The Religious Sisters of Mercy, a congregation of physicians, has issued a statement on the current dust-up between the LCWR and the Vatican. This statement demonstrates that not all women religious in the U.S. have fallen under the spell of the LCWR.
Let's encourage other women's religious congregations to publish similar statements so that the false narrative of the MSM can be exposed for what it is. . .We need to produce a preference cascade in religious life so that sisters in LCWR-type congregations can find the courage to stand up for the Church and her apostolic faith!
Religious Sisters of Mercy Physicians' Statement Concerning Appropriate Response to the Magisterial Church and A Vision of the Religious Woman in Medicine
We, the physicians
and future physicians of the Religious Sisters of Mercy of Alma,
Michigan, met on June 2, 2012, to articulate the vision of the call and
contribution of religious women in the redemptive healing ministry of
the Church. We also addressed statements issued by the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR),
various news agencies, and other organizations which have created
confusion, polarization, and false representations about the beliefs,
activities, and priorities of a significant number of women religious in
the United States.
As religious women, our whole life is based in faith. Apart from faith, religious life has no meaning. The doctrinal assessment
from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) regarding the
LCWR is in the language of faith. The responses of opposition are being
expressed using the language of politics. There is no basis for
authentic dialogue between these two languages. The language of faith is
rooted in Jesus Christ, His life and His mission, as well as the
magisterial teaching of the Church. In addition, the language of faith
does not contradict reason, but elevates it and secures its integrity.
The language of politics arises from the social marketplace. The Sisters
who use political language in their responses to the magisterial Church
reflect the poverty of their education and formation in the faith.
Read the whole thing. . .and send these sisters your prayers and material support!
___________________
Follow HancAquam and visit the Kindle Wish List and the Books & Things Wish List
Click on St. Martin and donate to the Dominicans! ----->
LCWR SISTERS CONFUSED ON VATICAN COUNCIL II AND THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
ReplyDeleteIn their protests supporters of the LCWR Sisters have been saying that Vatican Council II has changed every thing.They mean Vatican Council II contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and so they are into all New Age teachings and even deny the Creed.
One of the posters of an LCWR supporter says Vatican Council II cannot be changed.They interpret Vatican Council II with an irrational argument. In their religious formation they were taught that those saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.Explicit, known to us ? This is irrational.
They do not realize that Vatican Council II no where says that those saved in invincible ignorance etc are known to us and so they are explicit exceptions.
So how can those saved in invincible ignorance, a good conscience,seeds of the Word, imperfect communion with the church etc and who are unknown to us, be an exception to the traditional interpretation of the dogma, which they reject?
Vatican Council II is a traditional Council if the 'exceptions' are considered implicit and not explicit.
It's ecclesiology is exclusive ecclesiocentrism. Ad Gentes 7 says there is exclusive salvation in only the Catholic Church and all need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation (to avoid Hell).AG 7 indicates all New Agers and Protestants need Catholic Faith (which includes the baptism of water) to avoid Hell.This is the message of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
The Sisters are rejecting Vatican Council II (AG 7). Then they assume LG 16 is explicit and not implicit. So they deny AG 7 and the defined dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
They reject an ex cathedra teaching (Cantate Domino, Council of Florence on extra ecclesiam nulla salus) and are not excommunicated like the OMI priest Fr.Tissa Balasuriya who denied the Immaculate Conception of Our Lady.
Can the LCWR sisters affirm the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, along with implicit baptism of desire and invincible ignorance ?
Cardinal William Levada, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican has not asked them to acknowledge Vatican Council II in accord with the dogma on exclusive salvation in only the Catholic Church.
The dogma is in agreement with the Catechism of the Catholic Church as long as it is understood that the baptism of desire etc is always implicit for us and explicit for God.
The LCWR sisters are rejecting the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 issued during the pontificate of Pope Pius XII which referred to 'the dogma', 'the infallible statement'.
In principle there can be non Catholics saved in (implicit to us) invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire. De facto, in reality, in the present times there are no known exceptions to everyone needing to convert into the Church for salvation.
The LCWR needs to clarify its doctrinal position on the thrice defined dogma and Vatican Council II.
There are religious sisters in Worcester,USA who affirm the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and reject explicitly known baptism of desire and invincible ignorance.They affirm Vatican Council II according to Tradition.-Lionel Andrades
http://ncronline.org/blogs/all-things-catholic/exclusive-interview-levada-talks-lcwr-criticism-states
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/06/lcwr-sisters-confused-on-vatican.html#links
C.M., you're giving LCWR too much credit. I doubt very seriously that they are aware of the documents you cite.
DeleteTuesday, June 19, 2012
ReplyDeleteWhen the LCWR invites Curran, Hubbard and Schneiders they are saying the Catholic Church is not the one true Church (UR 3) and every one does not need faith and baptism for salvation (AG 7)
The Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR) is rejecting Vatican Council II (AG 7) and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.They are saying that the Catholic Church is not the sole moral authority.
Statutes are approved of a religious organization which does not believe in exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church and the literal interpretation of the dogma ? The LCWR is Catholic even when it says invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are explicit exceptions to the dogma ? Are these 'exceptions' not always implicit for the SSPX?
I have mentioned on a blog that if you invite Charles Curran to speak you are telling us all what you believe. If you openly promote New Age you are telling us what you believe. In the case of the LCWR, they represent the Church and so they are saying that this is what the Church teaches. They are also saying that there is no exclusive salvation in only the Catholic Church. When you invite Barbara Marx Hubbard your message is clear. You are saying that the Catholic Church is not the one true Church (UR 3, Vatican Council II) and all people do not need Catholic faith and the baptism of water for salvation (AG 7).Your also saying that there can be an interpretation of Vatican Council II which negates AG 7.
If a Mother Superior of a community affiliated with the LCWR inquired if their community could hold the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus along with implicit baptism of desire and invincible ignorance etc in accord with Vatican Council II (AG 7), would the LCWR approve?
They would be saying that all non Catholics in 2012 need to enter the Catholic Church for salvation and if there are any exceptions,' who have not had the Gospel preached to them’ it would be known only to God.
This is not the ecclesiology of the LCWR which is centered on Jesus and excludes the Church. So an LCWR member can believe in Jesus, according to the Jehovah Witnesses, distribute sacred pictures of Jesus as they do in Rome, and teach according to their religion and still consider oneself in the Catholic Church. This would be Jesus without the Catholic Church which the Bible tells us is His Mystical Body.The LCWR rejects exclusive ecclesiocentrism.
The CDF could help the sisters by announcing that those saved in invincible ignorance and the baptisms of desire are implicit for us and only explicit for God.
It is true that only those who know about Jesus and the Church and yet do not enter are oriented to Hell (LG 14) however we cannot judge that someone is really in invincible ignorance or someone is not. This judgement is left to God.The dogma and AG 7 says all need to convert into the Church for salvation.
If anyone says Fr. Leonard Feeney was wrong for rejecting the baptism of desire they are making a mistake. The baptism of desire is not a known exception to the literal interpretation of the dogma.-Lionel Andrades
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/06/when-lcwr-invites-curran-hubbard-and.html#links