Sunday, December 28, 2014

I would ask you to show me an ambigous passage with respect to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.LG 16,LG 15,LG 8,NA 2,UR 3 etc ? None of them are ambigous for me.

  • The education and formation of our young religious brothers and sisters.
  • Vehicle maintenance on the small, hard-driven fleet that shuttles our brothers and sisters far and wide to distribute our books and spread the Faith.

Tantumblogo on The Blog for Dallas Area Catholics recently met a religious sister from the St.Benedict Center Still River,MA. He seemed impressed that she did not hold the rigorist interpretation of the dogma.He considers the baptism of desire an exception to the dogma.
Do you'll still affirm the rigorist interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus and while doing so put aside Vatican Council II ?The Council and extra ecclesiam nulla salus ( rigorist interpretation) are not compatible for Tamtamblogo.
So how can you say that the St.Benedict Center accepts extra ecclesiam nulla salus?(And there are doctrinal criticisms of Medugorje on the website!!)
Do you'll affirm the dogma as opposed to some parts of Vatican Council II ?
For me there are no ambigous passages in Vatican Council II which contradict extra ecclesiam nulla salus. There are the orthodox passages. The passages which appear ambigous are those in which 1) the distinction between explicit-implicit , objective-subjective etc are not made and 2) an irrational premise is used because of the explicit-implicit, visible-invisible etc, distinction not being made.
Try it out. I would ask you to show me an ambigous passage with respect to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.LG 16,LG 15,LG 8,NA 2,UR 3 etc ? None of them are ambigous for me.Could you use my approach?
-Lionel Andrades

Cardinal Ratzinger in a subtle way did away with the dogma.

There have been so many reports of Pope Francis doing away with dogmas and doctrine but most Catholics are unaware that Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger and Pope John Paul II in magisterial documents put aside the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

28.The Church has faithfully preserved what the word of God teaches, not only about truths which must be believed but also about moral action, action pleasing to God (cf. 1Th 4:1); she has achieved a doctrinal development analogous to that which has taken place in the realm of the truths of faith. Assisted by the Holy Spirit who leads her into all the truth (cf. Jn 16:13), the Church has not ceased, nor can she ever cease, to contemplate the "mystery of the Word Incarnate", in whom "light is shed on the mystery of man".-Veritatis Splendor,1993

 Cardinal Ratzinger mentioned a  development of doctrine on the truths of  faith!
For him there was a development of doctrine based on the Fr.Leonard Feeney case  in Boston, when the magisterium suggested  there were explicit cases  of non Catholics saved  with the baptism of desire  and in invincible ignorance.So these explicit cases, for them, were exceptions to the rigoroust interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to Fr;Leonard Feeney and Tradition.

The 'development of the faith' based  on an irrationality ( visible to us baptism of desire) was expressed in Vatican Council II.
This was a subtle way of doing away with the dogma. It was by inferring that there were visible cases of   the deceased , now in Heaven. Otherwise how could there be exceptions? Invisible cases cannot be exceptions.
This error was not corrected by Pope Benedict XVI or Pope John Paul II.
A major Catholic dogma, called an infallible teaching by Pope Pius XII,was placed under the rug because of alleged being able to see the dead.
Even Archbishop Lefebvre was not aware of the objective error in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.Until today today, both groups of traditionalists, SSPX and St.Benedict Centers,are making the same error and are not aware of it.
-Lionel Andrades

Since they assumed that Pope Pius XII was correct and Fr.Leonard Feeney wrong Cardinal Ratzinger used an irrational inference in magisterial documents

Pope John Paul II made a doctrinal error

In Dominus Iesus Cardinal Ratzinger chose the irrational inference and rejected the traditional dogma on salvation

Similar to Dominus Iesus and the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Cardinal Ratzinger used an irrational inference in Ut Unum Sint


Archbishop Thomas E.Gullickson says Vatican Council II does not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors
June 21, 2014
Catholic Religious indicate the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 made a factual mistake :implicit desire etc is not visible to us 

Catholic religious contradict Bishop Fellay : Nostra Aetate is not an exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus