The Catechism tells us that we must protect our faith.
The impressive miracles which you have seen, could take you away from the truth of the Catholic Church ? And  over time, they could turn out not to be miracles?
I have been at Catholic Charismatic revival meetings, where the so called healings, announced in public,  disappeared after a day or two.
Others who were healed or experienced something wonderful, in the name of Jesus have left the Church, outside of which, Jesus tells us in the Bible and through the Catholic Church, there is no salvation.
 Ecumenist:
Let go of the division/hatred brother;
 Lionel:
Let go of the ideology, friend, and come back to the Catholic Church 'in spirit and truth'.
 Ecumenist:
it's probably rooted in parental judgment (my two cents -- I've seen this over and over). It's not the real you.
Lionel:
It's definitely rooted in the Catholic Church according to the popes, upto John Paul II . And this is the Catholic Church not with the new, divisive doctrines, that are being politically enforced.You have picked them up like many others.
-Lionel Andrades
 

Is the SSPX General Chapter Statement 2012 contradicting the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 regarding Fr.Leonard Feeney ?

The SSPX General Chapter Statement 2012 affirms extra ecclesiam nulla salus and says there are no exceptions. The SSPX priests Fr.Francois Laisney and others say there are exceptions and that this is the teaching of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 relative to Fr.Leonard Feeney.The SSPX is maintaining two positions which are a contradiction.
The General Chapter Statement says there are no exceptions while Archbishop Lefebvre  considers the baptism of desire an exception.
Bishop Bernard Fellay considers Nostra Aetate an exception.
They are implying that the Letter of the Holy Office infers that we can see the dead in Heaven who are are visible on earth and they are exceptions. They all infer that the Letter of the Holy Office was teaching irrationality. It was also heresy. It rejected the defined dogma on exclusive salvation.
 
Catholic Truth,Scotland
Lionel is in error.
Lionel:
Lionel is not denying the baptism of desire. Just like you and the SSPX bishops and priests, he affirms the baptism of desire.
He only clarifies that the baptism of desire which you and the SSPX priests and the liberals refer to, is not visible for us. It is visible only to God. We can only accept it as being hypothetical. There is no other choice.So it cannot be an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.For something to be an exception it must be different and it must exist in our reality.It must be explicit. None of the readers here can name a person saved with the baptism of desire this year or last year.

Lionel:You are not on my mailing list.I sent you the few posts recently since they were related to the SSPX in Great Britain and Archbishop Lefebvre. You had no specific comment.I was waiting for you or a priest of the SSPX in Great Britain ( whom you could consult) to show me where I was wrong.No one has done so.
Catholic Truth,Scotland
Our policy is not to moderate posts unless there is a breach of our in-house rules, so I am releasing this with a warning that he is in theological error.
Lionel:
No one in the SSPX (USA or Europe) has showed me where is my theological mistake. I have been writing on this same subject for long.
Catholic Truth,Scotland
He is not a theologian – that is obvious – and he does not understand the teaching of the Church on baptism of desire.
Lionel:
The SSPX position on the baptism of desire is the same as the liberal theologians and dissenters who are otherwise criticized on this blog.
Catholic Truth,Scotland
Unless you feel that you can correct him further – I just don’t have the time – then I suggest you ignore his comments. Given his error,
Lionel:
'Given his error'- what is it precisely?. Tell it to me and I will correct.
I am saying there are no known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. This is also the position of the SSPX General Chapter Statement 2012.It is also the position of the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, traditionalists, who affirm the dogma according to Fr.Leonard Feeney.
Fr.Francis Laisney, Fr.Peter Scott and Fr.Joseph Pfieffer (SSPX -Resistance) say there are exceptions and the General Chapter Statement says there are no exceptions.I too say there are no exceptions.
Is the SSPX General Chapter Statement 2012 contradicting the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 regarding Fr.Leonard Feeney ? Could you ask an SSPX priest in Scotland to respond here?...-Lionel Andrades