Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus Forum (No Salvation Outside the Church Forum)
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.
Latest topics
» The Unity of the Body (the Church, Israel)
Five Catholic academics accept the development of doctrine on salvation and Vatican Council II but reject it on morals and the death penalty EmptySun Mar 17, 2024 9:23 am by tornpage

» Defilement of the Temple
Five Catholic academics accept the development of doctrine on salvation and Vatican Council II but reject it on morals and the death penalty EmptyTue Feb 06, 2024 7:44 am by tornpage

» Forum update
Five Catholic academics accept the development of doctrine on salvation and Vatican Council II but reject it on morals and the death penalty EmptySat Feb 03, 2024 8:24 am by tornpage

» Bishop Williamson's Recent Comments
Five Catholic academics accept the development of doctrine on salvation and Vatican Council II but reject it on morals and the death penalty EmptyThu Feb 01, 2024 12:42 pm by MRyan

» The Mysterious 45 days of Daniel 12:11-12
Five Catholic academics accept the development of doctrine on salvation and Vatican Council II but reject it on morals and the death penalty EmptyFri Jan 26, 2024 11:04 am by tornpage

» St. Bonaventure on the Necessity of Baptism
Five Catholic academics accept the development of doctrine on salvation and Vatican Council II but reject it on morals and the death penalty EmptyTue Jan 23, 2024 7:06 pm by tornpage

» Isaiah 22:20-25
Five Catholic academics accept the development of doctrine on salvation and Vatican Council II but reject it on morals and the death penalty EmptyFri Jan 19, 2024 10:44 am by tornpage

» Translation of Bellarmine's De Amissione Gratiae, Bk. VI
Five Catholic academics accept the development of doctrine on salvation and Vatican Council II but reject it on morals and the death penalty EmptyFri Jan 19, 2024 10:04 am by tornpage

» Orestes Brownson Nails it on Baptism of Desire
Five Catholic academics accept the development of doctrine on salvation and Vatican Council II but reject it on morals and the death penalty EmptyThu Jan 18, 2024 3:06 pm by MRyan

» Do Feeneyites still exist?
Five Catholic academics accept the development of doctrine on salvation and Vatican Council II but reject it on morals and the death penalty EmptyWed Jan 17, 2024 8:02 am by Jehanne

» Sedevacantism and the Church's Indefectibility
Five Catholic academics accept the development of doctrine on salvation and Vatican Council II but reject it on morals and the death penalty EmptySat Jan 13, 2024 5:22 pm by tornpage

» Inallible safety?
Five Catholic academics accept the development of doctrine on salvation and Vatican Council II but reject it on morals and the death penalty EmptyThu Jan 11, 2024 1:47 pm by MRyan

» Usury - Has the Church Erred?
Five Catholic academics accept the development of doctrine on salvation and Vatican Council II but reject it on morals and the death penalty EmptyTue Jan 09, 2024 11:05 pm by tornpage

» Rethink "Feeneyism"?
Five Catholic academics accept the development of doctrine on salvation and Vatican Council II but reject it on morals and the death penalty EmptyTue Jan 09, 2024 8:40 pm by MRyan

» SSPX cannot accept Vatican Council II because of the restrictions placed by the Jewish Left
Five Catholic academics accept the development of doctrine on salvation and Vatican Council II but reject it on morals and the death penalty EmptyFri Jan 05, 2024 8:57 am by Jehanne

» Anyone still around?
Five Catholic academics accept the development of doctrine on salvation and Vatican Council II but reject it on morals and the death penalty EmptyMon Jan 01, 2024 11:04 pm by Jehanne

» Angelqueen.org???
Five Catholic academics accept the development of doctrine on salvation and Vatican Council II but reject it on morals and the death penalty EmptyTue Oct 16, 2018 8:38 am by Paul

» Vatican (CDF/Ecclesia Dei) has no objection if the SSPX and all religious communities affirm Vatican Council II (without the premise)
Five Catholic academics accept the development of doctrine on salvation and Vatican Council II but reject it on morals and the death penalty EmptySun Dec 10, 2017 8:29 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Piazza Spagna - mission
Five Catholic academics accept the development of doctrine on salvation and Vatican Council II but reject it on morals and the death penalty EmptySun Dec 10, 2017 8:06 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Fund,Catholic organisation needed to help Catholic priests in Italy like Fr. Alessandro Minutella
Five Catholic academics accept the development of doctrine on salvation and Vatican Council II but reject it on morals and the death penalty EmptySun Dec 10, 2017 7:52 am by Lionel L. Andrades


Five Catholic academics accept the development of doctrine on salvation and Vatican Council II but reject it on morals and the death penalty

Go down

Five Catholic academics accept the development of doctrine on salvation and Vatican Council II but reject it on morals and the death penalty Empty Five Catholic academics accept the development of doctrine on salvation and Vatican Council II but reject it on morals and the death penalty

Post  Lionel L. Andrades Sun Oct 22, 2017 5:32 am

OCTOBER 21, 2017

Five Catholic academics accept the development of doctrine on salvation and Vatican Council II but reject it on morals and the death penalty

LifeSiteNews interviewed five Catholic academics on how the Catholic Church has understood the development of doctrine. The five are:
Dr. Josef Seifert, founding rector of the International Academy of Philosophy in Liechtenstein (read full interview here)
Dr. Joseph Shaw, Oxford professor (read full interview here)
Dr. Claudio Pierantoni, Professor of Medieval Philosophy at the University of Chile (read full interview here)
John Paul Meenan, Professor of Theology and Natural Science at Our Lady Seat of Wisdom College (read full interview here)
Dr. Scott M. Sullivan, President of the Aquinas School of Theology and Philosophy
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/catholic-academics-raise-alarm-over-pope-franciss-teaching-on-doctrine

All the five names here have accepted the development of doctrine on salvation. Pope Benedict confirmed it in March 2016.He said that extra ecclesiam nulla salus(Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus) was no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century. He said there was 'a development' with Vatican Council II. All the five names above have accepted this development. No one has objected.
Image result for Photo Dr.Joseph Shaw
Dr.Joseph Shaw does not object when Catholics have to accept that invisible for us baptism of desire etc is a visible exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus) as it was known in the 16th century.This is also his official position.
This is the deposit of faith for him.
Yet he objects,correctly, when Amoris Laetitia assumes that we can know when a Catholic in manifest mortal sin is not in mortal sin and the divorced and remarried can be given the Eucharist.
So he has rejected the centuries old ecclesiology of the Church with the false premise of invisible people being  visible exceptions to all needing to be incorporated into the Church.He has accepted this 'development'.There is a new Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus for him. It is Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus with exceptions. This is all normal.
In principle he accepts that there can be a development of doctrine in salvation theology.He did not object to Pope Benedict's statement in March 2016 in the Avvenire interview.
None of the five names are going to affirm the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was known to the missionaries in the 16th century.
None of them are saying that invisible for us baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance are not visible.They are not known exceptions to the dogma Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus .So the magisterium made a mistake in the Fr. Leonard Feeney case.
They have all accepted the development of doctrine on Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus.
None of them are saying that Lumen Gentium  16( invincible ignorance), like UR 3, NA 2 ,GS 22, LG 8 etc refer to invisible cases and so there is nothing in Vatican Council II to contradict the stict interpretation of the dogma Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus as it was interpreted over the centuries.
They accept the development of doctrine on Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus when Vatican Council II is interpreted with the false premise ( invisible cases are visible exceptions to the dogma Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus).
So they accept the development of doctrine with Vatican Council II. They do not state that the Council can be interpreted without the false premise.
So is it any surprise when Cardinal Walter Kasper before the Synod said in an interview, that if ecclesiology could be changed ( could be developed!) then why cannot the Eucharist be given to the divorced and remarried.
Dr.Joseph Shaw attends the Tridentine Rite Mass with the new ecclesiology.He does not affirm the old exclusivist ecclesiology of the Latin and Greek Mass.He is politically correct and comfortable with the English Bishops and  Ecclesia Dei.They approve Una Voce and the Latin Mass Societies.None of them will state that all Jews and Muslims in Britain need to be incorporated into the Church as members for salvation with no exceptions.This was the old exclusivist ecclesiology. Now there is a development.
Joseph Shaw is looking after his career and personal interests.So he is not going to interpret Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus and Vatican Council II without 'the development' i.e without the false premise.
For me there is no development of doctrine in salvation or morals.Since baptism of desire, baptism of blood and I.I and LG 16, LG 8, LG 14, AG 7, AG 11, GS 22, UR 3, NA 2 etc all refer to hypothetical cases and not objectively visible people saved outside the Church.So no exception to the dogma Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus exists in 2017.
Similarly there is no development of doctrine for me on mortal sin.So we cannot say that someone living in manifest adultery is not in adultery and is an exception to the general rule. We cannot say that a divorced and remarried couple living together or a young couple living in concubinage, who claim they are living as brother and sister are really doing so. Even if it was true it would be known only to God. A priest cannot say that a couple living together are not in scandal.He simply cannot know of any exception.If they are living together there still is the sin of scandal.For people in general it would be an example of adultery.Now they are being given the Eucharist in Malta, Italy, Germany etc since there is a new doctrine created with Amoris Laetitia, its ' a development'.-Lionel Andrades


OCTOBER 21, 2017
With one small false premise which Christine Niles accepts in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 Vatican Council II has the hermeneutic of rupture for her
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/10/with-one-small-false-premise-which.html

Lionel L. Andrades

Posts : 60
Reputation : 158
Join date : 2015-05-11

Back to top Go down

Back to top

- Similar topics

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