Author Topic: Question for the so-called 'Lover of Truth' (Read 8292 times)

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #25 on:** August 23, 2017, 11:19:54 AM »

Quote from: Meg on August 23, 2017, 11:18:24 AM

The above comment is imprecise. What the Archbishop actually said (which you later did acknowledge in your post) is that..."Souls can be saved in a religion other than the Catholic religion (Protestantism, Islam, Buddhism, etc.) but not by this religion."
I think that the distinction needs to be made. The Archbishop did not mean to say that souls can be saved a by any particular religion other than Catholicism.

Exactly correct. He know more than the feeneyite bloggers here.

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #26 on:** August 23, 2017, 11:23:13 AM »

Quote from: An even Seven on August 23, 2017, 11:19:13 AM

I would not deny Christ and assent to being Martyred, knowing that if the Lord saw fit, He would send me the means to be Baptized before death.

Thank you for answering the question. Feeneyism pins you in an impossible corner but understanding EENS as the Church does does not.

According to the Church's official liturgy and honor of Saints, He did not see fit but allowed them to be washed in their own blood and they were taken immediately to Heaven.

There should be no problem accepting this.

Universal Salvationism has cause an over reaction against that terribly heresy into an equal and opposite heresy. Admittedly if I had to chose one heresy or the other I would chose feeneyism. But I do not have to chose between the two.

Meg · « **Reply #27 on:** August 23, 2017, 11:23:32 AM »

Quote from: Lover of Truth on August 23, 2017, 11:19:54 AM

Exactly correct. He know more than the feeneyite bloggers here.

Yes, I believe he knew more than any of us here, actually. Or at least me, that's for sure. He was not infallible of course, but I have to take his teaching into consideration, even though it is considered controversial among trads.

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #28 on:** August 23, 2017, 11:27:01 AM »

Quote from: An even Seven on August 23, 2017, 11:24:06 AM

The distinction is clear. You even quoted it in your post. He said they can be saved IN a religion other than the Catholic Religion. Which religion they are actually saved By matters not, the heresy is already taught. The terms "false religions" and "religion other that the Catholic religion" are synonymous because all non-Catholic religions are false. Lefebvre is saying they are saved IN non-Catholic religions.

You do not understand or do not want to understand.

There is a difference between one who is in a false religion in the exterior that is within the Church's inner bonds if unity i.e. sanctifying grace.

And

One who is saved by a false religion.

Lefebvre did not claim one can be saved by a false religion. Sticking perfectly well with the infallible truths of EENS and BOD. These infallible truths do not contradict one another but compliment one another keeping God's Justice and Mercy in tact as it were. Amen?

Meg · « **Reply #29 on:** August 23, 2017, 11:32:46 AM »

Quote from: An even Seven on August 23, 2017, 11:24:06 AM

The distinction is clear. You even quoted it in your post. He said they can be saved IN a religion other than the Catholic Religion. Which religion they are actually saved By matters not, the heresy is already taught. The terms "false religions" and "religion other that the Catholic religion" are synonymous because all non-Catholic religions are false. Lefebvre is saying they are saved IN non-Catholic religions.

In a religion, but NOT BY that religion.

CathInfo.com

Author Topic: Question for the so-called 'Lover of Truth' (Read 8292 times)

Lover of Truth

Re: Question for the so-called 'Lover of Truth'

Lover of Truth

Re: Question for the so-called 'Lover of Truth'

Meg

Re: Question for the so-called 'Lover of Truth'

Lover of Truth

Re: Question for the so-called 'Lover of Truth'

Meg

Re: Question for the so-called 'Lover of Truth'