I have received an e-mail yesterday which I appreciate. I am glad we can discuss this issue.I would welcome further comments and questions.My response is in red type.
1. It is Catholic Church teaching that someone can positively be saved by Baptism of Desire, Baptism of Blood and Invincible ignorance when these conditions find themselves pleasing to God (Lionel: Are you saying without the baptism of water this is possible ? Then it would be a Church teaching with contradicts a dogma issued by the Church ; it would contradict another Church teaching.)
2. It is a matter of fact that these conditions have happened in the past and most likely will occur in the present and future. (It is a possibility that they have occurred under the right conditions. You do not personally know anyone as such, as a matter of fact. Since you would not know for instance, if St. Emerentiana received the baptism of water before or after she died physically.The Church has not said anything on this.) You are absolutely correct in saying that they are not known to us while a person is alive on earth.( I refer to those not known to us only when it is assumed that the deceased who lived in the past , who may have died with the baptism of desire, blood or in invincible ignorance, are exceptions to all needing the baptism of water for salvation in the present times. Only then! ) Saints have been confirmed by the Church and it is not for you to question. (That they have been confirmed it is not an issue.However If you infer here that they physically exist in 2015 and are an exception to all needing faith and baptism for salvation today, then it is an issue). They are known to us after their death proving Church teaching, not that the Church must prove anything. (I accept the Church teachings on the saints.However if you infer that a saint of the past is an exception in the present, to the teachings on salvation, according to Fr.Leonard Feeney, I would continue to say that this is irrational). What the Church declares as worthy of being believed must be accepted by the faithful.(In general yes. However Cardinal Francesco Marchetti Selvaggiani made an objective error, a factual error in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949. With this error he contradicted Church teaching before 1949. He also wrongly suggested that there were precedents in magisterial documents to support his view .This was false.)
3. When Salvation occurs in these conditions they are not exceptions but most assuredly are welcomed into Heaven by God as Catholics. (Yes and the right conditions would include the baptism water.)
4. it is not for you or anyone to say how God welcomes these souls into Paradise for God is not bound by his sacraments. (The dogma tells us that God is bound to the Sacraments.Cardinal Marchetti made an objective error when he inferred that there is salvation outside the Church and so God is not bound to the Sacraments. He did not know of any person saved in 1949 without the baptism of water to make this irrational inference.He inferred the deceased who are now in Heaven, saved without the baptism of water, were known to him on earth, to be exceptions to the dogma. This nonsense is the basis for his new theology.It has been accepted by the International Theological Commission and the magisterium of Pope Benedict XVI. This error has been incorporated in the Catechism of the Catholic Church(1257) and has conditioned Redemptoris Missio, Dominus Iesus etc. These documents issued by Pope John Paul II use the ambigous language of the Marchetti letter. The first part of the Letter supports Fr.Leonard Feeney on doctrine and the second part contradicts him, with alleged known salvation outside the Church.
2. It is a matter of fact that these conditions have happened in the past and most likely will occur in the present and future. (It is a possibility that they have occurred under the right conditions. You do not personally know anyone as such, as a matter of fact. Since you would not know for instance, if St. Emerentiana received the baptism of water before or after she died physically.The Church has not said anything on this.) You are absolutely correct in saying that they are not known to us while a person is alive on earth.( I refer to those not known to us only when it is assumed that the deceased who lived in the past , who may have died with the baptism of desire, blood or in invincible ignorance, are exceptions to all needing the baptism of water for salvation in the present times. Only then! ) Saints have been confirmed by the Church and it is not for you to question. (That they have been confirmed it is not an issue.However If you infer here that they physically exist in 2015 and are an exception to all needing faith and baptism for salvation today, then it is an issue). They are known to us after their death proving Church teaching, not that the Church must prove anything. (I accept the Church teachings on the saints.However if you infer that a saint of the past is an exception in the present, to the teachings on salvation, according to Fr.Leonard Feeney, I would continue to say that this is irrational). What the Church declares as worthy of being believed must be accepted by the faithful.(In general yes. However Cardinal Francesco Marchetti Selvaggiani made an objective error, a factual error in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949. With this error he contradicted Church teaching before 1949. He also wrongly suggested that there were precedents in magisterial documents to support his view .This was false.)
3. When Salvation occurs in these conditions they are not exceptions but most assuredly are welcomed into Heaven by God as Catholics. (Yes and the right conditions would include the baptism water.)
4. it is not for you or anyone to say how God welcomes these souls into Paradise for God is not bound by his sacraments. (The dogma tells us that God is bound to the Sacraments.Cardinal Marchetti made an objective error when he inferred that there is salvation outside the Church and so God is not bound to the Sacraments. He did not know of any person saved in 1949 without the baptism of water to make this irrational inference.He inferred the deceased who are now in Heaven, saved without the baptism of water, were known to him on earth, to be exceptions to the dogma. This nonsense is the basis for his new theology.It has been accepted by the International Theological Commission and the magisterium of Pope Benedict XVI. This error has been incorporated in the Catechism of the Catholic Church(1257) and has conditioned Redemptoris Missio, Dominus Iesus etc. These documents issued by Pope John Paul II use the ambigous language of the Marchetti letter. The first part of the Letter supports Fr.Leonard Feeney on doctrine and the second part contradicts him, with alleged known salvation outside the Church.
Also Catholics are encouraged to marry non Catholics (Jews, Muslims, Protestants etc) without informing the Catholic spouse that he or she is living in adultery and would go to Hell. Since their non Catholic spouse is on the way to Hell and is not a Catholic according to the original dogma.
This liberalism, has come into Catholic family life with the Marchetti heresy which has been accepted by 'the Church'.)5. Father Feeney denied Baptism of Desire, Baptism of Blood and that Invincible Ignorance could possibly lead a person to Salvation. (This is the interpretation of the liberals, supporting the Masonic agenda.
He denied there was salvation outside the Church. There are no known cases of any one saved with the Baptism of Desire, Baptism of Blood and Invincible Ignorance outside the Church in 1949. You do not know of anyone today (2015).Instead cardinals Marchetti and Cushing were saying there were known exceptions. The cardinals were in heresy. They were also irrational. They were 'the Church' at that time. )
He was Saintly in teaching the faith to all but wrong and disobedient on this issue. You have never admitted that this was the case. (I have continually been saying that it is irrational, heretical and non traditional to say there are known exceptions to the dogma.This was an ecclesiastical lie. This was the heresy of the Holy Office 1949 and not that of Fr.Leonard Feeney.The magisterium made an objective mistake here.The Church should issue a correction in 2015.)6. I would be very careful in saying that Pope Pius XII did not understand or was guilty of error with regards to the letter of the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office and its aftermath. (He did not correct the Letter, he did not lift the unjust excommunication, he did not excommunicate Cardinal Richard Cushing,he did not say all Jews and other non Catholics in Boston and elsewhere need to convert into the Catholic Church for salvation and there are no exceptions, he did not correct the wrong reports in the Boston secular media which indicated that the Church had changed its position on the traditional dogma.These were acts of omission and commission) The truth in the contents were most definitely not obeyed by many to undermine the faith and teach error That has been and continues to be a tragedy. That abuse is a totally different subject You can not attack the contents (The contents in the Letter are irrational, false,non traditional and fantasy theology.It is a break with faith and reason.) but certainly are accurate on their rampant abuse and denial of Church teaching on No Salvation Outside the Catholic Church and Baptism by water. (You agree with me here!?)
THE FOLLOWING LIONEL MUST BE OUR BATTLECRY:
7. The Catholic Church declares , defines and teaches and
embraces that those who
> attain holiness that is pleasing to God through Baptism of
> Desire, Baptism of Blood and Invincible Ignorance shall be
> saved. (and we don't know who they are in the present times and so this is not relevant to the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus,the 'rigorist interpretation'.) Furthermore let it be known to all for all time by our
> solemn and highest decree that the Catholic Church has bound
> herself as she is bound by Jesus that all people must be
> taught and are commanded to enter, remain or
> return to the Catholic Church and be baptized with water in
> order to attain Salvation. (Agreed!) There are no circumstances in which this decree may be modified, changed or disobeyed at any point in time. (Since this was the dogmatic teaching and has not been contradicted by any Church document before 1949 and which is empirically, objectively, in real life not contradicted today (2015) since we do not know of any exceptions )
-Lionel Andrades
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment