Are those Catholics who do not believe in EENS outside the Church?

My belief is that because the salvation doctrine has been under a cloud for so long, I cannot judge those who hold various loopholes concerning it. Nevertheless, I must still insist that once a person realizes that the dogma is defined ex cathedra, then they must hold it to be Catholic.

If they deny it outright, as did Archbishop Cushing when he said that the doctrine is “nonsense,” then that is a mortal sin. Does denying it place one “outside the Church” as a formal heretic?

If one holds, even privately, that the Church is “wrong” and that this definition, or any other, is not infallible, then, yes, in the internal forum they are no longer in the Church. In the external forum, they can believe themselves to be Catholic, even insist that they are “Catholic,” but that is a contradiction. When it comes to this particular doctrine, those who make a point of opposing it are almost always practicing Catholics who are embarrassed by its literal clarity. So, they try to water it down by expanding the definition of “Church,” by applying baptism of desire to anyone who is sincere, or by holding that no one can be punished for not believing what they had no way of knowing, i.e., invincible ignorance. These kinds of objections do not make one a “formal” heretic. But they are in material heresy. Only God can judge their culpability. It becomes a much more serious obligation to embrace the doctrine as defined when someone is shown the infallible definitions and one admits that the teaching is de fide ex cathedra.

Apocalypse 1, 20
"As for the mystery of the seven stars that thou sawest in my right hand, and the seven golden lamp-stands -- the seven stars are the angels of the seven churches, and the seven lamp-stands are the seven churches."

Apocalypse 6, 6
And I heard as it were a voice in the midst of the four living creatures, saying, "A measure of wheat for a denarius, and three measures of barley for a denarius, and do not harm the wine and the oil."

Apocalypse 10, 3-4
"And I will grant unto my two witnesses to prophecy for a thousand two hundred and sixty days, clothed in sackcloth. These are the two olive trees and the two lamp-stands that stand before the Lord of the earth."

Apocalypse 14, 19-20
And the angel cast his sickle to the earth, and gathered the vintage of the earth, and cast it into the great wine press of the wrath of God. And the wine press was trodden outside the city, and there came forth blood out of the wine press, up to the horses' bridles, for a thousand and six hundred stadia.

Apocalypse 19, 15
And he will rule them with a rod of iron, and he treads the wine press of the fierce wrath of God Almighty.


Can you tell me what the oil and the wine are, and who the two witnesses are?

Is that a 'no'?

The oil and the wine are oil and wine and the two witnesses are Enoch and Elijah.
And that verse should be 11:3-4 not 10:3-4

You're right, it's 11, 3-4. But you're wrong about the rest. Try again?

Why don't you just explain yourself instead of trying to make everyone guess what goes on in your mind?

Dominion,

The question is not what is the oil and the wine, and who are the two witnesses - since you don't have a clue - but what you believe they are.

Ok, I'll play.

The oil and the wine is the gospel message, the word that brings salvation. The two witnesses are the Old Testament Church and the New Testament Church.

tornpage

Hooray for Tornpage, very good! The oil is prophecy and the wine is the wrath of God. You're pretty much right about the two witnesses too, the Jewish Church and the Christian Churches...ALL of them.