If you assume BOB and BOD are linked to EENS, then LG 16,LG 8, UR 3 etc will contradict EENS. Then V2 is heretical

Introibo Ad Altare DeiJune 23, 2015 at 5:52 AM

The pertinent part of Lumen Gentium, the heretical document of Vatican II to which you refer states: "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"

Lionel:

We don't know any such case in 2015. So do not infer it is related to the dogma. This is the approach of the liberals and heretics.

 Modernism loves the ambiguous.

Lionel:

This line comes from the error Cardinal Francesco Marchetti Selvaggiani made in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949. He assumed there were people saved in invincible ignorance and these cases were known to us in real life and so they were exceptions to the Feeneyite version of the dogma. This was accepted by the liberal theologians in Boston and Cardinal Cushing and the Jesuits put this line in Vatican Council II.

However when we are aware that these cases are not known to us, this line does not refer to an explicit exception to the dogma in the present times.

________________________

 In what sense of the word is "knowing" used? Is it simple awareness of the claim which you must then investigate or be guilty? (This is the traditional notion, but when was the last time some V2 sect "priest" ever preached that claim?) "Knowing" can also mean "accepting it as true." This is the sense most V2 clerics give to it, so as to excuse virtually everyone from having to convert due to "invincible ignorance." 

Lionel:

There is no way we can know these cases on earth. They are known only to God.

__________________________________

Moreover, it's important to note that the idea that false sects can be a "means of salvation" was taught be John Paul The Great Apostate in "Catechesi Tradendi" of 10/16/79 using the near word for word verbiage of Vatican 2:
"It is extremely important to give a correct and fair presentation of the other Churches and ecclesial communities, that the Spirit of Christ does not refrain from using as means of salvation." 

Lionel:

Yes hypothetically, as a possibility, yes.

De facto we cannot judge. We do not know any one who will be saved or is saved in the present times outside the Church i.e without Catholic Faith and the baptism of water.

__________________________________

As Pope Pius IX taught in "Ubi primum": Let those who wish to be saved come to this pillar, to this foundation of the truth which is the Church, let them come to the true Church of Christ which, in her Bishops and in the Roman Pontiff, the supreme head of all, possesses the uninterrupted succession of apostolic authority...We will never spare either Our efforts or Our labors, to bring back,by the grace of the same Jesus Christ, to this unique way of truth and salvation, those in ignorance and error."

Lionel:

Agreed!

__________________________

Non-Catholic religions are not a "means of salvation", since the Roman Catholic Church is the unique way of truth and salvation.

Lionel:

Yes. This was also mentioned in the CDF Notification on Fr.Jacques Dupuis S.J (2001)

 V2 is heretical at face value,

Lionel:

At face value, if you use Marchetti's false inference, if you assume BOD and BOB refer to known cases in June 2015, if you assume BOB and BOD are linked to EENS, then LG 16,LG 8, UR 3 etc will contradict EENS. Then V2 is heretical.

The error would be there on the part of the sedevacantist but not in V2 itself. For me V2 is Feeneyite. It is traditional.LG 16,UR 3 etc do not contradict EENS.

________________________________________

 and its heresy affirmed by the post-V2 "popes."

Lionel:

Yes like the traditioalists they do not affirm the Feeneyite version of the dogma, the traditional version.

______________________________________

 LG 14 is nothing more than confusing Modernist claptrap to deceive people that the Council didn't really teach error.

Lionel:

The Council has picked up LG 14 from error in Boston in 1949. Though it can be interpreted without error when Marchetti's inference is avoided. It can be accepted as a dejure statement. It is not defacto known.It can be accepted as a reference to something invisible instead of being visible.Otherwise it becomes heretical.It would also be irrational.

-Lionel Andrades