Thursday, February 12, 2015

The lawful authorities were saying that there were exceptions to the strict interpretation of the dogma

I have received an e-mail today.The discussion continues.1
You will have to show me or point out to me where in the 1949 letter of the Holy office or where in official church teaching at any point in Church teaching that it says that souls that are known to be saved are exceptions or are known to us while they are alive. (Lionel :O.K) I can not find that anywhere in the letter of 1949.(Lionel: It's there) In fact if anything the 1949 letter points out specifically how these situations leave that person with uncertainty as to their salvation.(Lionel : Yes) The word "exceptions " is never used by the Church in defining a soul that is saved.(Lionel : Yes but it is inferred) You either will be Catholic on earth or Catholic in Heaven. I feel to even use the word "exception" by anyone is dangerous to the faith.(Lionel : It is implied) Please note the following from Pope Pius XII in explaining these conditions subjectively which are not known to us individually but are clearly recognized as favorable for God's discernment and judgement.

From the letter of the Holy Office 1949:
"Toward the end of this same encyclical letter, when most affectionately inviting to unity those who do not belong to the body of the Catholic Church, he mentions those who "are related to the Mystical Body of the Redeemer by a certain unconscious yearning and desire,"( Lionel: Yes this is a possibility. But why mention it here unless the cardinal thinks it is relevant. How can those who are saved with an implicit desire, be relevant to the strict interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney and the St.Benedict Center? Yet it is relevant for him. Cardinal Marchetti thinks it is an exception to all needing the baptism of water , with no exceptions.So this case of someone having an implicit desire, is not a hypothetical case but one actually known ,for him. So it becomes an explicit exception to the dogma) and these he by no means excludes from eternal salvation, but on the other hand states that they are in a condition "in which they cannot be sure of their salvation" since "they still remain deprived of those many heavenly gifts and helps which can only be enjoyed in the Catholic Church" (AAS, 1. c., p. 243). With these wise words he reproves both those who exclude from eternal salvation all united to the Church only by implicit desire, (Lionel: We do not know of any defacto case of someone saved with an implicit desire and without the baptism of water. So it is not an exception to the dogma. Why mention it here? ) and those who falsely assert that men can be saved equally well in every religion (cf. Pope Pius IX, Allocution, , in , n. 1641 ff.; also Pope Pius IX in the encyclical letter, , in , n.

But it must not be thought that any kind of desire of entering the Church suffices that one may be saved. It is necessary that the desire by which one is related to the Church be animated by perfect charity. (Lionel : Agreed but it would have to be known, visible in 1949, for it to be an exception to the dogma according to the St.Benedict Center. This it is not! So it cannot be an exception as it is being implied here.) Nor can an implicit desire produce its effect, unless a person has supernatural faith: "For he who comes to God must believe that God exists and is a rewarder of those who seek Him" (Heb. 11:6). The Council of Trent declares (Session VI, chap. 8): "Faith is the beginning of man's salvation, the foundation and root of all justification, without which it is impossible to please God and attain to the fellowship of His children" (Denzinger, n. 801)."

Where in the above quote does it say that these conditions would be known to us or are exceptions from the Church teaching all including these situations that they must be Catholic and have Baptism by water.(Lionel: Fr.Leonard Feeney is being criticized for not accepting the baptism of desire as an exception to the dogma. It is implied that the baptism of desire is an exception. In other words these are visible and known cases, for Fr.Feeney to consider. ) How could we even project that they possess the holiness as described by the Pope for us to possibly ever proclaim that we KNOW them or that they were already saved while on earth; let alone use the word exception to describe their eternal status. Give me an example of what you describe as a defined heretical church taught exception.
Therefore, no one will be saved who, knowing the Church to have been divinely established by Christ, nevertheless refuses to submit to the Church or withholds obedience from the Roman Pontiff, the Vicar of Christ on earth.-Letter of the Holy Office
(Lionel: We do not know any one in 2015 who is saved or will be saved with implicit desire or in invincible ignorance.So who knows or does not know, is known only to God.The Letter implies that we know who these cases are and so not every one needs to enter the Church as Fr.Leonard Feeney taught.Only those who 'know' need to enter the Church, as compared to the dogmatic teaching which says all need to formally enter the Church.)
In His infinite mercy God has willed that the effects, necessary for one to be saved, of those helps to salvation which are directed toward man's final end, not by intrinsic necessity, but only by divine institution, can also be obtained in certain circumstances when those helps are used only in desire and longing.-Letter of the Holy Office 1949
(Lionel: Why mention that a person can be saved in desire and longing with reference to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.Where are these cases ? What are their names? The cardinal assumes there are known cases and so it is relevant to the dogma. He assumes there are exceptions to the dogma. )
This we see clearly stated in the Sacred Council of Trent, both in reference to the sacrament of regeneration and in reference to the sacrament of penance (, nn. 797, 807).-Letter of the Holy Office 1949
(Lionel. No where does the Council of Trent say that there are exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus or that we know in real life who these people are for them to be exceptions.In Cardinal Marchetti's mind they are visible  and known. So for him they are exceptions.)
Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it is necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing.-Letter of the Holy Office 1949
(Lionel: The dogma says all need to be incorporated into the Church actually as a member and he denies it. For him there are known cases of persons who do not need to be incorporated as members of the Church.)
However, this desire need not always be explicit, as it is in catechumens; but when a person is involved in invincible ignorance God accepts also an implicit desire, so called because it is included in that good disposition of soul whereby a person wishes his will to be conformed to the will of God.-Letter of the Holy Office 1949
(Lionel :'This desire need not always be explicit, as it is in catechumens; but when a person is involved in invincible ignorance..' in other words this case is known, explicit, objective for Cardinal Marchetti. So it is an exception to the rigorist interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney.)
These things are clearly taught in that dogmatic letter which was issued by the Sovereign Pontiff, Pope Pius XII, on June 29, 1943, (AAS, Vol. 35, an. 1943, p. 193 ff.). For in this letter the Sovereign Pontiff clearly distinguishes between those who are actually incorporated into the Church as members, and those who are united to the Church only by desire.-Letter of the Holy Office 1949
Lionel: 'those who are actually incorporated into the Church as members, and 'those who are united to the Church only by desire' . 'Those who are united to the Church only by desire' will be saved, while being outside the visible limits of the Church.Since these cases are visible and known for Cardinal Marchetti they are exceptions to all needing to be incorporated into the Church as members for salvation. This is inferred and so Fr.Leonard Feeney is pulled up.He had to say that they were known exceptions to the dogma and there was salvation outside the Catholic Church.He has to say that not all people need to defacto be members of the Church for salvation.He did not and so criticized here.
From what has been said it is evident that those things which are proposed in the periodical , fascicle 3, as the genuine teaching of the Catholic Church are far from being such and are very harmful both to those within the Church and those without.-Letter of the Holy Office.
Lionel : From the Housetops was saying there are no known exceptions to the dogma.
Hence, one cannot understand how the St. Benedict Center can consistently claim to be a Catholic school and wish to be accounted such, and yet not conform to the prescriptions of canons 1381 and 1382 of the Code of Canon Law, and continue to exist as a source of discord and rebellion against ecclesiastical authority and as a source of the disturbance of many consciences.-Letter of the Holy Office 1949
Lionel: They were saying that there are no known exceptions.
Furthermore, it is beyond understanding how a member of a religious Institute, namely Father Feeney, presents himself as a "Defender of the Faith," and at the same time does not hesitate to attack the catechetical instruction proposed by lawful authorities, and has not even feared to incur grave sanctions threatened by the sacred canons because of his serious violations of his duties as a religious, a priest, and an ordinary member of the Church.-Letter of the Holy Office 1949
Lionel: The lawful authorities were saying that there were exceptions to the strict interpretation of the dogma. Implicit desire and being saved in invincible ignorance, referred to known cases saved without the baptism of water. So there was known salvation outside the Church for the lawful authorities.
Finally, it is in no wise to be tolerated that certain Catholics shall claim for themselves the right to publish a periodical, for the purpose of spreading theological doctrines, without the permission of competent Church authority, called the "" which is prescribed by the sacred canons.-Letter of the Holy Office 1949
Lionel: The competent authorities were saying that all persons do not need to enter the Church but only those who 'knew', those who were not in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire and who were saved. So all need to enter the Church except for this category- of exceptions.
Therefore, let them who in grave peril are ranged against the Church seriously bear in mind that after "Rome has spoken" they cannot be excused even by reasons of good faith. Certainly, their bond and duty of obedience toward the Church is much graver than that of those who as yet are related to the Church "only by an unconscious desire." Let them realize that they are children of the Church, lovingly nourished by her with the milk of doctrine and the sacraments, and hence, having heard the clear voice of their Mother, they cannot be excused from culpable ignorance, and therefore to them apply without any restriction that principle: submission to the Catholic Church and to the Sovereign Pontiff is required as necessary for salvation.-Letter of the Holy Office 1949
Lionel: They were being criticized for saying there are no exceptions.
This is exactly what I discussed with father. If those in these conditions find themselves saved it is NEVER to be because the Church ever taught them that this was an option to choose from as this would be disobedient to the command of Jesus. (This is not the issue. The issue is that the baptism of desire etc are not exceptions to the dogma.This was what Cardinal Marchetti missed out on) This would simply be a very hopeful condition of Holiness that the Church has defined for all to believe in the proper context. (There is a factual mistake here. Those saved with the baptism of desire for example would be in Heaven. They would not be on earth. So they could not be an exception to the interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney. This was an oversight) They are completely irrelevant to teaching the faith with absolute crystal clear assuredness but must recognized and accepted as Church teaching.-Lionel Andrades

Would the FSSP Monsignor say that according to Vatican Council II all need to formally enter the Church for salvation ?

I received this e-mail yesterday and the discussion continues.

   Thank you for your quick response. The good Monsignor truly does believe that Vatican Council II is not a break with past councils or past centuries on Church teaching that there is No salvation Outside the Catholic Church and all must be baptized with water. (Lionel: Could you ask him if he believes Vatican Council II affirms the ' rigorist interpretation' of extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Feeneyite version?) He did say that a syllabus would be in order to correct , denounce or explain as the case may be the era of VCII. (Lionel: Would the Syllabus have to say that LG 16,LG 8,UR 3,NA 2 etc are not exceptions to the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus?) There is much confusion and lack of clarity in understanding and faithful catechesis.(Lionel : Would the FSSP Monsignor say that according to Vatican Council II (AG 7- all need faith and baptism for salvation) all non Catholics ( including Christians ) need to enter the Catholic Church formally for salvation and there are no exceptions ?)
◦“There is but one universal Church of the faithful, outside which no one at all is saved.” (Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, 1215.) This has been repeated throughout the centuries so to me and the Catholic Church it is quite clear that it is really that beautiful, Holy and simple. After all a command is a command. Baptism of Desire, Baptism of Blood and Invincible Ignorance are completely irrelevant to teaching this truth as commanded by Jesus to all Catholics and non Catholics alike.(Yes .Agreed) In my humble opinion there would be no difference in 2015 or in any year there is contact with any living person that Father Feeney, your and my teaching and belief would be identical in what we tell them is necessary for Salvation. Even the centuries of teaching by the church on such things such as they do not know or if they are ignorant fall by the wayside if we do and say what we are commanded. If the Church teaches to all that this is the formula (Lionel: Yes. This is also the teaching of Vatican Council II (AG 7). Vatican Council II does not contradict the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Church.
Presently the SSPX and the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, Fr.Leonard Feeney's communities in the USA, assume there are exceptions in Vatican Council II to the dogma. For them then LG 16,LG 8,UR 3 etc would be referring to visible and known cases in 2015 for them to become exceptions.)
the excuse that someone does not know becomes less and less likely in our teaching mission and expectations for conversion to the Catholic faith. If they do not accept what the church teaches they cannot say that they do not know but only that they disagree and will not accept the formula for salvation for which they are accountable before God. (Lionel: Another problem today is that Vatican Council II is being interpreted with the Marchetti Inference ( the dead are visible in 2015) and this is assumed to be the 'Church's teaching'.)
Having said that where we disagree is as follows. Father Feeney most assuredly was a staunch defender of the faith and taught salvation exactly and accurately in regards to No Salvation outside the Catholic Church and baptism by water.(Lionel : He was correct doctrinally: there was no known or unknown salvation outside the Catholic Church) Where he made serious mistakes were in lack of obedience in not going to Rome as demanded of him and denying the Church teaching on the possibilities of Baptism of Desire, Baptism of Blood and Invincible Ignorance.(Lionel: The Holy Office and the Archbishop of Boston were in heresy for assuming there was known salvation outside the Church and so the dogma was contradicted.) Unlike you Lionel, he even accepted their possibilities which you have not addressed. (Lionel: They are possibilities for me, followed by the baptism of water. I do not have a problem with the baptism of desire. Since it is not relevant or an exception to the dogma.They being invisible,these cases can be accepted in faith, hypothetically) I believe that Father Feeney is a Saint simply because the Church did not show and demonstrate this great love, charity and humility that we hear of so often. The Church in retrospect on so important could have come to him. The excommunication was lifted without a recant when the Church clearly knew his stance on the issues in question. We say in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass: "your servant Pope______" Lionel, I believe that
you are absolutely correct when you say that we know of no one while they are alive on this earth that can be exempt from being taught that there is No Salvation Outside the Catholic Church and that they must have baptism by water. period; no exceptions.(Lionel: Agreed) Correct me if I am wrong, while we totally agree on this I feel that you ironically project this mindset to THOSE WHO HAVE DIED ( Lionel: I have to keep saying that these persons are dead and so so cannot be exceptions. It is only in this sense do I mean it ) where souls are then out of the realm of earthly influence and are judged by God in his infinite mercy, love and justice in ways that you should dare not speculate or even have an opinion. (Lionel: I speak in a general way. I am not referring to personal cases.) Baptism of Blood, Baptism of Desire and invincible Ignorance along with the possibilities of a sincere heart, searching and yearning for God, righteous life and perfect contrition are simply the Church's teaching of placing these favorable possible conditions that someone may possess before God for judgement.(Yes) We totally agree that these wonderful possibilities are not ours to offer but simply to embrace as Church teaching. The catechumen who dies before receiving communion is lovingly buried a Catholic and whose soul is before God for judgement. Many catechumens have been proclaimed Saints and it is not for anyone speculate on how they were welcomed by God into eternity.(Lionel: We agree)
We disagree on so little.(Lionel: I think we agree in general)
-Lionel Andrades

The baptism of desire is accepted by me since it is not an exception to the dogma even when it occurs and it is known only to God



Memento mori!

Memento mori!

Just a reminder to GO TO CONFESSION!
You are all going to die one day.
I direct this especially at you who dissent from some teaching of the Church: Don’t be on the wrong side of the Church when you go to your judgement. A harrowing thought.

It is a good thing to think on the Four Last Things regularly and to examine one’s conscience every day.
Remember to weigh your state in life and the responsibilities that come with it.
Consider your sins of omission, as well as of commission.
Confess all your mortal sins in both kind (what sin) and number (how many times, frequency).
If there is something in your life that it is out of order, take steps now to put things to right!
Life among the living is the time to make straight the paths of the Lord.
Once we die, that’s it.
Don’t delay.
We are in pre-Lent. Lent is coming.
If you are in an irregular situation, for the love of God see your parish priest NOW.
If you have some habitual sin that is keeping you from the grace of God, GO TO CONFESSION.
Fr. Z’s Tips

Burnley UK street interview attacked by muslims

Burnley UK street interview attacked by  muslims

Bill Warner, PhD: Jihad vs Crusades

Jihad vs Crusades

From Pope Paul VI to Pope Francis... : Can popes reject an ex cathedra teaching and offer Holy Mass ? Yes, defacto this is what is being done.

Risultati immagini per Photo of Pope Francis offering Mass
From Pope Paul VI to Pope Francis -  they have used an irrational premise in the interpretation of Vatican Council II. Both popes were unaware of the Marchetti Inference.Both used the Cardinal Marchetti Theory  to change the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.The 'evolved' version of the dogma was being taught in pontifical universities with the approval of Pope Paul VI. The irrationality is  approved today also by Pope Francis.
When Pope Paul VI offered the first Mass in Italian he was not aware of the error in the Marchetti letter of 1949 I mentioned in the last post. The error  discarded the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was interpreted over centuries.He was also not aware of an irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II which would emerge.
The dogma was rejected.It was claimed that the baptism of desire was an exception to the dogma. Since it was inferred that these cases were personally known to us, to be exceptions. This was an objective error of the pope.Since these persons saved as such are in Heaven.They could not be an exception on earth  to the traditional interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney. 

Since this first Mass priests and popes  can offer Holy Mass while denying the thrice defined dogma without it being considered an impediment.Since 1949 the Traditional Latin Mass was also offered with this change in Catholic Faith.
Pope Paul VI did not correct the irrational interpretations of Vatican Council II. Lumen Gentium 16 ( saved in invincible ignorance or a good conscience) was assumed to refer to known cases. They  were considered explicit exceptions to all needing to convert into the Catholic Church.So all did not need  'faith and baptism'' for the popes since there were explciit exceptions.This was a factual error.It was an objective error. So Lumen Gentium 16 contradicted Ad Gentes 7 and Lumen Gentium 14( all need faith and baptism for salvation) and the popes have said nothing about this. Even Pope Benedict  and Pope Francis accepted this false premise(dead-saved  are visible) and conclusion( they are exceptions to the dogma on salvation).This was the  new Deposit of the Faith, from 1949.
The text of Vatican Council II does not state that there are known cases of persons saved in invincible ignorance( with or without the baptism of water). So if there are no known cases how can there be exceptions to the dogma in Vatican Council II  ?. How does Vatican Council II not support the strict interpretation of the dogma? We lay people would have expected the popes and cardinals to explain this, but they have not.
Pope Paul VI never ever announced that without the irrational inference,without Marchetti's Theory, Vatican Council II is in agreement with the rigorist interpretation of the dogma.Vatican Council II does not contradict the defined dogma. Vatican Council II is in  accord with Fr.Leonard Feeney, the Church Councils, popes and saints. Nor is there an announcement today from Pope Francis .
This change in faith, we now know was a public heresy. Since the baptism of desire had nothing to do with the dogma. People in Heaven cannot be exceptions on earth!
When Pope Paul VI was offering the first Mass in Italian the excommunication of Fr.Leonard Feeney,a Jesuit priest, was not lifted. Fr.Feeney refused to say that there were known exceptions to the traditional interpretation of the dogma.Of course he could not see the dead in heaven or on earth saved with the baptism of desire.The Jesuits expelled him.

Until today, there is no apology from the Vatican or the Jesuits, for the excommunication of Fr.Leonard Feeney. Pope Francis, a Jesuit, accepts the Marchetti heresy.So do the other Jesuits. The theology Pope Francis taught in Argentina said  there were known exceptions to the traditional teaching. For him too  everyone does not need to enter the Church for salvation.This was magisterial teaching with Pope Benedict.
There were also four Catholic professors who were dismissed from Boston College, along with Fr.Leonard Feeney, for their traditional Catholic faith.The magisterium does not consider this an injustice.Since this is not a leftist issue.

Since 1965 the Novus Ordo Mass is being offered by popes  who interpret Vatican Council II with a a strange premise and they  have changed the Nicene Creed's 'I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sin' .It is now I believe in three or more known baptisms for the forgiveness of sin and these are baptisms without the baptism of water.
Extra ecclesiam nulla salus was an infallible teaching. It was defined by the Church, ex cathedra.Can popes reject an ex cathedra teaching and offer Holy Mass ? Yes, defacto this is what is being done.   
-Lionel Andrades