Latest topics
» Magsiterial Heresy ?
Sat Sep 26, 2015 8:36 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Magisterium should apologise to the SSPX for the excommunication of Archbishop Lefebvre
Sat Sep 26, 2015 8:34 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Brother Francis MICM made a mistake on Vatican Council II
Sat Sep 26, 2015 5:14 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Legion of Christ universities in Rome adapt to leftist laws
Fri May 22, 2015 7:53 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» CM, SSPX, MICM deny the Faith to please superiors
Thu May 21, 2015 4:44 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» SSPX and Church Militant are using the same liberal theology and are unaware of it
Wed May 20, 2015 9:54 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Michael Voris uses liberal theology and yet critcizes Michael Coren
Tue May 19, 2015 10:10 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Fr.John Zuhlsdorf condones Mass for suicide
Tue May 19, 2015 9:18 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Vatican Council II is traditional or liberal depending on how you interpret the Letter of the Holy Office
Mon May 18, 2015 5:57 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Church Militant unable to answer questions on extra ecclesiam nulla salus
Sun May 17, 2015 5:55 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Brother Andre Marie MICM and Christine Niles approve liberal theology on Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus
Sat May 16, 2015 5:23 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Christine Niles misses the elephant in the living room
Fri May 15, 2015 9:54 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Cardinal Pell recommends the Roman Forum and telling a lie
Wed May 13, 2015 9:43 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» GOOGLE CLOSES DOWN BLOG EUCHARIST AND MISSION
Tue May 12, 2015 9:23 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Vatican Council II interpreted without the irrational premise. The SSPX could affirm this
Mon Apr 13, 2015 9:25 am by George Brenner

» Cardinal Raymond Burke approved Fr. John Hardon's error
Thu Mar 12, 2015 5:27 pm by tornpage

» Fr.Robert Barron in Catholicism uses an irrational proposition to reach an irrational conclusion
Sat Mar 07, 2015 6:49 am by Lionel Andrades

» Cardinal Raymond Burke interprets Church documents with an irrational premise and conclusion and offers the Traditional Latin Mass
Sat Mar 07, 2015 6:25 am by Lionel Andrades

» Beautiful Gregorian Chant
Fri Mar 06, 2015 10:10 pm by tornpage

» Fr.Robert Barron in Catholicism uses an irrational proposition to reach an irrational conclusion
Fri Mar 06, 2015 6:47 am by Lionel Andrades


Factual Errors in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Factual Errors in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949

Post  Lionel Andrades on Wed Jun 25, 2014 8:38 am


There are objective errors in the Letter of the Holy Office  1949. The Letter uses a false premise.Upon this premise it has based its theology.The theology  suggests there are exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.What is not visible cannot be an exception. The baptism of desire is a possibility.It is  something we accept in faith, but it is not an exception to the literal interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney.Reason tells us that it is always implicit for us. It is always invisible for us. So how can what is invisible be an exception to all needing 'faith and baptism'(AG 7) for salvation.


1.

Therefore, no one will be saved who, knowing the Church to have been
divinely established by Christ, nevertheless refuses to submit to the
Church or withholds obedience from the Roman Pontiff, the Vicar of
Christ on earth.

Not only did the Savior command that all nations should enter the
Church, but He also decreed the Church to be a means of salvation
without which no one can enter the kingdom of eternal glory.-Letter of
the Holy Office 1949

Lionel:
The dogma, the infallible teaching says all need to enter the Church
for salvation and not only those who know. Those who know or are in
invincible ignorance are not known to us on earth.These cases are not
visible to us.Is it being inferred here that these cases are visible
to us so only those who know are culpable and every one in general
does not need to enter the Church  with Catholic Faith and the baptism
of water?
____________________________

2.

In His infinite mercy God has willed that the effects, necessary for
one to be saved, of those helps to salvation which are directed toward
man's final end, not by intrinsic necessity, but only by divine
institution, can also be obtained in certain circumstances when those
helps are used only in desire and longing. -Letter of the Holy Office
1949

Lionel:
'only in the desire and longing' have nothing to do with the
centuries old teaching which says all need to convert.There is no
visible case of someone saved ' only in the desire and longing'. So it
is not an exception to the dogma.Neither is it relevant.So why is it
mentioned here? What has 'only in the desire and longing' to do, for
example, with everyone needing to enter the Church in 2014 for
salvation ?
___________________________

3.
This we see clearly stated in the Sacred Council of Trent, both in
reference to the sacrament of regeneration and in reference to the
sacrament of penance (<Denzinger>, nn. 797, 807).-Letter of the Holy
Office 1949

The same in its own degree must be asserted of the Church, in as far
as she is the general help to salvation. Therefore, that one may
obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be
incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it is necessary
that at least he be united to her by desire and longing.

Lionel:
Desire and longing have nothing to do with the dogma extra ecclesiam
nulla salus. These cases are not explicit as it is being suggested
here.

No pope or saint, who has referred to the baptism of desire, has said
that it is visible for us. Rationally we know that the baptism of
desire is always implicit for us and explicit for God. This is a
given.
So why mention it here?
Is it because it is assumed here that these cases are visible to us
and so are exceptions to the traditional interpretation of Fr.Leonard
Feeney.
Did Pope Pius XII make a mistake ?
_______________________________

4.
However, this desire need not always be explicit, as it is in
catechumens; but when a person is involved in invincible ignorance God
accepts also an implicit desire, so called because it is included in
that good disposition of soul whereby a person wishes his will to be
conformed to the will of God. -Letter of the Holy Office 1949.

Lionel:
This is theology based on visible to us baptism of desire and being
saved in invincible ignorance.These cases are not known to us and here
its theology is being explained.
The theology is based on a false premise that of being able to see
the dead-saved.This is irrational. How can we see the dead? How can
the deceased-saved be exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus? We do
not know of a single explicit case of the dead saved and upon this
false premise a theology is being explained here.

__________________________________________

5.
These things are clearly taught in that dogmatic letter which was
issued by the Sovereign Pontiff, Pope Pius XII, on June 29, 1943,
(AAS, Vol. 35, an. 1943, p. 193 ff.). For in this letter the Sovereign
Pontiff clearly distinguishes between those who are actually
incorporated into the Church as members, and those who are united to
the Church only by desire.-Letter of the Holy Office 1949

Lionel:
No where in that dogmatic letter is it said that the baptism of desire
is explicit for us.This is another factual error.It is inferred
wrongly that the baptism of desire is visible in particular cases, who
do not need the baptism of water for salvation.This is an objective
error. We do not know any case of a person saved outside the Church
with implicit desire.No magisterial document claims that they are
visible to us or that they are exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla
salus.
________________________________

6.
Discussing the members of which the Mystical Body is-composed here on
earth, the same august Pontiff says: "Actually only those are to be
included as members of the Church who have been baptized and profess
the true faith, and who have not been so unfortunate as to separate
themselves from the unity of the Body, or been excluded by legitimate
authority for grave faults committed."-Letter of the Holy Office 1949

Toward the end of this same encyclical letter, when most
affectionately inviting to unity those who do not belong to the body
of the Catholic Church, he mentions those who "are related to the
Mystical Body of the Redeemer by a certain unconscious yearning and
desire,"

Lionel:
"are related to the Mystical Body of the Redeemer by a certain
unconscious yearning and desire," refer to cases which are implicit
for us.To be seen in real life they would have to be ghosts.So they
are not exceptions. If they were explicit, objectively visible then
they would be relevant to the dogma on exclusive salvation in the
Church.So this is not an exception to the dogma as interpreted by the
St.Benedict Center and Fr.Leonard Feeney i.e the traditional
interpretation, as it was known for centuries.
_________________________________

7.
From what has been said it is evident that those things which are
proposed in the periodical , fascicle 3, as the genuine teaching of
the Catholic Church are far from being such and are very harmful both
to those within the Church and those without.

From these declarations which pertain to doctrine,...-Letter of the
Holy Office 1949

Lionel:
It is not Catholic doctrine to assume that the dead are visible to us
and they are explicit, seen in the flesh exceptions, to extra
ecclesiam nulla salus.This is a new doctrine.
_______________________________

8.
certain conclusions follow which regard discipline and conduct, and
which cannot be unknown to those who vigorously defend the necessity
by which all are bound' of belonging to the true Church and of
submitting to the authority of the Roman Pontiff and of the Bishops
"whom the Holy Ghost has placed . . . to rule the Church" (Acts
20:28).-Letter of the Holy Office 1949

Lionel:
'submitting to the authority of the Roman Pontiff and of the Bishops
"whom the Holy Ghost has placed . . . to rule the Church"'.

The authorities of the Church were telling Fr.Leonard Feeney and the
St.Benedict Center that there is known salvation outside the
Church.This is a new doctrine. There was known salvation for them
since the deceased saved with implicit desire and in invincible
ignorance were allegedly visible in the flesh fo them to be
exceptions.The Holy Spirit cannot teach this irrationality.

To claim that there are known exceptions to a  dogma defined by three
Church Councils and which Pope Pius XII called an 'infallible
teaching' is heresy. It is also a rejection of the Nicene Creed ' I
believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sin'.This refers to the
baptism of water only. Here it is being implied in the Letter that
there are three or more known baptisms, water, desire, blood etc.
_____________________________

9.
Therefore, let them who in grave peril are ranged against the Church
seriously bear in mind that after "Rome has spoken" they cannot be
excused even by reasons of good faith. Certainly, their bond and duty
of obedience toward the Church is much graver than that of those who
as yet are related to the Church "only by an unconscious desire." Let
them realize that they are children of the Church, lovingly nourished
by her with the milk of doctrine and the sacraments, and hence, having
heard the clear voice of their Mother, they cannot be excused from
culpable ignorance, and therefore to them apply without any
restriction that principle: submission to the Catholic Church and to
the Sovereign Pontiff is required as necessary for salvation.-Letter
of the Holy Office 1949

Lionel:
'submission to the Catholic Church and to the Sovereign Pontiff is
required as necessary for salvation', who are here saying there are
visible exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.This is
factually incorrect.It is a fact of life that we cannot see the dead.
____________________________


Fundamentally the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 assumes that being
saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are exceptions
to the literal interpreattion of Fr.Leonard Feeney. Since they are
exceptions, they would have to be visible, for the Holy
Office.Invisible cases are assumed to be visible.This is irrational.
-Lionel
____________________


Did Pope Pius XII make a mistake ? http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/06/did-pope-pius-xii-make-mistake.html#links

Did Pope Pius XII make a mistake ? : implicit desire, invincible ignorance have nothing to do with extra ecclesiam nulla salus http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/06/did-pope-pius-xii-make-mistake-implicit.html#links

Lionel Andrades

Posts : 260
Reputation : 384
Join date : 2013-01-08

Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum