Latest topics
» Angelqueen.org???
Tue Oct 16, 2018 8:38 am by Paul

» SSPX cannot accept Vatican Council II because of the restrictions placed by the Jewish Left
Wed Apr 18, 2018 5:55 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Vatican (CDF/Ecclesia Dei) has no objection if the SSPX and all religious communities affirm Vatican Council II (without the premise)
Sun Dec 10, 2017 8:29 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Piazza Spagna - mission
Sun Dec 10, 2017 8:06 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Fund,Catholic organisation needed to help Catholic priests in Italy like Fr. Alessandro Minutella
Sun Dec 10, 2017 7:52 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Catholic theocracy- Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) and extra ecclesiam nulla salus (Feeneyite) essential
Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:57 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» The Social Reign of Christ the King can be seen based on Cushingite or Feeneyite theology, Vatican Council II with the false premise or without it
Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:52 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» When Card. Ladaria and Bp Fellay meet a non Catholic they know he or she is oriented to Hell because the Church lic Church inspired by the Holy Spirit teaches this
Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:49 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» No denial from Cardinal Ladaria and Bishop Fellay : two interpretations of Vatican Council II and theirs is the irrational one
Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:44 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Ask Cardinal Ladaria a few questions when you meet him
Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:42 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Now it is the time for cardinals Kasper and Marx to reject Vatican Council II
Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:37 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» No denial from Cardinal Ladaria, CDF : schism from the Left over Vatican Council II
Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:35 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Schism over Vatican Council II ?
Sat Nov 25, 2017 9:30 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» SSPX recognises that Abp.Lefebvre's writings are obsolete : seminaries have to make the correction
Thu Nov 23, 2017 9:25 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Polish traditionalists handicapped : Archbishop Lefebvre made a mistake
Wed Nov 15, 2017 8:20 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Communities of Fr.Leonard Feeney in the USA when they interpret Vatican Council II with the irrational premise deny the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus
Wed Nov 15, 2017 5:18 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Bishop Robert J.McManus and Brother Thomas Augustine MICM,Superior,St.Benedict Center,Still River,MA, interpret Vatican Council II with the 'possibilites are exceptions' error
Mon Nov 06, 2017 8:47 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» SSPX must be aware of the deception of Abp.Guido Pozzo and confront it
Tue Oct 31, 2017 11:57 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Two popes must ask all Catholics to affirm Vatican Council II (premise-free) as they do
Mon Oct 30, 2017 5:16 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary Still River Ma., could lose canomical status because of Feeneyism
Sat Oct 28, 2017 5:54 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

Post  Lionel L. Andrades on 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


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