Thursday, March 5, 2015

March for Life 2015 : double standards


The March for Life will be held in Rome on May 10, 2015. Cardinal Raymond Burke is expected to be present.
Cardinal Raymond Burke approved an article by Fr.John Hardon, which rejects the traditional strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.If the dogma on salvation, approved by three Church Councils can be changed why would His Eminence expect Church teachings on pro-life and family issues to not also change?
There will be other particpants at the March for Life who also reject the traditional interpretation of the dogma on salvation.Among them could be the Catholics,John Henry Weston and Hilary White of Lifesites news.
 
I have mentioned in a previous blogpost that Fr.John Hardon's error was that he made an irrational inference. He assumed that being saved in invincible ignorance or with implicit desire referred to personally known, nameable cases in the present times.This was a false inference.This then became a false premise for him. Since he concluded that these cases of persons saved, this category of people, now in Heaven, were explicit exceptions to all needing the baptism of water, in the present times.They were exceptions to all needing to enter the Catholic Church for salvation. So based on the wrong premise, he wrongly concluded that every one did not defacto, in the present times, need to enter the Church for salvation. He used an irrational premise ( the dead-saved are visible on earth) which resulted in an irrational conclusion ( everyone does not have to defacto enter the Church).
Since he assumed that salvation in Heaven is explicit for us, those saved with the baptism of desire and in invincible ignorance, became exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So for him every one did not have to become a formal member of the Church, but only they had to, who were not in invincible ignorance.While those who knew about Jesus and the Church and yet did not enter were on the way to Hell.So he changed the original teaching which said all with Original Sin need the baptism of water.
This was the original mistake made by the Holy Office and the Archdiocese of Boston in 1949 when they assumed that a category of people now in Heaven were objective exceptions on earth to the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
 
Fr.Hardon wrote an article on outside the Church there is no salvation in which he repeated this mistake.Also as a consultant to the Holy See on the Catechism of the Catholic Church he let this error pass conspicuously in CCC 1257 (The Necessity of Baptism) and with confusion in CCC 846 (Outside the Church No Salvation).
 
Cardinal Raymond Burke approved this article by Fr.Hardon. Cardinal Burke  also recommends the Catechism of the Catholic Church which incorporates this confusion while he has never affirmed the traditional strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
This is also observed in Cardinal Raymond Burke's criticism of Vatican Council II. Salvation in Heaven is an explicit exception to the traditional interpretation of the dogma. So LG 16,LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc refer to visible in the flesh cases in 2015. Vatican Council II contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors for Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke. It is a break with the traditional teaching on other religions and Christian communities.This was also Fr.John Hardon's mistake.
 
If salvation in Heaven was not explicit, seen in the flesh for them, then there would be nothing in Vatican Council II to contradict the 'rigorist interpretation' of the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.Vatican Council II would be Feeneyite.It would not contradict the traditional teaching on non Catholics needing to convert into the Church to avoid Hell. Since the ecclesiology would still be traditional.
 
The 2015 March for Life seems like another case of Mark Shea being all for pro life issues and other Catholic teachings but changing the Nicene Creed, rejecting the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and interpreting Vatican Council II with an irrationality.
John Henry Weston and Hilary White of LifeSites.com use the same irrationality, approved by Cardinal Francesco Marchetti Selvaggiani and Cardinal Richard Cushing in 1949 - and Cardinal Raymond Burke.
Weston will not say that all need to enter the Church for salvation in 2015 ,with no exceptions.Life sites' cofounder is Protestant Steve Jalsevac.

According to the teachings of the Catholic Church, Jalsevec like the founder of Lifenews Steve Ertelt are on the way to Hell unless they convert into the Church formally.This is also the doctrine of the Church (without the irrational premise and conclusion).They  ignore this when they cover Catholic issues.
Like Cardinal Raymond Burke, John Henry Weston and Hilary White interpret Vatican Council II with an irrationality.Lumen Gentium 16 etc would refer to known exceptions to the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Church. They would have to be known to be exceptions.This shows up on Lifesites reports on Vatican Council II, Franciscans of the Immaculate etc.
For these pro life Catholics participating in the March for Life annually in Rome, abortion would be a mortal sin.To change the Church teachings on salvation would not be a mortal sin (or possibly they are not aware of the irrationality). How can those who 'develop' a dogma defined by three Church Councils not expect teachings on the family and divorced and remarried receiving the Eucharist, not also develop.Cardinal Kaspar has  said that he rejects the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Just as pro-life Catholics expect  Catholics to live the teachings of the Church on abortion, contraceptives etc they also must affirm the Church's teaching on exclusive salvation in the Church. Abortion is a mortal sin. So also is denying the Nicene Creed and the defined dogma with an irrational premise and conclusion.

-Lionel Andrades

For me too Fr.John Hardon was a holy priest and I admire Cardinal Raymond Burke

 
Lionel:
Cardinal Raymond Burke approved Fr. John Hardon's error
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/03/cardinal-raymond-burke-approved-fr-john.html

BloggerVox Cantoris said...

I am publishing your comment however, Father John Hardon was a holy priest and devoted his life as a true servant of Our Lord Jesus Christ and His people. Raymond Cardinal Burke is a profoundly holy, strong and courageous man; a Canonist of high reputation and integrity another true servant of Our Blessed Lord and a consolation to us.
I only briefly glanced at your link and I do not have time for a deep analysis or rebuttal suffice to say I disagree with you.
Others may choose to challenge your hypothesis and are welcome to do here.
Vox
____________________________ 
 
BloggerLionel:
For me too Fr.John Hardon was a holy priest and I admire Cardinal Raymond Burke. I have not been able to meet him in Rome.

My report refers to a general oversight in the Catholic Church, an error which is innocent.
I too once upon a time made this same error.

I think the Church needs to identify it, correct it and then move on.
_____________________________

BloggerVox Cantoris said...
Thank you; truly there seem to have been many errors that even pre-dated the Council that some day need to be clarified but what a debate that would open.

Liturgically, I would even go back to 1951 and start over!

-Lionel Andrades


https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=20981956&postID=9146538378469423885&isPopup=true

What was Fr. Hardons error that Cardinal Burke approved?

What was Fr. Hardons error that Cd. Burke approved? Just trying to keep up.
Lionel:
Fr.John Hardon's error was that he made an irrational inference. He assumed that being saved in invincible ignorance or with implicit desire referred to personally known, nameable cases in the present times.This was a false inference.This then became a false premise for him. Since he concluded that these cases of persons saved, this category of people, now in Heaven, were explicit exceptions to all needing the baptism of water, in the present times.They were exceptions to all needing to enter the Catholic Church for salvation. So based on the wrong premise, he wrongly concluded that every one did not defacto, in the present times, need to enter the Church for salvation. He used an irrational premise ( the dead-saved are visible on earth) which resulted in an irrational conclusion ( everyone does not have to defacto enter the Church).
 
Since he assumed that  salvation in Heaven is explicit for us, those saved with the baptism of desire and in invincible ignorance, became exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So for him every one did not have to become a formal member of the Church, but only they had to,  who were not in invincible ignorance.While  those who knew about Jesus and the Church and yet did not enter were on the way to Hell.So he changed the original teaching which said all with Original Sin need the baptism of water.
This was the original mistake made by the Holy Office and the Archdiocese of Boston in 1949 when they assumed that a category of people now in Heaven were objective exceptions on earth to the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
Fr.Hardon wrote an article on outside the Church there is no salvation in which he repeated this mistake.Also as a consultant to the Holy See on the Catechism of the Catholic Church he let this error pass conspicuously in CCC 1257 (The Necessity of Baptism) and with confusion in CCC 846 (Outside the Church No Salvation).
Cardinal Raymond Burke approved this article by Fr.Hardon. Cardinal Burke  also recommends the Catechism of the Catholic Church which incorporates this confusion while he has never affirmed the traditional strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
This is also observed in Cardinal Raymond Burke's criticism of Vatican Council II. Salvation in Heaven is an explicit exception to the traditional interpretation of the dogma. So LG 16,LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc refer to visible in the flesh cases in 2015. Vatican Council II contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors for Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke. It is a break with the traditional teaching on other religions and Christian communities.This was also Fr.John Hardon's mistake.
If salvation in Heaven was not explicit, seen in the flesh for them, then there would be nothing in Vatican Council II to contradict the 'rigorist interpretation' of the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.Vatican Council II would be Feeneyite.It would not contradict the traditional teaching on non Catholics needing to convert into the Church to avoid Hell. Since the ecclesiology would still be traditional.
-Lionel Andrades
 
 
March 4, 2015