I posted this recently:
In Latin, an important use of the accusative case is with prepositions. Prepositions and the nouns or pronouns they go with show direction toward, time, the means by which something is done, where and when something is done, purpose, and various other kinds of directions.
As an adverb, the word "extra" in Latin is properly translated into English as "outside." However, the same word in the maxim Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus is a preposition which takes the accusative case. It is, therefore, more accurately translated into English as "without."
Consequently, the maxim Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus is more accurately translated into English as "Without the Church there is no salvation."Why is this so important? Because, for the Feeneyites, the maxim means that an individual who is not formally a practicing Catholic cannot be saved. The Church has condemned this interpretation (cf. Denzinger-Schonmetzer, 3870-3873).
As Pope John Paul II explains:"The Council speaks of membership in the Church for Christians and of being related to the Church for non-Christian believers in God, for people of good will (cf. Lumen Gentium 15-16). Both these dimensions are important for salvation, and each one possesses varying levels. People are saved through the Church, they are saved in the Church, but they always are saved by the grace of Christ. Besides formal membership in the Church, the sphere of salvation can also include other forms of relation to the Church. Paul VI expressed this same teaching in his first encyclical, Ecclesiam Suam, when he spoke of the various circles of the dialogue of salvation (cf. Ecclesiam Suam 101-117), which are the same as those indicated by the Council as the spheres of membership in and of relation to the Church.
This is the authentic meaning of the well-known statement 'Outside the Church there is no salvation.'" (Crossing the Threshold of Hope, pp. 140-141).
The cultists at the SBC in Richmond reject this Magisterial teaching of the Church.
Meanwhile, actor Mel Gibson has just sunk another 8 million into his church: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,291701,00.html
2 comments:
Having read Louis Villarrubia's response to the second Southern Poverty Law Center article on his anti-Semitic cult, I couldn't help but notice how long it is. While this con man cannot find the time to answer serious questions regarding his own character, he nevertheless managed to find the time once again to attack Paul Melanson with silly accusations. In fact, a very significant portion of his "response," (it can hardly be called that) was aimed at slandering Mr. Melanson. Mr. Villarrubia understands that Mr. Melanson has totally dismantled his erroneous ideas and exposed his cult in the process. And he wants revenge.
Why hasn't Mr. Villarubia responded (in any fashion) to Roger Vaste's many posts calling on him to explain just how he could have been ordained without canonical permission from the Church? Why hasn't he explained Mr. Bersaw's Holocaust denial or anti-Semitic remarks? Or his own anti-Semitic remarks? Why hasn't he explained why he lied to so many and claimed that his cult was in communion with the Diocese of Manchester and Rome? Why hasn't he explained Fr. Jarecki's support of domestic terrorism in the form of violence against those who perform abortions? Why hasn't he explained why he told the IRS that his cult is Roman Catholic on the tax exemption application? Why has Stormfront, a nationally-known White Supremacist hate group, defended his cult?
I could go on. But the good folks over at SBC Watch - http://sbcwatch.blogspot.com have documented all of this.
Mr. Villarrubia is a fraud. And if he spent half as much time explaining his lies and hate-filled remarks as he did attacking and slandering Mr. Melanson, we would have a more detailed portrait of a monster.
At The Keene Sentinel Blog, Eugene De Lalla wrote this comment:
Eugene R. De Lalla
1/21/2007 10:57:25 PM
"Well, here we go... Marjorie Fratea uses the word "cult" twice in her five sentence post of 1/20.
Ok, I'm game; here is the meaning of the word "cult" taken from Webster's dictionary: 1) a system of religious worship. My comment: yep, we do worship God. 2a) obsessive and faddish devotion to a principle or person.
My comment: we ARE "obsessed" with upholding the Catholic Church's magisterium and reject the novelties of today that have so infiltrated the influenced the general population of Catholics. "Faddish" devotion to a principle or person.
My comment: fad or faddish, refers to something that is "tranistory." That is why we are now called a "cult," for the simple reason that the folks at the St. Benedict Center and those who attend same -- religious and lay -- believe in the concrete, and not the house built on a "foundation" of sand. We hold to the perennial teachings of the Catholic Church. And, yes, we are devoted to the Mother of Christ, the Blessed Virgin Mary. 2b) A group of persons sharing such devotion. My comment: I'm (we're) "guilty"! God Bless.
But cult is actually defined thusly: "A religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist or bogus."
This is why Paul Melanson began employing the word in reference to the SBC years ago. The SBC is (unless you're one of the cult members) both extremist and bogus. Extremist because of its hate-filled anti-Semitism. Bogus because it is NOT AFFILIATED with the Roman Catholic Church but claims to be affiliated with the Church and in communion with her.
Mr. De Lalla claims that the SBC cult is "obsessed" with "upholding the Catholic Church's Magisterium." And yet, the SBC cult clearly rejects the Magisterial teaching of the Church regarding salvation for non-Catholics as found in the Catechism and Vatican II.
Mr. Melanson saw the SBC as a cult many years ago. To his eternal credit he began warning others about the dangers of the SBC when most just didn't see the dangers.
God bless you Paul.
Post a Comment