1. (Lionel: Is the Magisterium saying for you that God has bound salvation to the Sacrament of Baptism and so every one in 2014 needs the baptism of water for salvation and -God is not bound by his Sacraments and so every one in 2014 does not need the baptism of water for salvation?)
2. (Lionel: Is the Magisterium saying for you that every one in 2014 does not need the baptism of water for salvation and so there is no more an ecumenism of return?
Also there are known cases of persons saved or who are going to be saved in 2014 so there is no more an ecumenism of return, the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus has been superseded?
3. (Lionel:The Magisterium in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 has not made a factual error for you?)
4. ( Lionel :'it is not always required that a person be incorporated in reality (reapse) as a member of the Church' in Rome in 2014 for example?)
Praised be Jesus and Our Lady.
Please let me know what is the teaching of the Magisterium, here for you. The questions are in orange. I assume this is what you will be teachng.
September 1, 2014
1257 The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation. He also commands his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all nations and to baptize them. Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament. The Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude; this is why she takes care not to neglect the mission she has received from the Lord to see that all who can be baptized are "reborn of water and the Spirit." God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments.-Catechism of the Catholic Church
(Lionel: Is the Magisterium saying for you that God has bound salvation to the Sacrament of Baptism and so every one in 2014 needs the baptism of water for salvation and -God is not bound by his Sacraments and so every one in 2014 does not need the baptism of water for salvation?)
We do not know of any possibility ( hypothetical case) which is a known reality in the present times(2014). We do not know of any one saved outside the Church.So we do not know any exception to the traditional teaching on 'all' needing 'faith and baptism'(AG 7) for salvation. There are no known cases to contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So how can the Joint International Commission for Theological Dialogue between the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church, approved by Pope Benedict XVI, agree in the Balamand Declaration (N.30) that an ecumenism of return is outdated theology?
(Lionel: Is the Magisterium saying for you that every one in 2014 does not need the baptism of water for salvation and so there is no more an ecumenism of return?
Also there are known cases of persons saved or who are going to be saved in 2014 for there is no more an ecumenism of return, the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus has been superseded?
Do you know how? It is based on the same error in the Catechism of the Catholic Church N.1257.
30. To pave the way for future relations between the two Churches, passing beyond the outdated ecclesiology of return to the Catholic Church connected with the problem which is the object of this document, special attention will be given to the preparation of future priests and of all those who, in any way, are involved in an apostolic activity carried on in a place where the other Church traditionally has its roots. -Balamand Declaration
The Catechism of the Catholic Church has referenced the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 as if it is a magisterial document.
1.The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 made a factual error when it inferred that implicit desire (baptism of desire) and being saved in invincible ignorance are visible to us . So then it was concluded that these cases now in Heaven (but who are also personally visible to the physical eye) were exceptions to the traditional interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.How can the dead be exceptions?
2.The Letter of the Holy Office did not have the signature and seal of the Secretary of the Holy Office.Neithe was it placed in the Acta Apostolica Sedis.
3.It was placed in the Denzinger by Fr.Karl Rahner S.J with a reference from an American magazine.
4.It was made public by the Archdiocese of Boston three years after it was issued by Cardinal Francesco Marchetti Selvaggiani. It was made public after Cardinal Francesco died.
Aside from the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 no Catholic magisterial document infers that there are known exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
The Magisterium in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 has not made a factual error for you?)
It is upon this factual error in theology, the dead man visible theory , that Catholic theologians agreed in the Balamand Declaration that there is no more an ecumenism of return in the Catholic Church and there is a new ecclesiology.
The same error is there in the International Theological Commission paper Christianity and the World Religions .'Christianity and the World Religions' and 'The Hope of Salvation for Infants who die without being baptiized' .
59. The Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston (1949) offers further specifications. “To gain eternal salvation, it is not always required that a person be incorporated in reality (reapse) as a member of the Church, but it is necessary that one belong to it at least in desire and longing (voto et desiderio). It is not always necessary that this desire be explicit as it is with catechumens.-'The Hope of Salvation for Infants who die without being baptiized'
( Lionel :'it is not always required that a person be incorporated in reality (reapse) as a member of the Church' in Rome in 2014 for example?)
Really? Not always required? Where is the known exception? Where is the defacto explicit case of someone saved outside the Church?
This error has been repeated by Cardinal Ratzinger in the Catechism of the Catholic Church N.1257,when he says God is not bound to the Sacraments.
The text of the Catechism of the Catholic Church was approved by Pope John Paul II on 25 June 1992, and promulgated by him on 11 October 1992 according to Wikpedia. In 1997 the same error was there in Christianity and the World Religions issued by the International Theological Commission and approved by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican. The same error was approved by Pope Benedict XVI in the ITC 's The Hope of Salvation for Infants who die without being baptized.
International Theological Commission, Vatican 1997.
66. In his encyclical Mystici Corporis, Pius XII addresses the question, How are those who attain salvation outside visible communion with the Church related to her? He says that they are oriented to the mystical body of Christ by a yearning and desire of which they are not aware (DS 3821).(Lionel: Did the Magisterium of Pius XII say that they are visible to us in the present times ? Does he say here that they are an exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus. ?This has to inferred by the ITC. It is wrongly inferred ?.) The opposition of the American Jesuit Leonard Feeney, who insisted on the exclusivist interpretation of the expression extra ecclesiam nulla solus, afforded the occasion for the letter of the Holy Office, dated 8 August ,1949, to the archbishop of Boston, which rejected Feeney s interpretation and clarified the teaching of Pius XII.( In other words there are known exceptions outside the Church.For there to be exceptions these cases would have to be personally known, physically visible.But how can they be seen with the naked eye when they are in Heaven?) The letter distinguishes between the necessity of belonging to the Church for salvation (necessitas praecepti) and the necessity of the indispensable means of salvation (intrinseca necessitas); in relationship to the latter, the Church is a general help for salvation (DS 3867—69).(These are hypothetical cases. Possibilities cannot be known realities who are visible to us) In the case of invincible ignorance the implicit desire of belonging to the Church suffices;( and this is relevant since these persons now in Heaven are also visible on earth?) this desire will always be present when a man aspires to conform his will to that of God (DS 3870). But faith, in the sense of Hebrews 11:6, and love are always necessary with intrinsic necessity (DS 3872).
67. Vatican Council II makes its own the expression extra ecclesiam nulla salus. But in using it the council explicitly directs itself to Catholics (where does it say it is directed exclusively to Catholics ?) and limits its validity to those who know the necessity of the Church for salvation (those who know or are in invincible ignorance are not known to us.Only God can know who is saved as such. So what bearing does this have on the dogma? Why mention it?). The council holds that the affirmation is based on the necessity of faith and of baptism affirmed by Christ (LG 14). In this way the council aligned itself in continuity with the teaching of Pius XII, but emphasized more clearly the original parenthentical character of this expression( with the irrational inference, the visible-dead premise?).-Christianity and the World Religions, International Theological Commission, Vatican.1997.
and-teachings/ecumenical-and- interreligious/ecumenical/ orthodox/response-balamand- uniatism-union-and-search-for- communion.cfm
in the Creed I profess this: “I believe in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church”. Nothing more, nothing less, nothing else.
The same Church that defined “extra Ecclesia nulla salus” teaches and recognizes the doctrine we can find in the Catechism of Catholic Church, as the Holy Father John Paul II stated clearly and authoritatively in the Apostolic Constitution “Fidei depositum”:
“The Catechism of the Catholic Church, which I approved 25 June last and the publication of which I today order by virtue of my Apostolic Authority, is a statement of the Church's faith and of catholic doctrine, attested to or illumined by Sacred Scripture, the Apostolic Tradition and the Church's Magisterium. I declare it to be a sure norm for teaching the faith and thus a valid and legitimate instrument for ecclesial communion. May it serve the renewal to which the Holy Spirit ceaselessly calls the Church of God, the Body of Christ, on her pilgrimage to the undiminished light of the Kingdom!”
So the problem is not in the Teaching of the Church, but in your wrong lecture and interpretation (or better misinterpretation). Your questions are a series of nonsenses. My only answer is this you can read just in this message. I think is enough clear.