Monday, February 17, 2014

from Spirit Daily

"O Jesus, You instituted this Sacrament, not through any desire to draw some advantage from it for Yourself, but solely moved by love which has no other measure than to be without measure. You instituted this Sacrament because Your love exceeds all words. Burning with love for us, You desired to give Yourself to us and took up Your dwelling in the consecrated Host, entirely and forever, until the end of time. And You did this, not only to give us a memorial of Your death which is our salvation, but You did it also, to remain with us entirely and forever." -St.Angela Foligno


The founder of the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) mistakenly used an irrational premise in the interpretation of Vatican Council II.
The Hindu saved in his religion, through Jesus and the Church is not a known exception to the traditional interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
Likewise the non Christian saved in his religion, which has 'true and holy', 'ways and conducts of life' (NA 2), is not personally known to us. So this is not relevant to the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.It  is hypothetical for us and so is not a known exception.
 The Protestant saved in his religion through 'seeds of the Word' (AG 11), 'elements of sanctification and grace' or imperfect communion with the Church' (UR 3) is known only to God.This case would be a possibility.Since it is not personally knwonit is  not an exception to the dogma on salvation defined three times.
So Vatican Council II does not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus unless one assumes implicit for us salvation is explicit for us.The invisible is visible.
Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, the SSPX bishops and the SSPX District Superiors have made this mistake.

We must say it clearly: such a concept is radically opposed to Catholic dogma. The Church is the one ark of salvation, and we must not be afraid to affirm it. You have often heard it said, “Outside the Church there is no salvation”--a dictum which offends contemporary minds. It is easy to believe that this doctrine is no longer in effect, that it has been dropped. It seems excessively severe.-Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre (1)
Similarly the SSPX bishops and priests also affirm extra ecclesiam nulla salus, as in this statement by Archbishop Lefebvre above, and at the same time they indicate there are known exceptions in the present times.This is contradictory.
In the book written by Fr.Francois Laisney and published by the Angelus Press,USA the SSPX says there are known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So Fr. Leonard  Feeney's traditional interpretation of the dogma is rejected. Similarly in a book written by Fr.Jean Marie Gleaze and sold by the SSPX, Italy it is assumed there are known exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.Vatican Council II is rejected as a break with the dogma on salvation and the rest of Tradition.

The doctrine of the Church also recognizes implicit baptism of desire. This consists in doing the will of God. God knows all men and He knows that amongst Protestants, Muslims, Buddhists and in the whole of humanity there are men of good will. They receive the grace of baptism without knowing it, but in an effective way. In this way they become part of the Church.
The error consists in thinking that they are saved by their religion. They are saved in their religion but not by it. There is no Buddhist church in heaven, no Protestant church. This is perhaps hard to accept, but it is the truth. I did not found the Church, but rather Our Lord the Son of God. As priests we must state the truth.-Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre

'They are saved in their religion but not by it.' Even if they are saved in their religion,these cases are irrelevant to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
-Lionel Andrades


He wrote his Apologia Pro Marcel Lefebvre (1)assuming there are known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
We now know that Archbishop Lefebvre's 'hindu saved in his religion in Tibet' (2) is not an exception to the literal interpretation of the dogma on salvation according to Fr.Leonard Feeney. Michael Davis did not know that all salvation mentioned in Vatican Council II is not relevant to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
There are no exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus in Vatican Council II. So the traditional teaching on other religions  and ecumenism has not changed.
Davis, like Archbishop Lefebvre, assumed that implicit for us salvation is explicit. They mistook  what is invisible for us as being visible. He assumed that the dead now saved in Heaven are  personally known to us. They are  visible in the flesh. So they became exceptions to Tradition.So he criticized Vatican Council II.
Daphne McLeod is aware of this factual error in the writings of Michael Davis.It is a fact of life that she cannot see the dead, now existing in Heaven or Hell.
-Lionel Andrades
Apologia Pro Marcel Lefebvre (Angelus Press) is a three volume book in support of the French Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, founder of the Society of St. Pius X

"Consider a Hindu in Tibet who has no knowledge of the Catholic Church. He lives according to his conscience and to the laws which God has put into his heart. He can be in the state of grace, and if he dies in this state of grace, he will go to heaven.” (The Angelus, “A Talk Heard Round the World,” April, 2006, p. 5.)
February 17, 2014