Glad I tuned in to Raymond Arroyo's The World Over on EWTN last night.
I've read several articles on what the pope has done, and I found one that really stands out to me.
If you haven't yet read any articles on what Pope Francis has done, I highly recommend The Remnant's article: Killing Capital Punishment: Francis vs. the Catholic Church
Written by Christopher A. Ferrara
From Twitter...
I can see where some Catholics would come to this conclusion.
I've got nothing to add to this, except God help us. 🙏
In Christ,
Julie
https://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/4000-killing-capital-punishment-francis-vs-the-catholic-church
https://twitter.com/mange513/status/1025403309606227968
Maybe someone in Rome read your previous post and decided to provide you an answer.
ReplyDeleteJulie: "How can dogma change?"
Antipope Bergoglio: "Hold my beer."
ReplyDeleteThe Catechism has already been changed.The change is related to your last post on the dogma EENS.
The Catechism of the Council of Trent briefly mentions the desire for the baptism of water of the unknown castechumen who dies before receiving it. This was understood to be a hypothetical case and not an practical exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).It cannot only hypothetical.
Similarly the Catechism of Pope Pius X mentions being saved in invincible ignorance and at the same time affirms the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS. It does not state that being saved in invincible ignorance refers to known people saved outside the Church and so is relevant to EENS.
But the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1994) says all who are saved are saved through Jesus and the Church while not affirming the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS. So CCC 846 indicates that there are known cases of non Catholics saved outside the Church through the baptism of desire(BOD), invincible ignorance(I.I) etc and they are exceptions to the dogma EENS.
They are visible and known people saved outside the Church and so the traditional interpretation of the dogma EENS is not affirmed.
CCC 848 does not refer to 'the dogma' but an 'affirmation' outside the Church there is no salvation. It mentions the Church Fathers and not the numerous saints who affirmed the strict interpretation of EENS.
So in the Catechisms since 1555 ( see website Whispers of Restoration) they affirmed the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS and did not indicate there were exceptions to BOD, BOB and I.I, since these are known people saved outside the Church.This is something obvious.
CCC 846 though in a subtle way has made the change.
CCC 847 and 848 consolidate the deception.
Then CCC 1257 is traditional and states that the Church knows of no means to eternal beatitude other than the baptism of water.But at the same time mentions God is not limited to the Sacraments- as if we can known these people who are saved without the baptism of water.Can we know such people who are exceptions to traditional EENS? No.
If we are careful to avoid these mistakes when reading the Catechism(1994) then dogmas do not change.The dogma EENS has not changed.-Lionel
AUGUST 3, 2018
Catechism of the Catholic Church - read with caution Outside the Church there is no salvation (846) and The Necessity of Baptism(1257)
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/08/catechism-of-catholic-church-read-with.html
The biggest change, at least for me, because I remember being taught prior to VII that the one and only true church IS the Catholic Church, was when VII came along and told us that the true church only "subsists" in the Catholic Church.
ReplyDeleteJulie, more than a few folks have come to the same conclusion as that fella on Twitter.
It's hard to believe that I have been alive long enough to have watched the entire Catholic Church dismantle itself. If you only knew what it used to be like.
Maybe someday someone somewhere in a position to actually change things will figure out that Vatican II wasn't such a great idea after all. But don't hold your breath.
God have mercy on us all.
Mary
AUGUST 5, 2018
ReplyDeleteIt is not enough to present Traditional Catholic Catechisms
The website Whispers of Restoration states that among their most accessed resources is the Traditional Catholic Catechisms.But they do not realize that this is meaningless .Since if they interpret these Catechisms with the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance as referring to known people saved outside the Catholic Church, as does the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF), then these catechisms become a rupture with the old ecclesiology ( supported by these traditional catechisms), the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Syllabus of Errors( ecumenism of return etc), and they make Mission and the proclamation of the Social Reign of Jesus unnecessary.
So when they refer to the Catechisms they have to make it clear that they can be interpreted in two ways.For example BOD and I.I mentioned in the Catechisms of the Council of Trent and Pius X.Catholics interpret the baptism of desire(BOB), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) as referring to known or unknown people, objective or implicit cases, visible or invisible people or as I put it, it is Cushingite or Feeneyite.
The editorial team at the Whispers of Restoration do not realize that they are interpreting all the Catechisms with Cushingism, they use an irrational premise and so there is a hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition.
When hypothetical cases of BOD, BOB and I.I are considered to be non hypothetical and objective people in the present times saved outside the Church, even though none of them are visible, I call this action Cushingism.
When hypothetical cases of BOD, BOB and I.I are just hypothetical there are no concrete examples of salvation outside the Church.So there are no practical exceptions to the dogma EENS, the past ecclesiology, the ecumenism of return, the Syllabus of Errors, the need for Mission to non Catholics and the proclamation of the necessity of the non separation of Church and State with the Social Reign of Christ the King.
When they interpret the traditional Catholic Catechisms with Cushingism then they become a rupture with EENS( Feeneyite) and Vatican Council II ( Feneeyite). It is in harmony with EENS(Cushingite) and Vatican Council II(Cushingite).
When the traditional catechisms affirm the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Catholic Church, the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS, then there is a rupture with Vatican Council II (Cushingite) and so the editors of Whispers of Restoration reject the Council.Since obviously Vatican Council II(C) is a rupture with Traditon.
Cushingism, the false premise, the false reasoning and heresy creates the rupture and not the Council per se.
This is what the editors at Whispers of Restoration do not seem to understand and they are unable to discuss this issue.They cannot critique what I write.
So they have excluded the Catechism of the Catholic Church(1994) from the list of Catechisms since obviously they are interpreting it with Cushingism.So for them the Catechism(1994) is a rupture with the other Catechisms and the past ecclesiology of the Church.
Like wise they have produced books critical of Vatican Council II, which have all interpreted the Council with Cushingism and so there is a rupture with the Traditional Catechisms of the Church.
I affirm all those Traditional Catechisms along with the Catechism of the Catholic Church(1994) and Vatican Council II and I interpret them all with Feeneyism.
-Lionel Andrades
CONTINUED
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/08/it-is-not-enough-to-present-traditional.html
The biggest change, at least for me, because I remember being taught prior to VII that the one and only true church IS the Catholic Church, was when VII came along and told us that the true church only "subsists" in the Catholic Church.
ReplyDeleteLionel:
we now know that there are two ways to interpret Lumen Gentium 8 (subsists it) and really the whole of Vatican Council II. We choose to interpret LG 8 as referring to a known or unknown person,visible or invisible saved outside the Church.
Ask yourself if know any non Catholic saved outside the Church where the true, Church subsists ? No.
Of course not.
So LG 8(subsist it in ) is not an explicit,visible in the flesh exception to the traditional teaching.The traditional teaching said the true Church of Christ exists in only the Catholic Church and all need to be a member of this Chruch for salvaion.
Similarly when LG 8 refers to 'elements of sanctification and truth' in other religions, we have to ask ourself if there is anyone whom we know, or can know, who has been saved outside the Church with elements of sanctification and truth? For us humans it is not possible.
So when the two popes and the CDF interpret LG 8 as referring to known people saved outside the Church I call it CUSHINGISM.
When I interpret LG 8 as referring to unknown and invisible people saved outside the Church I call it FEENEYISM.
Mary, the whole Church is interpreting Vatican Council II with Cushingism.
______________________
Julie, more than a few folks have come to the same conclusion as that fella on Twitter.
It's hard to believe that I have been alive long enough to have watched the entire Catholic Church dismantle itself. If you only knew what it used to be like.
Lionel. We have discovered what was the error. Now the dismantling has began. The truth has a power of its own independent of us and it is asserting itself.
I interpret Vatican Council II with Feneeyism, Mary you and Julie can do the same.
______________________
Maybe someday someone somewhere in a position to actually change things will figure out that Vatican II wasn't such a great idea after all. But don't hold your breath.
Lionel:
Vatican Council II ( Cushingite) is a rupture with the dogma EENS and the de fide teaching that all need to be members of the Church with no known exceptions.
But Vatican Council II (Feeneyite) is NOT a rupture with EENS and when Catholics know this, from here begins the Restoration with correct theology and doctrine.-Lionel Andrades