Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Could the British Prime Minister be a Daily Rosary Saying, Tridentine Mass fan?  (Read 14241 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Schools of thought which did not come into existence until the first Jesuit liberals started playing with the notion of EENS around the year 1600.  And the Church's failure to condemn these types does not condone their heresies.  God allowed the Church not to condemn these errors, because without them the great testing of faith that we see in progress today could never have happened.  God willed that the faith be put to the test.  And you are failing badly, Banezian.

Are you a Traditional Catholic at all?  If so, you're in contradiction because everything in Vatican II derives from this Garrigou-articulated distortion of EENS.

I guess that Arianism wasn't heresy until it was formally condemned by the Church after some time.  Until the Church formally and officially condemned it, it too was just a harmless "school of thought".
ABL agreed with me. If I’m a heretic, so was he.
Bishop Marcel Lefebvre, Against the Heresies, Page 216: “Evidently, certain distinctions must be made.  Souls can be saved in a religion other than the Catholic religion (Protestantism, Islam, Buddhism, etc.), but not by this religion.  There may be souls who, not knowing Our Lord, have by the grace of the good Lord, good interior dispositions, who submit to God…But some of these persons make an act of love which implicitly is equivalent to baptism of desire.  It is uniquely by this means that they are able to be saved.”
Bishop Marcel Lefebvre, Against the Heresies, Page 217: “One cannot say, then, that no one is saved in these religions…”
Bishop Marcel Lefebvre, Open Letter to Confused Catholics, Pages 73-74: “Does this mean that no Protestant, no Muslim, no Buddhist or animist will be saved?  No, it would be a second error to think that.  Those who cry for intolerance in interpreting St. Cyprian’s formula Outside the Church there is no salvation, also reject the Creed, “I accept one baptism for the remission of sins,” and are insufficiently instructed as to what baptism is…”
Bishop Marcel Lefebvre, Against the Heresies, Pages 217-218: “This is then what Pius IX said and what he condemned.  It is necessary to understand the formulation that was so often employed by the Fathers of the Church:  ‘Outside the Church there is no salvation.’  When we say that, it is incorrectly believed that we think that all the Protestants, all the Moslems, all the Buddhists, all those who do not publicly belong to the Catholic Church go to hell.  Now, I repeat, it is possible for someone to be saved in these religions, but they are saved by the Church, and so the formulation is true: Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus.  This must be preached.”

Quoting Abp. Lefebvre is interesting, because most people on this site are willing to call anyone a non-Catholic heretic for saying things like that EXCEPT him. When you point out the hypocrisy they just accuse you of being some divide-and-conquer troll. 


Quoting Abp. Lefebvre is interesting, because most people on this site are willing to call anyone a non-Catholic heretic for saying things like that EXCEPT him. When you point out the hypocrisy they just accuse you of being some divide-and-conquer troll.
Indeed

ABL agreed with me. If I’m a heretic, so was he.
I was one of the first contributors to CI that introduced those ABL quotes that the writer posted. He again makes the same mistake by saying that he "follows" ABL that he did  when he said he is just "following" Garrigou-Lagrange, he is just choosing them because they reflect what he already believed, what 99% of Novus Ordo's believe and Vatican II and JPII taught, along with all the Vatican II clergy. That is why Vatican II came to be, to teach what he believes, what was demonstrated at the World Day of Peace at Assisi, that non-Catholics can be saved by their belief in a God that rewards. I'll repeat what I said, the writer quotes 20th century personages because there are no saints that ever taught what he believes. My belief in EENS is based on dogmas as they are written, and the early church Fathers and many many saints. The writers belief is based on 20th century personages, what he was taught by the Vatican II religion.

BY the way, like I pointed out, I said the writer is not Catholic because of what he wrote, which has nothing to do with EENS, he said that "I would absolutely marry a Traditional Orthodox or a Traditional Protestant(Anglican/Lutheran) before I thought about marrying an N. O Catholic. - I’m closer to traditional Orth9dox than I am to any Novus Ordo".




Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Quoting Abp. Lefebvre is interesting, because most people on this site are willing to call anyone a non-Catholic heretic for saying things like that EXCEPT him. When you point out the hypocrisy they just accuse you of being some divide-and-conquer troll.

Nope.  I've stated clearly that the particular quotes from +Lefebvre are indeed objectively heretical.  He wrongly believes that he's upholding "no salvation outside the Church" by reformulating it as "no salvation except by means of the Church."  But it's clear that +Lefebvre never gave the question much thought and was merely parroting back something he was taught in seminary.

Banezian on the other hand manifested his heresy by declaring that formal schismatics and heretics are closer to Catholicism than conservative Novus Ordites who profess the Catholic faith.  And he is pertinacious in this heresy after having been called out and corrected about it.