Saturday, June 21, 2014

Did Pope Pius XII make a mistake ? : implicit desire, invincible ignorance have nothing to do with extra ecclesiam nulla salus

Why did  the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston mention implicit desire and being saved in invincible ignorance as if these cases are exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus ? They are not known or visible to us for them to be exceptions.
 
Why did Pope Pius XII not excommunicate Cardinal Cushing and the Jesuits for suggesting there were known exceptions to the defined dogma?

Implicit desire ( baptism of desire) and  being saved in invincible ignorance have nothing to do with the traditional interpretation of the dogma.
 
Did Pope Pius XII overlook a mistake? So what if someone is saved or not saved with the baptism of desire? It would be known only to God.So how can it be an exception to Fr.Leonard Feeney's literal interpretation?
 
Why does the Letter of the Holy Office have to explain implicit desire theologically, when we do not know of any explicit case?

How can Pope Pius XII suggest that there is salvation outside the Church when we do not know of a single case saved as such?
Pope John XXIII and Pope Paul VI did not correct the mistake and allowed it to be included in Vatican Council II.
 
According to the International Theological Commission website Pope Pius XII suggested there is salvation outside the Church and condemned Fr.Leonard Feeney's exclusivist interpretation. Where are these cases of the deceased- saved outside the Church, without the baptism of water and Catholic Faith ? To whom are they visible on earth?
 
10. Exclusivist ecclesiocentrism—the fruit of a specific theological system or of a mistaken understanding of the phrase extra ecclesiam nulla salus—is no longer defended by Catholic theologians after the clear statements of Pius XII and Vatican Council II on the possibility of salvation for those who do not belong visibly to the Church (cf, e.g., LG 16; GS 22).- Christianity and the World Religions, International Theological Commission (1997)
 
Did Pope Pius XII mistake de jure cases as being de facto? Did he consider what is hypothetical ( implicit desire) as being known in reality? Did he mix up theoretical cases as being practically known?  Where is there (defacto, visible) salvation outside the Catholic Church? 

The Letter of the Holy Office should have said that the baptism of desire and salvation in invincible ignorance are not relevant to the interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney.Instead restrictions were placed on the St.Benedict Center. The excommunication was not lifted for some 19 years.Did they want the priest to die excommunicated?

Fr.Leonard Feeney lived to see the same error of 1949 being placed in Vatican Council II. 2
 
Until today it is being said that Nostra Aetate 2, ' a ray of the Truth' is an exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus. It is as if these cases of the deceased saved with ' a ray of the Truth'  are known and visible in 2014.
 
Wikipedia says Lumen Gentium 16 ( invincible ignorance) is an exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus, repeating the error of the Letter of the Holy Office.
 
Fr.William Most, EWTN and Jeff Mirus( Catholic Culture) criticize Fr.Leonard Feeney for not knowing that there were  exceptions( visible). They call it, on line, 'The 'Tragic Errors of Fr.Leonard Feeney'.
 
The priest was always innocent. This was the tragedy.
-Lionel Andrades
 
1
 
2.
In a prepared statement for the press the former Jesuit (Fr.Leonard Feeney) added: "The conscience difficulty is that the diocese of Boston, under the auspices of Archbishop Cushing, and Boston College, under the auspices of Father John J. McEloney, S.J., both notably ignorant in the field of Catholic theology ... are teaching that there is salvation outside the Catholic Church." - Father Feeney Is Dismissed From Jesuit Order by Rome
 
 

The Grand Secret : Vatican Council II says all Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, Muslims, Protestants etc are lost

 
The Grand Secret : Vatican Council II says all Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, Muslims, Protestants etc are lost unless they convert into the Catholic Church.

Vatican Council II says all Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, Muslims and Protestants are lost but this is a secret in the Church and no one is talking about it.
Ad Gentes 7 says all need faith and baptism for salvation. We cannot name any one saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16) tc for them to be known exceptions to Ad Gentes 7.
 
If you keep the text of Ad Gentes 7 and Lumen Gentium 14 before you Vatican Council II is saying all need to convert into the Catholic Church.All need to be formal, visible members of the Catholic Church.Visible Catholic Faith and the baptism of water is needed.Outside the Church there is no salvation.

Vatican Council II is traditional on other religions and salvation.It is in agreement with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

It is in agreement with the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX), the St.Benedict Centers,USA,the popes, Church Councils,saints and the Catechism of the Catholic Church (846,845,1257).

While those saved in invincible ignorance and a good conscience (LG 16) are only possibilities which we accept, these cases are not exceptions to AG 7 and LG 14. They are not exceptions since they are known only to God.They are not known to us in 2013.We cannot see these persons who are now in Heaven.
 
We cannot name anyone saved with the baptism of desire or elements of sanctification (LG 8).We personally do not know any exceptions, since those who are dead are not visible to us.

Yet for many Catholics, those saved in imperfect communion with the Church (UR), seeds of the Word etc are visible and known.So Vatican Council II for them is a break with the past.

No where in Nostra Aetate is it said that non Catholics do not have to convert in their religion or that they are saved in general in their religion.We cannot name any 'good and holy '(NA) non Catholic, who is saved and is an exception to all needing 'faith and baptism' in 2013 to go to Heaven and avoid the fires of Hell.

Vatican Council II is traditional. This is a grand secret.

-Lionel Andrades
 
 

Catholic Religious indicate the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 made a factual mistake :implicit desire etc is not visible to us


 

Catholic Religious who have said that the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance are not known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, indicate that the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr.Leonard Feeney, has made a factual mistake, in its common interpretation.

There was no need for the cardinal who issued the Letter to mention implicit desire and being saved in invincible ignorance. He did mention them!.It  could be an indication that he considered these forms of salvation, an exception to all needing to convert into the Church with the baptism of water and Catholic Faith.It means they would have to be physically visible for him.Otherwise how could they be an exception to the dogma ?
This seems the general interpretation of the Letter which was not corrected by popes and the magisterium.
The objective error was then carried over into Vatican Council II by Cardinal Richard Cushing and the American Jesuits.
 
The  Letter of the Holy Office in the first half (introductory) seems to support Fr.Leonard Feeney on doctrine and in the second half criticizes him for disobedience.The Letter was an unofficial inter-office  communication from one bishop to another.It was placed in the Denzinger by Fr.Karl Rahner and supported by the pro-Mason Catholics.
 
Now more Catholics are aware, that it is common knowledge, that the dead cannot be seen on earth.So they cannot be considered exceptions to the dogma on exclusive salvation. So Pope Pius XII made an objective mistake. He also contradicted the traditional dogma which he called an ' infallible teaching'(Letter of the Holy Office). The text of the dogma defined by three Church Councils does not mention any exceptions. Also no magisterial text which does refer to the baptism of desire, says that it is explicit for us.This was the Cushing mistake.
In the Letter of the Holy Office and in Vatican Council II  Cushingism has to be noticed as an  inference. No change is required in the text. Once the Cushing inference is detected and avoided,  there is no objective error in the interpretation.For example, without Cushingism, LG 16,LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc do not contradict AG 7 and the traditional interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney.
-Lionel Andrades

 

 

DEAN OF THEOLOGY AT ST. ANSELM SAYS THERE ARE NO KNOWN EXCEPTIONS TO THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUShttp://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2013/10/dean-of-theology-at-st-anselm-says.html#links
Archbishop Thomas E.Gullickson says Vatican Council II does not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors
REDEMPTORIST PRIEST SAYS VATICAN COUNCIL II DOES NOT CONTRADICT ITSELF NOR THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
CANTATE DOMINO, COUNCIL OF FLORENCE ON EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS IS DE FIDE AND NOT CONTRADICTED BY VATICAN COUNCIL II- Fr. Nevus Marcello O.P http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/07/cantate-domino-council-of-florence-on.html
BRAZILIAN PRIEST SAYS VATICAN COUNCIL II DOES NOT CONTRADICT DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/07/brazilian-priest-says-vatican-council.html#links
LEGIONARY OF CHRIST PRIEST FR.RAFAEL PASCUAL AFFIRMS CANTATE DOMINO, COUNCIL OF FLORENCE

Catholic Religious contradict most Catholic priests and nuns : Nostra Aetate is not an exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus

Ted Cruz to President Obama: Demand the Release of Meriam Ibrahim

by Steven Ertelt | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 6/20/14

Senator Ted Cruz delivered a message to President Barack Obama yesterday during his speech at the Road to Majority Conference Thursday afternoon: demand the release of Meriam Ibraham. His speech follows on the heels of a large rally outside the White House that he and pro-life groups led.
Meriam is the Christian woman who was jailed when she was pregnant and was forced to give birth in chains in a Sudanese prison as she awaits a death sentence ad brutal flogging by Muslim officials because of her Christian faith.
The Daily Caller has more:
Processed with VSCOcam with c1 presetCruz also made a call for the president to stand up and demand the release of Meriam Ibrahim, the wife of an American citizen who was sentenced to 100 lashes and hanging for refusing to deny Christ.
“And then you look to another example. The example of Meriam Ibrahim,” Cruz said. “Meriam Ibrahim is someone every elected official, every American should be speaking out. Meriam Ibrahim is a young woman. She’s a wife. She’s a mother, and she is in prison in Sudan for the crime of being a Christian.”
“Every one of us needs to be lifting Meriam Ibrahim in prayer, but every bit as important, we need leadership,” Cruz continued. “The president of the United States should stand up and speak on Meriam Ibrahim.”
Ibrahim, 26, joined the Catholic Church shortly before she married U.S. citizen Daniel Bicensio Wani in December 2011. Because of that, Catholic Church officials are also speaking up on her behalf.
The Archdiocese of Khartoum has urged the judiciary in Sudan to review her case and overturn the death sentence.
“There are many people trying to persuade Meriam to renounce Christianity in order to be freed, but she is refusing. Some people are pleading with her husband to convince her to abandon Christian faith in order to save her life, but to no avail,” the archdiocese said.
“The Catholic Church — Archdiocese of Khartoum — expresses deep regret over the way the case is being handled in the court,” with disregard of “Meriam’s moral and religious beliefs,” it said.
“We are pleading with the judiciary and other concerned authorities to review the case … and to bring it to a reasonable end,” it said.
Meriam Ibrahim is not sentenced to die for her Christian faith for two years, until such a time as her newborn baby girl Maya is weaned, but she could be flogged within days if her appeal of her death sentence is thrown out. LifeNews recently covered the terrible nature of the flogging she will have to endure and how it will literally take her skin off of her body.
Meriam’s case has drawn international outrage. Meriam was jailed in September despite the fact she was pregnant, because she married a Christian – when authorities claim she is Muslim. Sudanese leaders suggested she may be freed weeks ago as international outrage grew – but there is still no sign of her release. She was forced to give birth to daughter, Maya, in prison, shackled to bed.
Now, human rights advocates have released a video of another woman flogged in public to highlight her case. In the video, dated 2010, the woman begs for mercy as police laugh and joke.