Monday, January 26, 2015

Just a Catholic Hobby

Rome Vicariate's Ecclesia Mater teaches lay Catholics theology with an irrational premise : Vatican Council II then becomes a break with traditional extra ecclesiam nulla salus

The Vicariate in Rome has centers in the city where they teach theology to lay Catholics.These lay Catholics are not aware that the theology of these centres is based on an irrationality.It is false theology.It is a break with Tradition and rationality. They use an irrational premise.With this false premsie they interpret magisterial documents including Vatican Council II.
I wrote to this office Ecclesia Mater a few years back but no one responded. Lay Catholics who attend these courses should ask themself two questions which the profesors at Ecclesia Mater and the Auxiliary Bishops of Rome will not answer.

1) Do we personally know the dead now saved in invincible ignorance, a good conscience (LG 16) etc,can we see them, are they physically visible to us in 2015 ?
2) Since we do not know any of these cases, in real life, they are not visible for us, there are no known exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, or Ad Gentes 7 which states 'all' need 'faith and baptism' for salvation ?

If the answer is :1) No we do not know any case of the dead now saved in invincible ignorance, a good conscience etc and we cannot physically see them in 2015 and 2) since they are not known; not visible to us they are not explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II - then you are rational.
You would be saying that there are no known exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus in 2015.
Defacto, objectively, you and I would not know of any such case.If there was any such case, it would only be known to God.And if there was such a case of someone saved, or going to be saved, without the baptism of water, it would be a possibility known only to God and unknown to us human beings.It would not be an exception. Possibilities are not exceptions. Hypothetical cases cannot be defacto exceptions in the present times.
So do you think the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 made an objective mistake when it alleges that the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance are exceptions to the historical interpretation of the dogma , the 'rigorist interpretation' ? Yes! - but the Vicariate will not say it. Instead they will teach theology based on their being known exceptions to the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Church.
How could Fr.Leonard Feeney be wrong when there cannot be any known exception? The Vicariate will not answer.
Many Catholic priests, who offer Mass in Italian,  in Rome to whom I have spoken to say there are no known exceptions and the Marchetti Letter of 1949 made an objective mistake. It assumed that the dead are visible, to be exceptions to the dogma.It is a fact of life, that we cannot see these exceptions.
What is your view as a student ?
Fr.Stefano Visintin OSB, is Dean of the Faculty of Theology at the Pontifical University St.Anselm, Rome. This Benedictine priest says there are no known exceptions.
The baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance are possibilities, he said, but are not known exceptions to the traditional teaching on salvation.
Prof. Visintin was speaking with me on Oct.15,2013 at the University of St.Anselm in Rome.
So did the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 issued by Cardinal Francesco Selvagginai Marchetti make a mistake for you ? Ask your professor at the Vicariate may be he will answer you.
Vatican Council II is in agreement with Fr.Leonard Feeney and the traditional interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus, for me.
Vatican Council II, without the irrational inference(visible-dead who are exceptions to the dogma), would be saying, all Hindus, Buddhists, Jews,Muslims  need to convert into the Catholic Church with 'faith and baptism' (Ad Gentes 7) for salvation ( to avoid Hell). All Protestants and Orthodox Christians need Catholic Faith (Ad Gentes 7, Lumen Gentium 14)
Would you agree?

Could you confirm this with professors of theology at the St.John Lateran University?.
The priest who confirmed this for me most recently is Fr.Marco Hausmann FSSP. He offers the Traditional Latin Mass on Sunday mornings at the church San Giuseppe a Capo le Casa in  Rome.
I simply asked him if there are any physical exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, are baptism of desire cases visible and known to us to be exceptions to all needing to enter the Church for salvation.His obvious answer was - no.There are no physically visible cases.There are no known exceptions.
-Lionel Andrades


Professors of Theology at the Ecclesia Mater
 according to the Rome Vicariate website.
Ceccarelli Marco

Cuccurullo Rossan

Dal Bello Mario

De Luca
Delpozzo Paola
Lee Jae-Suk
Luparia Marco Ermes

Olivieri Pennesi
Pasquale Luca

Simeoni Martino
Viganò Dario


Mons. Prof. Antonio Sabetta


Mons. Prof. Pierluigi Sguazzardo

So the real issue with extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Vatican Council II is whether you are interpreting them with or without the irrational premise

Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus: A Question of Emphasis

01/05/2015 Comments (62)


...In that article, I used ecumenism as an example and I will do so again today. But rather than get into the muck and mire of the theology surrounding the issue, I want focus on the real world consequences of this confusion.
The other day, I put a quote up on social media from Presidential contender Senator Marco Rubio. Though I had just written about the confusion over this issue, even I was surprised by the immediate reactions of Catholics to the quote. Basically, my combox blew up in a not so good way.
I present the quote here not to resume that discussion but to illustrate a point.
“I'm a Roman Catholic. I'm theologically in line with the Roman Catholic Church.(this theology is based on an irrationality, an irrational inference) I believe in the authority of the church,(the magisterium made an objective error in the Letter of the Holy Office and this was carried over into Vatican Council II Ad Gentes 7. Lumen Gentium 14 etc)  but I also have tremendous respect for my brothers and sisters in other Christian faiths. I recognize, as the Catholic Church does, that there are excellent teachings of the Word throughout other denominations. The elements of salvation are found in these churches as well." (They do not have Catholic Faith (AG 7). So Christian religions in general are not paths to salvation. Jesus saves through the Sacraments and the faith and moral teachings of the Catholic Church.)
While one could quibble a little over some of the phrasing used by Senator Rubio, this would seem to be close-enough restatement of what the Church teaches in Catechism 819.
"Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth" are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church ( they are not known to us in 2015 to be exceptions to the traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam  nulla salus) : "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements." ( we cannot say that any Protestant will be saved or has been saved who is outside the visible limits of the Church i.e without formal membership in the Catholic Church) Christ's Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, (in theory, in faith, in hope - but not in known cases, not in personally known cases.Hypothetical cases cannot be defacto exceptions to the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Church) whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him, and are in themselves calls to "Catholic unity."
Yet, a great deal of confusion and anger spewed forth because of this statement. The question is why?
It is a selective reading of the Church’s teaching on this matter. Many people see this passage as the only relevant teaching on the matter and adopt an approach that belonging to a protestant denomination is just as good as being Catholic. ( in-principle cases, accepted hypothetically, are considered defacto, objectively known.This was the mistake of Senator M.Rubio)  In fact, one gets the sense that many Catholics, including some in the hierarchy of the Church, (the hierarchy uses the visible- dead inference. This is there in the papers of the International Theological Commission, the Balamand Declaration, Cardinal Kaspar's speech at  the Vatican Council for Christian Unity, available on line,an article on the website of the Vatican Council for the Clergy, etc ) think that conversion and visible communion with the Catholic Church is unnecessary and anachronistic.(This is said since it is  assumed that the baptism of desire etc refer to known exceptions in the present times to the traditional interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney.) Those Catholics, it can be reasonably surmised, have adopted the notion that “Protestantism is nothing more than another form of the same true Christian religion, in which form it is given to please God equally as in the Catholic Church.” (Since there is known salvation outside the Church for them, every one does d not have to be a formal member of the Church Church.This was indicated in the  Marchetti Letter of 1949)   This belief is specifically condemned in the syllabus of errors.(The Syllabus of Errors is contradicted by Vatican Council II for them, since they interpret the Council using an irrational premise.Without this premise Vatican Council II does not contradict the Syllabus of Errors.)
They even go so far as to minimize or ignore other passages (846-848) from the very same catechism on the topic.
"Outside the Church there is no salvation"
846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers? Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:(Yes all salvation comes form Christ through his Church and there are no exceptions to the rigorist interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus)Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door.(Extra ecclesiam nulla salus!) Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.(This passage has nothing to do with the dogma.Since those who are in invincible ignorance or 'who know' are known only to God.This confusion has come from the Marchetti letter.The error has been inserted into Vatican Council II by Cardinal Richard Cushing and the Jesuits)
847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:(those who through no fault of their own who do not know Christ and his Church and who are saved, are not known to us human beings. This confusion has come from the Marchetti letter. If we know that it refers to in principle cases, accepted in theory and are not exceptions to the dogma, then this passage is harmless.)
Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.(Yes they may achieve salvation but they are not objective cases for us.To assume that they are objective cases, is using the false inference. Also they could have received salvation with the baptism of water and Catholic Faith, this is the teaching of the dogma.So when interpreted rationally this passage does not contradict the dogma according to the Church Councils and saints.)848 "Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men." (Another passage which has nothing to do with the Fr.Leonard Feeney interpretation of the dogma. It does not contradict the 'rigorst interpretation' of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.)

So the real  issue with extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Vatican Council II is : are you a interpreting them with or without the irrational premise. EWTN speakers and National Catholic Register staff writers are not aware of how an irrational premise which they use, creates an interpretation of Vatican Council II which is a break with the Syllabus of Errors.
-Lionel Andrades

Hundreds of Catholics ask Cardinal Sean O Malley to resign as Chairman of US Bishops Committee on Pro Life issues