Thursday, March 24, 2016

You can from now on interpret Vatican Council II without the irrational inference and the Council will be in harmony with traditional EENS. Try it and confirm it. Then let me know.

Immagine di copertina
Comments from Léon Bloy’s Role in the Catholicism of Jacques and Raissa Maritain, Crisis Magazine.
léon-bloy
Avatar


Michael Novak was a visiting professor at a Legion of Christ university in Rome when I spoke to him. I was disappointed that he did not affirm the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) even though he projected himself as a conservative Catholic, something he has done in this article too.
He interprets the dogma EENS and Vatican Council II just as Pope Benedict did in his recent interview with Avvenire.
So Cardinal Kasper has said that if ecclesiology can change then why not change in other teachings of the Catholic Church?
For me ecclesiology has not changed and there are no known exceptions to EENS mentioned in Vatican Council.
The hermenuetic method depends upon how you interpret the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorancehttp://eucharistandmission.blo...
Without this new theology, based on an irrational observation it cannot be said the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus has been changed or discarded.They have to use the irrationality: Synod Exhortationhttp://eucharistandmission.blo...
_____________________________


No Salvation outside the church isn't taught anymore, even though it is a infallible doctrine. Ecumenism and inter religious dialogue has caused this. According to this pope, anyone can be saved, no matter what you believe or if you don't have any beliefs at all. Jesus's teachings have been changed. read John 14:6, John 8:24, Mark 16:16 and then, tell me Jesus's teachings have not been changed.
The 'New Wave" since Vat. II says that doctrines can evolve according to the changes in society. The goal of Vat.II was to bring the church into the modern world, Instead of bringing the modern world into the church. According to the Modernists of today there are no eternal truths. Truths change with the societal changes,
I don't buy any of it. That is why I attend the Latin mass, where we follow the pre Vatican Calendar and the traditional teachings of the Catholic church.
If there are any more changes in the Catholic teachings, I am going to join the Eastern Orthodox church. Notice the word Orthodox.
_________________________
No Salvation outside the church isn't taught anymore, even though it is a infallible doctrine. Ecumenism and inter religious dialogue has caused this.
Lionel:
The cause is using an irrational premise and then inferring there is known salvation outside the Church. This is the magisterial error in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 and Vatican Council II. It is expressed in ecumenism and inter religious dialogue.
It can be avoided. Just omit the inference and we are back to the old ecclesiology. Try it and see.

You can interpret Vatican Council II without the new theology. Try it and see.http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/03/you-can-interpret-vatican-council-ii.html

_________________________
According to this pope, anyone can be saved, no matter what you believe or if you don't have any beliefs at all. Jesus's teachings have been changed. read John 14:6, John 8:24, Mark 16:16 and then, tell me Jesus's teachings have not been changed.
Lionel:
It is only by using the irrational inference ( being able to see people in Heaven) that it was possible to contradict EENS and of course John 3:5 and Mk. 16: 16.
You can from now on interpret Vatican Council II without the irrational inference and the Council will be in harmony with traditional EENS. Try it and cofirm it. Then let me know.

_______________________
The 'New Wave" since Vat. II says that doctrines can evolve according to the changes in society. The goal of Vat.II was to bring the church into the modern world, Instead of bringing the modern world into the church. According to the Modernists of today there are no eternal truths. Truths change with the societal changes,
I don't buy any of it. That is why I attend the Latin mass, where we follow the pre Vatican Calendar and the traditional teachings of the Catholic church.
Lionel:
The traditionalists and sedevacantists also use the new theology, which assumes the baptism of desire refers to known exceptions to the dogma EENS. This is a break with the old ecclesiology, based on EENS, for example in the 16th century.
-Lionel Andrades
http://www.crisismagazine.com/2016/leon-bloys-role-in-the-catholicism-of-jacques-and-raissa-maritain#comment-2586709194

The hermeneutic method depends upon how you interpret the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance

The apprehension of Catholics on the eve of the Post-Synod Exhortation - Roberto de Mattei-Roberto de Mattei, Corrispondenza Romana March 23, 2016 (Rorate Caeili)

Related image
Roberto de Mattei:
The continuity of doctrine is demonstrated through facts not words. Confronted with these novelties in praxis, how can it be said nothing will change? And how can the hermeneutic of continuity be proposed when it has already failed as far as the Vatican II documents are concerned?
Lionel : Vatican Council II's hermeneutic of continuity has not failed for me since there is no known salvation outside the Church for me.
It has failed for Pope Benedict XVI since there is known salvation outside the Church for him. So LG 16 would contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. There is 'a development of doctrine'. 
It is the same for Roberto de Mattei. LG 16 refers to a known case of salvation outside the Church i.e someone personally known who was saved in invincible ignnorance through no fault of his own, and of course without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
_________________________________

In his discourse to the Roman Clergy on February 14th 2014, Benedict XVI, the most authoritative promoter of the hermeneutic of continuity, admitted the debacle of this interpretation of the events.
Lionel: 
In his recent interview with Avvenire he rejected the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.He said there was a development of doctrine with Vatican Council II. There could only be a development if there was known salvation outside the Church.So he infers that LG 16 for example, refers to personally known and explicit cases of persons saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.This is the hermeneutic of rupture.It is a break with the past.It is a break with the old ecclesiology based on extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
____________________________________

 His abdication from the pontifical throne was first of all, the defeat of his tentative to stem the post-council’s religious and moral deviation by placing it on a level of pure theological and hermeneutical debate. When the same Benedict XVI moved from the hermeneutical level to that of the facts, in conceding the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum, he won the battle. And Summorum Pontificum represents the highest point of his pontificate.
Lionel:
However he permitted Summorum Pontificum with no change in the new theology of Rahner which he implemented in the Catholic Church.The new theology is based on their being empirically known cases of salvation outside the Church.So the Traditional Latin Mass is offered by the FSSP priests, in Rome for example, with LG 16 referring to known cases. Vatican Council II is a break with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as interpreted by the 16 th century missionaries.It is offering the Latin Mass with the hermeneutic of rupture.It is a rupture with the old ecclesiology.
___________________________________

Those who use the hermeneutic method, need to accept the possibility of different interpretations of the same text or event. 
Lionel :
The interpretation depends upon whether LG 16 refers to hypothetical or objective cases in 2016. Is there known salvation outside the Church or is there no known salvation outside the Church?
_____________________________________ 

If the plurality of interpretations is denied, by affirming that a document or a papal act must necessarily be read in continuity with the precedent Magisterium, the hermeneutical method is in itself rendered futile.
Lionel:
The hermenuetic method depends upon how you interpret the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance mentioned in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr.Leonard Feeney. If the baptism of desire etc refers to known cases  there is a heremeneutic of rupture.
If the baptism of desire refers to hypothetical, non -objective cases, it does not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So there is a hermeneutic of continuity.
Pope Benedict interprets Vatican Councul II with the hermenutic of rupture. Even for Bishop Bernard Fellay, LG 16 is a break with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.So he rejects Vatican Council II.
-Lionel Andrades



You can interpret Vatican Council II without the new theology. Try it and see.

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/03/you-can-interpret-vatican-council-ii.html

Without this new theology, based on an irrational observation it cannot be said the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus has been changed or discarded.They have to use the irrationality: Synod Exhortation




Michael Matt refers to Ludwig Ott who wrote The Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma. I read that book a long time back. I do not remember if he was using the new theology.However Matt then mentions the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
I assume  Michael Matt and Chris Ferrara , are assuming the baptism of desire refers to known cases, it is an example of salvation outside the Church and so it is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.This is the new theology.


It is relatively 'new' since it has been in the Church for some 70 plus years and so it was probably part of the religious formation of Michael Matt and Chris Ferrara as children.Perhaps it was the same also for Ludwig Ott.

If Matt and Ferrara are able to see that there cannot be any known salvation outside the Church; we cannot see people in Heaven without the baptism of water, or know of people on earth who are going to be saved without the baptism of water, then they could interpret the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, as it was known to the 16th century missionaries i.e there are no exceptions on earth to the dogma.Anyway in 2016 none of us knows of any exceptions.

It is only by assuming hypothetical cases are objectively known, that there can be a development with the dogma and a NEW theology created.

Without this new theology, based on an irrational observation, an irrational reasoning ( physically seeing people in Heaven) Pope Benedict and  Cardinal Kasper cannot  say the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus has been changed or discarded.They have to use the irrationality.
So it is important for Michael Matt and Chris Ferrara  to clarify this point.

We can affirm the traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus along with the baptism of desire  which is implicit, known only to God, accepted in principle and theoretical.So it is not relevant or an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

The baptism of desire and blood and being saved in invincible ignorance ( all allegedly without the baptism of water according to the new theology) is a zero case according to the apologist John Martignoni.

So zero cases cannot be the basis of a theology or projected as an exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.So the dogma has not changed after Vatican Council II as Pope Benedict suggested in the interview with Avvenire.This surprising interview seems a preparation for the Synod Report to be announced after Easter.

Theologically we have to be prepared when it is asked  by Cardinal Kasper that if the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus can be discarded or changed then why not other teachings of the Catholic Church ?-Lionel Andrades

https://whatisupwiththesynod.com/index.php/2016/03/22/the-new-newness-of-the-new-so-shiny/







You can interpret Vatican Council II without the new theology. Try it and see.

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/03/you-can-interpret-vatican-council-ii.html