Cardinal Richard Cushing and the Jesuits made a mistake when they inserted two paragraphs in Vatican Council II (AG 7,LG 14). They were irrelevant passages. The passages were based on Cardinal Marchetti's factual error in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949. The Letter brought a foreign element into the Catholic Church.A new doctrine was created.
These superfluous passages are not exceptions to the orthodox passages in Ad Gentes and Lumen Gentium 14 which affirm the rigorist interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
Here are the two superfluous passages which are irrelevant to the traditional teaching on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.
SUPERFLUOUS PASSAGES
Therefore those men cannot be saved, who though aware that God, through Jesus Christ founded the Church as something necessary, still do not wish to enter into it, or to persevere in it."(17) Therefore though God in ways known to Himself can lead those inculpably ignorant of the Gospel to find that faith without which it is impossible to please Him (Heb. 11:6)... -Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II
Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved...
Catechumens who, moved by the Holy Spirit, seek with explicit intention to be incorporated into the Church are by that very intention joined with her. With love and solicitude Mother Church already embraces them as her own.-Lumen Gentium 14
1. We human beings can physically see the dead in Heaven.
2. We can know someone in Heaven in the present times who is there without 'faith and baptism'.
The children infer that the baptism of desire and being saved in inculpable ignorance are exceptions to the rigorist interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Most Catholics think like this, including the apologists.2
So the two superfluous passages above contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and also the following two orthodox passages in AG 7 and LG 14.
Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church. -Lumen Gentium 14,Vatican Council II
2. We can know someone in Heaven in the present times who is there without 'faith and baptism'.
The children infer that the baptism of desire and being saved in inculpable ignorance are exceptions to the rigorist interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Most Catholics think like this, including the apologists.2
So non Catholics do not have to convert in the present times Catholic children are taught.Why ?
Since 1) we human beings can physically see the dead in Heaven and 2) we humans can know someone in Heaven in the present times who is there without 'faith and baptism'!!.
So the two superfluous passages above contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and also the following two orthodox passages in AG 7 and LG 14.
ORTHODOX PASSAGES 
Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church. -Lumen Gentium 14,Vatican Council II 
Therefore, all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church's preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door. - Ad Gentes 7,Vatican Council II
So Catholics conclude wrongly that Vatican Council II contradicts the rigorist interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.They are misled.
They use the same irrational approach with other magisterial documents.First comes the irrational premise ( 1. We human beings can physically see the dead in Heaven) and then follows the strange inference ( 2. We know someone in Heaven in the present times who is there without 'faith and baptism' and so the dogma is contradicted. There is salvation outside the Catholic Church).Then comes the conclusion based on the irrational premise and inference ( Vatican Council II has a hermeneutic of rupture with the past).
The two superfluous passages are what Donald Flood on the EENS FORUM would call a 'null set'. They would refer to John Martignoni's 'zero cases'.
The Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) has to assume that these zero cases are known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and then the CDF (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,Vatican) expects them to accept Vatican Council II with this irrationality. 3 Cardinal Gerhard Muller will not admit that the CDF has made a doctrinal mistake. Instead the CDF wants the SSPX and sedevacantists to accept this objective error. 4
For Bishop Maurice E. Piat , Bishop of Port-Louis , ' the SSPX is not in communion with the Catholic Church. The talks initiated by Pope Benedict XVI in 2011-2012 with a view to restore communion, failed.'(Rorate Caeili). They failed because Pope Benedict and Bishop Piat interpret Vatican Council II with an irrational premise and inference, as do the school children in Detroit and Port-Louis. So Vatican Council II is a break with Tradition. This is acceptable for Bishop Piat and the CDF.It is correctly rejected by the SSPX.
For Bishop Maurice E. Piat , Bishop of Port-Louis , ' the SSPX is not in communion with the Catholic Church. The talks initiated by Pope Benedict XVI in 2011-2012 with a view to restore communion, failed.'(Rorate Caeili). They failed because Pope Benedict and Bishop Piat interpret Vatican Council II with an irrational premise and inference, as do the school children in Detroit and Port-Louis. So Vatican Council II is a break with Tradition. This is acceptable for Bishop Piat and the CDF.It is correctly rejected by the SSPX.
For Cushing every one had to assume that 'zero cases' were known exceptions to the dogma . They were not zero cases for him! Until today for most Catholics, the superflous passages refer to known exceptions to the dogma on salvation.So Vatican Council II is a break with the Syllabus of Errors and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
For me it is not a break with Tradition. Since I am aware that the superflous passages do not contradict the orthodox passages. They are 'null sets', 'zero cases'.
The SSPX and the sedevacantists (CMRI,MHFM etc) must note that the superflous passages do not contradict Tradition, unless like the liberals, they assume that the dead now saved in Heaven are visible to us on earth.
There is nothing new in Vatican Council II with regard to an ecumenism of return and the need for non Christians to formally convert into the Church for salvation.
-Lionel Andrades
1.
An irrationality is being taught at Catholic schools in Detroit, where Michael Voris is based- and he has no comment http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/04/an-irrationality-is-being-taught-at.html
2.
Mic'd Up: Catholic School Daze
Bishop Paul B.Bootkoski will not endorse Church teaching on sodomy and also Vatican Council II ?
Ralph Martin assumes that we can see the dead saved in invincible ignorance and a good conscience
There is an option Fr.John Zuhlsdorf
3.
Pope Benedict expected the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) to accept Vatican Council II with the theology of Cushingism. This is doctrinal heresy http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/04/pope-benedict-was-expecting-society-of.html
Fr.John Hunwicke and Patrick Archbold expect the SSPX to also compromise the Faith with the irrational premise and conclusion http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/03/frjohn-hunwicke-and-patrick-archbold.html
The 'mainstream' Church has to begin the reconciliation process with doctrinal truth.They have to admit that there are no exceptions to the centuries old interpretation of the dogma EENS, on March 19,2015 http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/03/the-mainstream-church-has-to-begin.html
Ad Gentes 7 can be interpreted with Feeneyism or Cushingism http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/04/ad-gentes-7-can-be-interpreted-with.html
4.
Muller-Fellay Meeting: Just two points needed
Cardinal Gerhard Muller and Bishop Bernard Fellay must agree on two points for doctrinal sanity http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/09/cardinal-gerhard-muller-and-bishop.html#links
Muller-Fellay Meeting: Just two points needed
Cardinal Gerhard Muller and Bishop Bernard Fellay must agree on two points for doctrinal sanity http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/09/cardinal-gerhard-muller-and-bishop.html#links
April 8, 2015
Rome Vicariate, Ecclesia Dei, SSPX, FSSP and CMRI still agree with me !
__________________________
Questions and Answers
what premise ?
The irrational premise is "The dead are visible to us on earth".
what inference/ conclusion ?
The inference is since the dead are visible to us on earth, those who are saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance being explicit ( visible in the flesh) become exceptions to the traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
So it is concluded that Vatican Council II (LG 16 etc) contradict the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So it is concluded that Vatican Council II is a break with Tradition, it has the hermeneutic of rupture.
what theology,
The post -1949 theology says every one needs to enter the Catholic Church except for those in invincible ignorance or with the baptism of desire.Since it assumes that defacto( in fact in the present times,explicitly) there are known exceptions to the interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney of Boston.So it is a theology which assumes there is salvation outside the Church even though we cannot know of any one saved without 'faith and baptism'.
what Tradition.
Pre- 1949 Catholic Tradition, on salvation ( soteriology) says there is exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. The three dogmas on extra ecclesiam nulla salus ,defined by three Church Councils, do not mention any exception. The text also does not mention the baptism of desire or being saved in invincible ignorance.I am referring to Cantate Dominio, Council of Florence 1441 etc.
Also Mystici Corporis and the Council of Trent mention implicit desire etc but do not state that these cases are known to us, to be exceptions to the dogma.Neither do they state that there are exceptions to the dogma.
Yet with the false premise and inference is how the Council of Trent, the Catechism of Pope Pius X etc are interpreted.
Do you accept the baptism of desire?
Yes. I believe a Catechuman who has an implicit desire for the baptism of water and dies before he receives it can be saved. Since God will provide the means for him to receive the baptism of water. It has been the experience of saints, including St. Francis Xavier that some people returned from the dead only to be baptised by them with the baptism of water.
Irrational premise, Irrational inference, Non traditional conclusion
The secular media uses an irrational premise which is "We can see the dead who are now in Heaven, we can physically see them in Heaven and on earth".
They then make an irrational inference which is " Since we can see people in Heaven saved without the baptism of water and formal entry into the Church, there is known salvation outside the Church and these cases are an explicit exception to the traditional interpretation of EENS."
Their conclusion is : Vatican Council II is a break with EENS.
They then make an irrational inference which is " Since we can see people in Heaven saved without the baptism of water and formal entry into the Church, there is known salvation outside the Church and these cases are an explicit exception to the traditional interpretation of EENS."
Their conclusion is : Vatican Council II is a break with EENS.
I accept the Magisterium
'For me the magisterial teaching of the Church documents (and not the contemporary magisterium i.e the persons in power) support the rigorist interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ( AG 7,LG 14, CCC 1257,845,846, Redemptoris Missio 55, Dominus Iesus 20 etc).
I accept the Magisterium ( Vatican Council II (AG 7,LG 14), CCC 1257, 845,846, Redemptoris Missio 55, Dominus Iesus 20, Council of Trent,Syllabus of Errors, Catechism of Pope Pius X, Cantate Dominio Council of Florence 1441 etc).
Magisterium, Scripture and Tradition, before and after Vatican Council II support Fr.Leonard Feeney and the four Catholic professors of theology, who were expelled by Boston College. http://www.creativeminorityreport.com/2015/03/dont-blame-vatican-ii.html#comment-1943178630
Exclusivist ecclesiology?
The new theology is based on being able to see the dead. Remove the premise, which is, "I can see the dead on earth".We then have the old ecclesiology, the exclusivist ecclesiology. The ecclesiology of Vatican Council II is exclusivist. Since it affirms the rigorist interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus in Ad Gentes 7, which says all need faith and baptism for salvation.LG 16,LG 8,UR 3,NA 2 etc are not known exceptions to Ad Gentes 7 or the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. We are left with the old ecclesiology.
Who agrees with you?
Exclusivist ecclesiology?
The new theology is based on being able to see the dead. Remove the premise, which is, "I can see the dead on earth".We then have the old ecclesiology, the exclusivist ecclesiology. The ecclesiology of Vatican Council II is exclusivist. Since it affirms the rigorist interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus in Ad Gentes 7, which says all need faith and baptism for salvation.LG 16,LG 8,UR 3,NA 2 etc are not known exceptions to Ad Gentes 7 or the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. We are left with the old ecclesiology.
Who agrees with you?
Archbishop Thomas E.Gullickson says Vatican Council II does not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors
DEAN OF THEOLOGY AT ST. ANSELM SAYS THERE ARE NO KNOWN EXCEPTIONS TO THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
Implicit intention, invincible ignorance and a good conscience (LG 16) in Vatican Council II do not contradict extra ecclesiam nulla salus –John Martigioni
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/11/implicit-intention-invincible-ignorance.html#links
-L.Ahttp://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/11/implicit-intention-invincible-ignorance.html#links
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment