Saturday, May 2, 2015
Apparition Theology which Church Militant and Fr.Barron accept, contradict the exclusivist ecclesiology of Augustine and Aquinas.
We humans cannot know of an extra ordinary means of salvation. So there cannot be any defacto exception to the ordinary means of salvation.
Yes, baptism of desire is true and must be believed by Catholics since it’s taught by the Church.
Yes it can believed but not as an exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
So yes a person can be saved with the baptism of desire and we do not know any case in the present times.
I’ve written extensively on the subject on this blog and in my book which you’ll find at my bookstore.
For you these cases are known in April-May 2015 and so they are exceptions to the traditional interpretation of the dogma.
You also support the factual error in the Marchetti Letter.
Also you are unaware of the irrational theology, based on apparitions in CCC 1257,846 etc.
Since you also unknowingly use, Apparition Theology.
No, Jesus was not lying anymore than when He said that the mustard seed becomes the biggest of all shrubs (Mk 4:32) or when He said that “all who take the sword will perish by the sword.” (Matt. 26:52). Baptism of Desire is the doctrine that concerns extraordinary circumstances.
Fine but do not consider it an extra ordinary way in the present times.This would be irrational and heretical. There is only one way. It is Jesus in the Catholic Church. The way to salvation is 'faith and baptism'. The baptism of desire cannot be chosen or given or administered.If it happens it would be grace and it would be known only to God.
Zero cases of something cannot be considered an exception to all needing to formally enter the Church to avoid Hell.
Without this error Vatican Council II does not contradict Tradition doctrinally.
Jesus was speaking under ordinary circumstance in John 3:5 as the Church taught in the Roman Catechism. Correct nuances are critical when understanding doctrine, Scripture, law, etc.
John 3.5 and Mark 16:16 refer to the ordinary means of salvation.We humans cannot know of an extra ordinary means of salvation. So there cannot be any defacto exception to the ordinary means of salvation.
Vox Cantoris did not know that Vatican Council II affirms the rigorist interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and that Nostra Aetate and Lumen Gentium 16 does not contradict it.David unneccesarily went on the defensive in a dialogue on Facebook with the Vatican News Office.1
He asked if all religions are equal ? This was a good point to begin the dialogue.
I would have followed up by saying that as a Catholic I believe that the Catholic Church teaches in Vatican Council II and other magisterial documents that all non Catholics are oriented to Hell with no exception unless before they die they convert formally ( with faith and baptism ) into the Catholic Church. This would also include the Islamists in Benin.They are all going to Hell (AG 7,LG 14) .
responded citing Nostra Aetate, I would have agreed with him saying there are good things in other religions but the religions are false paths to salvation (LG 14,AG 7). We do not know any one in the present times saved with 'a ray of that Truth'(NA 2).Can't meet anyone this month! So NA 2 does not refer to an objective exception.We humans cannot know of any exception to all needing to convert for salvation in Benin.The pope could not meet someone there saved in invincible ignorance or with that 'ray of the Truth'. So dialogue should be conducted knowing that the Church is the ordinary means of salvation ( Redemptoris Missio 55).
Similarly Lumen Gentium 16 'those who without any fault do not know anything about Christ or his Church...' does not refer to an objective case in the present times. LG 16 is superflous with respect to the extra ecclesiam nulla salus, as it was interpreted over the centuries.
LG 16 does not contradict AG 7 and LG 14. All need to convert into the Church with 'faith and baptism' to avoid the fires of Hell. ( Cantate Dominio, Council of Florence 1441).
Vox Cantoris asks,' What of “no salvation outside of the Church?”. He does not affirm the Feeneyite version of the dogma according to Vatican Council II (AG 7,LG 14). Since he probably thinks the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 and the Catechism of the Catholic Church 846,1257 are correct. He is not aware that CCC 846,1257 and the Marchetti Letter are heretical and irrational. They are promting Apparition Theology.This is modernism which Vox Cantoris has accepted and so he gives the Vatican News an easy pass.
Similarly Tantumblogo 2 on the Dallas Blog comments on the Vox Cantoris blogpost but does not realize that there is heresy in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.Cardinal Ratzinger accepted the Marchetti factual error. In the Catechism there are Cushingite passages which assume that being saved in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire refer to defacto cases, explicit cases known in the present times.
The Magisterium at the Vatican promotes an irrational premise and inference.Then upon this irrationality (apparitions) they base their new theology. The new theology and ecclesiology is accepted by Vox Cantoris and Tantumblogo.So this creates a hermeneutic of discontinuity with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Syllabus of Errors and Tradition in general.They are both using the liberal interpretation of Vatican Council II and the Catechism (1992).
They could talk of salvation like the saints did and quote Vatican Council II and the orthodox passages in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
When someone cites exceptions (CCC 1257,LG 16 etc) show him that he assumes the dead in Heaven are living on earth to be exceptions. This is at the centre of the Vatican's Apparition Theology.3
Tell him that you do not know any one in May 2015 saved outside the Church i.e without faith and baptism (LG 16.AG 7).So in Vatican Council II there are no contradictions to the Feeneyite version of the dogma.This should be part of dialogue.-Lionel Andrades
Apparition theology in Detroit