SIMON RAFE NON CONOSCE CASO DELL'IGNORANZA INVINCIBILE

L'apologista Simon Rafe ha scritto  un e-mail a me:

L'insegnamento della chiesa è che una persona PUÒ essere salvare se non sono un membro visibile della chiesa. Per negare questo è di cessare di dare l'accettazione completa alla chiesa. Non desideriamo essere partito a tali cose.

Apologista Simon Rafe delle Real Catholic TV.com bisogno leggere Lumen Gentium 16, Concilio Vaticano II secondo analisi in seguente cinque punti.

Sì.L'insegnamento della Chiesa nel Concilio Vaticano II, Lumen Gentium 16 è che una persona può essere salvare nell'ignoranza invincibile ecc e così un membro non convenzionale e visibile della chiesa.

1. Non c’è l'ignoranza invincibile genuina di cui possiamo sapere umanamente. Non sappiamo chi Gesù Cristo giudicherà il Giorno di Giudizio come avendo ignoranza invincibile.

2. Non c’è l'ignoranza invincibile esplicita (esterno, visibile, ripetuto) conosciuta a noi.

3. Non c’è l'ignoranza invincibile implicita (in principio non conosciamo alcun caso). 4. Non conosciamo un singolo caso dell'ignoranza invincibile durante gli ultimi 100 anni.

5. Possiamo accettare soltanto l'esistenza dell'ignoranza invincibile come concetto. È ipotetico, una probabilità, una possibilità conosciuta soltanto al Dio. Così quando il LG 16 dice che i non cattolici nell'ignoranza invincibile possono essere salvare è ipotetico, qualcosa accettiamo in principio. Nessuno di noi conosce chiunque nell'Islam o nelle altre religioni che è nella genuina ignoranza invincibile. Non possiamo giudicare.

Ad Gentes 7, Concilio Vaticano II dice che la Fede Cattolica e di battesimo di acqua e bisogno per tutti per evitare inferno ed andare a cielo. AG 7 sta dicendo che ` assolutamente non c’e salvezza fuori della Chiesa Cattolica ‘. Così la Chiesa Cattolica sta affermando nel Concilio Vaticano II.

L’interpretazione rigorista dell’ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus `del salus e un insegnamento infallibile che può soltanto avere un'interpretazione; solo uno.

Similmente nessuna parte nel Catechismo della Chiesa Cattolica ce un riferimento o una citazione che contraddicono l'interpretazione rigorista di ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Senza prova contraria Rafe dovrebbe essere d'accordo con un'interpretazione del Concilio Vaticano II secondo Sacra Tradizione della Chiesa Cattolica.

Il Padre Santo Il Papa Benedetto XVI ha detto che il Concilio Vaticano II non è una rottura da tradizione.

Il battesimo dell'acqua è sia un concetto anche una realtà conosciuta (vedi esterna, ripetibile ed esplicito).

L'ignoranza invincibile e soltanto un concetto per noi poiché è conosciuto soltanto al Dio.

Potrei dire che tutto senza eccezione deve entrare formalmente nella Chiesa Cattolica (con Fede Cattolica ed il battesimo di acqua), mentre una persona nell’Induismo,’ in certo circostanze’ (Lettera dell'Ufficio Santo 1949) potrebbe essere salvare nell’Induismo e questo sarebbe conosciuto soltanto al Dio.

Michael Vorris di Real Catholic TV non ha problema con questo. Sul programmo The Vortex ha detto che ci sono soltanto Cattolici nel Paradiso.

Tutto nell'ignoranza invincibile salvare da Dio è solo cattolico.

_____________________________________________

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 2010

SIMON RAFE KNOWS NO CASE OF INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE

Apologist Simon Rafe wrote in an e-mail to me:

The teaching of the Church is that a person CAN be saved if they are not a visible member of the Church.

To deny this is to cease to give full acceptance to the Church. We do not wish to be party to such things.

Yes the teaching of the Church in Lumen Gentium 16 Vatican Council II is that a person can be saved in invincible ignorance etc and so not a formal,visible member of the Church.

Apologist Simon Rafe of Real Catholic TV.com needs to read Lumen Gentium 16, Vatican Council II according to the following step by step analysis in five points.

1. There is no genuine invincible ignorance which we humanly can know of. We do not know whom Jesus Christ will judge on the Day of Judgement as having invincible ignorance.

2. There is no explicit invincible ignorance (external, seeable, repeatable) known to us.

3. There is no implicit invincible ignorance (In principle we do not know any case).

4. We do not know a single case of invincible ignorance over the last 100 years.

5. We can only accept the existence of invincible ignorance as a concept. It is something hypothetical, a probability, a possibility known only to God.

So when LG 16 says non Catholics in invincible ignorance can be saved it is hypothetical, something we accept in principle. None of us knows any person in Islam or the other religions who is in genuine invincible ignorance. We cannot judge.

Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II states ‘all people’ need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water to avoid Hell and go to Heaven. AG 7 is saying ‘there is absolutely no salvation outside the Catholic Church’

So the Catholic Church is affirming in Vatican Council II. the ‘rigorist interpretation’ of the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, an infallible teaching which can only have one interpretation.

Similarly no where in the Catechism of the Catholic Church is there a quotation or citation which contradicts the rigorist interpretation of the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Without proof of anything contrary Rafe would have to agree with a Vatican Council II interpretation according to Sacred Tradition of the Catholic Church.

The Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI has said that Vatican Council II is not a break from Tradition.

The baptism of water is both a concept and a known reality (see able, repeatable and explicit).

Invincible ignorance can only be a concept for us since it is known only to God.

I could say that everyone with no exception needs to enter the Catholic Church formally (with Catholic Faith and the baptism of water), while a person in Hinduism, ‘ in certain circumstances ‘(Letter of the Holy Office 1949) could be saved in Hinduism and this would be known to God only.

Real Catholic TV's Michael Vorris has no problem with this. On The Vortex he said there are only Catholics in Heaven.

Everyone in invincible ignorance saved by God is a Catholic.

_____________________________________________

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2010/09/simon-rafe-non-conosce-caso.html#links

SIMON RAFE KNOWS NO CASE OF INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE

Apologist Simon Rafe wrote in an e-mail to me:

The teaching of the Church is that a person CAN be saved if they are not a visible member of the Church.

To deny this is to cease to give full acceptance to the Church. We do not wish to be party to such things.

Yes the teaching of the Church in Lumen Gentium 16 Vatican Council II is that a person can be saved in invincible ignorance etc and so not a formal,visible member of the Church.

Apologist Simon Rafe of Real Catholic TV.com needs to read Lumen Gentium 16, Vatican Council II according to the following step by step analysis in five points.

1. There is no genuine invincible ignorance which we humanly can know of. We do not know whom Jesus Christ will judge on the Day of Judgement as having invincible ignorance.

2. There is no explicit invincible ignorance (external, seeable, repeatable) known to us.

3. There is no implicit invincible ignorance (In principle we do not know any case).

4. We do not know a single case of invincible ignorance over the last 100 years.

5. We can only accept the existence of invincible ignorance as a concept. It is something hypothetical, a probability, a possibility known only to God.

So when LG 16 says non Catholics in invincible ignorance can be saved it is hypothetical, something we accept in principle. None of us knows any person in Islam or the other religions who is in genuine invincible ignorance. We cannot judge.

Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II states ‘all people’ need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water to avoid Hell and go to Heaven. AG 7 is saying ‘there is absolutely no salvation outside the Catholic Church’

So the Catholic Church is affirming in Vatican Council II. the ‘rigorist interpretation’ of the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, an infallible teaching which can only have one interpretation.

Similarly no where in the Catechism of the Catholic Church is there a quotation or citation which contradicts the rigorist interpretation of the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Without proof of anything contrary Rafe would have to agree with a Vatican Council II interpretation according to Sacred Tradition of the Catholic Church.

The Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI has said that Vatican Council II is not a break from Tradition.

The baptism of water is both a concept and a known reality (see able, repeatable and explicit).

Invincible ignorance can only be a concept for us since it is known only to God.

I could say that everyone with no exception needs to enter the Catholic Church formally (with Catholic Faith and the baptism of water), while a person in Hinduism, ‘ in certain circumstances ‘(Letter of the Holy Office 1949) could be saved in Hinduism and this would be known to God only.
 Real Catholic TV's Michael Vorris has no problem with this. On The Vortex he said there are only Catholics in Heaven.

Everyone in invincible ignorance saved by God is a Catholic.




_____________________________________________

1. Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience.-Lumen Gentium 16, Vatican Council II.

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2010/09/simon-rafe-knows-no-case-of-invincible.html#links

BISHOP BERNARD FELLAY AFFIRMS RIGORIST INTERPRETATION OF EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS : CONFUSION ON SEDEVANTIST WEBSITE

 I could say that everyone with no exception needs to enter the Catholic Church formally (with Catholic Faith and the baptism of water), while a person in Hinduism, ‘ in certain circumstances ‘(Letter of the Holy Office 1949) could be saved in Hinduism and this would be known to God only.

This it seems is what Bishop Bernard Fellay the leader of the Society of St.Pius X could have meant in the quotations cited in an article on the website of the Most Holy Family Monastery where is he is quoted and criticized.

It’s simple: St.Thomas Aquinas taught that everyone with no exception needed to be a formal member of the Holy Roman Catholic Church to avoid Hell and go to Heaven yet as a concept Aquinas believed there could be a man in the forest in invincible ignorance to whom God would provide the helps necessary to become a Catholic.

There is no other way to salvation  says Bishop Fellay except for the Church which Jesus has founded. Extra ecclesiam nulla salus !

Bishop Bernard Fellay, Conference in Denver, Co., Feb. 18, 2006: “So Faith is necessary. The Church is necessary. If we want to be saved, there is no other way except for the Church which Jesus has founded. Between God and creation, there is an infinite gap. On the side of man, since Original Sin, there is no way to cross this infinite abyss except by the bridge imposed and created by God in His only-begotten Son made flesh, Our Lord Jesus Christ. There is no other way to go to heaven except Our Lord Jesus Christ and Our Lord Jesus Christ wanted to associate with this work of Redemption the souls who would be united with Him, in Him, through Baptism, and which constitute the Mystical Body of Christ, the Catholic Church. What a tremendous mystery. This is why the Church is as necessary as Jesus; because it is the same reality.” (The Angelus, “A Talk Heard Round the World,” April, 2006, p. 5.)

The Hindu in Tibet is a hypothetical case. The bishop is not referring to a particular Hindu in Tibet whom he knows. In principle he accepts that there could be a Hindu in Tibet known to God only with the baptism of desire or who is in genuine invincible and has not had the Gospel preached to him or her. Since he is not referring to an explicit case he does not contradict the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus which says everybody needs to explicitly enter the Catholic Church and there are no exceptions.

Bishop Bernard Fellay, Conference in Denver, Co., Feb. 18, 2006: “We know that there are two other baptisms, that of desire and that of blood. These produce an invisible but real link with Christ but do not produce all of the effects which are received in the baptism of water… And the Church has always taught that you have people who will be in heaven, who are in the state of grace, who have been saved without knowing the Catholic Church. We know this. And yet, how is it possible if you cannot be saved outside the Church? It is absolutely true that they will be saved through the Catholic Church because they will be united to Christ, to the Mystical Body of Christ, which is the Catholic Church. It will, however, remain invisible, because this visible link is impossible for them. Consider a Hindu in Tibet who has no knowledge of the Catholic Church. He lives according to his conscience and to the laws which God has put into his heart. He can be in the state of grace, and if he dies in this state of grace, he will go to heaven.” (The Angelus, “A Talk Heard Round the World,” April, 2006, p. 5.)

So the above quotation is not a contradiction of the rigorist interpretation of the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

_______________________________________________

Bishop Bernard Fellay of the SSPX blatantly denies Catholic dogma by teaching that Hindus can be saved

By Bro. Peter Dimond, O.S.B.

-5/05/06-

We’ve repeatedly documented that almost all traditionalist priests deny the dogma Outside the Church There is No Salvation. We’ve also documented that among those dogma deniers, the priests of the SSPX are prominent. We’ve also pointed out that almost all of these dogma deniers sometimes make statements which seem to indicate that they hold the dogma; when, in fact, they don’t. All of this was on display in Bishop Bernard Fellay’s recent Conference in Denver, Colorado. His speech was printed in the recent issue of The Angelus. Notice that near the beginning of his Conference, Fellay made statements which absolutely seemed to indicate that he holds strictly to the necessity of the Catholic Faith and Jesus Christ for salvation.

Bishop Bernard Fellay, Conference in Denver, Co., Feb. 18, 2006: “So Faith is necessary. The Church is necessary. If we want to be saved, there is no other way except for the Church which Jesus has founded. Between God and creation, there is an infinite gap. On the side of man, since Original Sin, there is no way to cross this infinite abyss except by the bridge imposed and created by God in His only-begotten Son made flesh, Our Lord Jesus Christ. There is no other way to go to heaven except Our Lord Jesus Christ and Our Lord Jesus Christ wanted to associate with this work of Redemption the souls who would be united with Him, in Him, through Baptism, and which constitute the Mystical Body of Christ, the Catholic Church. What a tremendous mystery. This is why the Church is as necessary as Jesus; because it is the same reality.” (The Angelus, “A Talk Heard Round the World,” April, 2006, p. 5.)

Very shortly after making these statements, however, Fellay proceeded to deny the dogma and reveal that he doesn’t believe anything he just said.

Bishop Bernard Fellay, Conference in Denver, Co., Feb. 18, 2006: “We know that there are two other baptisms, that of desire and that of blood. These produce an invisible but real link with Christ but do not produce all of the effects which are received in the baptism of water… And the Church has always taught that you have people who will be in heaven, who are in the state of grace, who have been saved without knowing the Catholic Church. We know this. And yet, how is it possible if you cannot be saved outside the Church? It is absolutely true that they will be saved through the Catholic Church because they will be united to Christ, to the Mystical Body of Christ, which is the Catholic Church. It will, however, remain invisible, because this visible link is impossible for them. Consider a Hindu in Tibet who has no knowledge of the Catholic Church. He lives according to his conscience and to the laws which God has put into his heart. He can be in the state of grace, and if he dies in this state of grace, he will go to heaven.” (The Angelus, “A Talk Heard Round the World,” April, 2006, p. 5.)

These words are found on the very same page of The Angelus as the words in the first quote above. This is disgusting and bold heresy, and proves that Fellay doesn’t believe anything he said above. First, notice that he says “We know that there are two other baptisms.” Excuse me, but we know that there is ONLY ONE BAPTISM OF WATER. Catholics confess one baptism. If you don’t confess only one baptism, you are not a Catholic.

Pope Clement V, Council of Vienne, 1311-1312, ex cathedra: “Besides, one baptism which regenerates all who are baptized in Christ must be faithfully confessed by all just as ‘one God and one faith’ [Eph. 4:5], which celebrated in water in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit we believe to be commonly the perfect remedy for salvation for adults as for children.” (Denz. 482)

Second, Fellay says a Hindu – that is, an idolater who worships many false gods and doesn’t believe in Jesus Christ – can be in the state of grace and be saved. This is a total rejection of infallible Catholic dogma. This proves again that Bishop Bernard Fellay is not a member of the Catholic Church. He rejects the solemn teaching that all who die in non-Catholic religions and without the essential mysteries of the Catholic Faith will be lost. He has changed the dogma that no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church or without the Catholic Faith (the truth that all individuals who die as non-Catholics will be lost, all the Hindus, Muslims, Jews, etc.) to the heretical idea that no one can be saved except through the Catholic Church (meaning that all individuals who are saved, even if they are not Catholic and part of a false religion or even worshipping false gods, are saved in their religions but through the Catholic Church). This is evil heresy which is contradicted by ex cathedra Papal teaching. The fact that he holds that Hindus, etc. can be saved in their false religions reveals that he has no Faith. (By the way, notice that he also teaches the condemned heresy of an invisible Church by teaching that non-Catholic Hindus are invisibly united to the Church.) The fact that he is guiding a large body of those who consider themselves traditional Catholics in our day is a frightening signal of exactly where we are in history and the Great Apostasy.

We hear all the time from people who deny that their “traditionalist” priest denies the salvation dogma. “No, my priest doesn’t believe that,” they say about SSPX priests, CMRI priests, SSPV priests, etc. We try to tell them “yes, your priest does believe that.” This Heresy of the Week shows us again how priests who deny the salvation dogma will make statements (often in the same speech) which make it seem as if they believe in it.

Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos (# 13), Aug. 15, 1832: “With the admonition of the apostle, that ‘there is one God, one faith, one baptism’ (Eph. 4:5), may those fear who contrive the notion that the safe harbor of salvation is open to persons of any religion whatever. They should consider the testimony of Christ Himself that ‘those who are not with Christ are against Him,’ (Lk. 11:23) and that they disperse unhappily who do not gather with Him. Therefore, ‘without a doubt, they will perish forever, unless they hold the Catholic faith whole and inviolate (Athanasian Creed).”

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, The Athanasian Creed, Sess. 8, Nov. 22, 1439, ex cathedra:

“Whoever wishes to be saved, needs above all to hold the Catholic faith; unless each one preserves this whole and inviolate, he will without a doubt perish in eternity.” (Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, Vol. 1, pp. 550-553; Denzinger 39-40.)

Pope Gregory XVI, Summo Iugiter Studio (# 2), May 27, 1832:

“Finally some of these misguided people attempt to persuade themselves and others that men are not saved only in the Catholic religion, but that even heretics may attain eternal life.”

Pope Pius IV, Council of Trent, Iniunctum nobis, Nov. 13, 1565, ex cathedra: “This true Catholic faith, outside of which no one can be saved… I now profess and truly hold…” (Denz. 1000)

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Cantate Domino,” 1441, ex cathedra:

“The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the Church before the end of their lives; that the unity of this ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do the Church’s sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia produce eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and even if he has shed blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”

Bishop Fellay is preaching a new gospel directly contrary to Sacred Scripture. He is preaching that idolaters (Hindus) can actually be saved.

1 Corinthians 6:9- “Know you not that the unjust shall not possess the kingdom of God? Do not err: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor the effeminate, nor liers with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor railers, nor extortioners, shall possess the kingdom of God.”

www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com

_____________________________________________________________

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2010/09/bishop-bernard-fellay-affirms-rigorist.html#links

MOST HOLY FAMILY MONASTERY VATICAN COUNCIL II INDICATES ‘THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO SALVATION OUTSIDE THE CHURCH’, EVERYONE NEEDS TO BE A FORMAL MEMBER OF THE CHURCH TO AVOID HELL

Sedevacantists interpret Vatican Council II according to Rabbis Rosen and Segno

The sedevantists, Most Holy Family Monastery, USA (MHFM) call the Catholic Church the Vatican Council II sect and they criticize the liberal Jewish Left lobby for putting pressure on the Church to compromise in many ways.

Yet they use the interpretation of Vatican Council II as is done by the liberal Rabbis who are constantly seeking doctrinal changes in the Church in exchange for peace and economic prosperity.

Vatican Council II actually indicates that there is ‘absolutely no salvation outside the Catholic Church’.

The MHFM needs to read Lumen Gentium 16, Vatican Council II (1) according to the following step by step analysis in five points.

1. There is no genuine invincible ignorance which we humanly can know of. We do not know whom Jesus Christ will judge on the Day of Judgement as having invincible ignorance.

2. There is no explicit invincible ignorance (external, seeable, repeatable) known to us.

3. There is no implicit invincible ignorance (in principle we do not know any case).

4. We do not know a single case of invincible ignorance over the last 100 years.

5. We can only accept the existence of invincible ignorance as a concept. It is something hypothetical, a probability, a possibility known only to God.

So when LG 16 says non Catholics in invincible ignorance can be saved it is hypothetical, something we accept in principle. None of us knows any person in Islam or the other religions who is in genuine invincible ignorance. We cannot judge.

Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II states ‘all people’ need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water to avoid Hell and go to Heaven. AG 7 is saying ‘there is absolutely no salvation outside the Catholic Church’.(2)

So the Catholic Church is affirming in Vatican Council II the ‘rigorist interpretation’ of the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, an infallible teaching which can only have one interpretation.

Similarly no where in the Catechism of the Catholic Church is there a quotation or citation which contradicts the rigorist interpretation of the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Without proof of anything contrary even the Rabbis Rosen and Segno would have to agree with a Vatican Council II interpretation according to the Sacred Tradition of the Catholic Church.

The Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI has said that Vatican Council II is not a break from Tradition.

The Most Holy Family Monastery say that there is no baptism of desire. They are correct there is no explicit or implicit baptism of desire. In this sense there is no baptism of desire. However they cannot say there is no baptism of desire as a concept. Since they discuss and write about the baptism of desire, so in this sense, at least they accept it as a concept.

The baptism of water is both a concept and a known reality (see able, repeatable and explicit).

The baptism of desire can only be a concept for us since it is known only to God.

___________________________________________________________________

1. Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience.-Lumen Gentium 16, Vatican Council II.

2.Therefore, all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church's preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door.-Ad Gentes 7,Vatican Council II.



 (Photo from the website of the Most Holy Family Monastery)

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2010/09/most-holy-family-monastery-vatican.html#links