Tuesday, March 17, 2015

John Vennari assumes being saved in invincble ignorance is an exception to the dogma

John Vennari:
Editor’s Note: Because Catholic Family News often publishes articles that emphasize the infallible Catholic doctrine of “outside the Church there is no salvation,” we have sometimes been accused of implicitly denying Venerable Pope Pius IX’s teaching on invincible ignorance.1 In answer, we do not deny Pope Pius IX’s teaching on invincible ignorance.
Lionel:
I have mentioned in an earlier post that being saved in invincible ignorane is not related to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, it is not an exception to the traditional strict interpretation of the dogma. It is not relevant.
The Good Thief on the Cross or St.Emerentiana cannot be exceptions to the strict interpretation of the dogma. Since they existed centuries back. Exceptions must exist in the present times. Something or someone can only be an exception today. A possibility can be a possibility only.It cannot be an exception to the dogma today.
Every exception to all needing the baptism of water for salvation has to happen today.Otherwise it will not be an exception today.


An exception to the dogma on salvation must happen in the present times, today,living memory, existing time, visible and concrete, March 17,2015, Feast of St.Patrick.
Something that happened in the past cannot be an exception to the dogma on March 17.
Something that will happen in the future cannot be an exception to the dogma on outside the church there is no salvation.
Something that happens in Heaven and is known only to God, cannot be an exception on earth to the dogma today;someone in Heaven cannot be an exception o earth, to all needing to convert formally into the Church in March 2015.
So if someone dies in invincible ignorance ( with or without the baptism of water) it would be known only to God. So how could it be an exception or relevant to the strict interpretation of outside the Church there is no salvation ?
The message of the dogma is related to today.All need 'faith and baptism' for salvation today.All need to convert today into the Church to avoid the fires of Hell.
Even if someone were to die without faith and baptism ( which is not de fide) we would not know of any exception today.Humanly we cannot know. These persons would be dead and in Heaven.So why does John Vennari have to mention invincible ignorance with reference to the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Church ?
If  a pope, cardinal or magisterial document infers that there are exceptions today it is false.It has to be rejected.This is common sense.The dead -past, present or future- cannot be exceptions to all needing to convert into the Church today.
Cardinals Marchetti and Cushing in 1949 did not know of any exceptions.
At Vatican Council II ( 1960-1965) no one there knew of anyone saved without faith and baptism.
When Redemptoris Missio and Dominus Iesus were issued neither did Pope John Paul II and Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger know of any exceptions to the dogma.
There is no known case of salvation outside the Church i.e without Catholic Faith and the baptism of water.
So how can the Catechism of Pope John Paul II, Dominus Iesus, Redemptoris Missio and other magisterial documents, over seen by Cardinal Ratzinger, imply that there is salvation outside the Church? Yet they do.
The magisterium has made a factual error and John Vennari has not noticed it.Since he and the SSPX also assume that there are explicit exceptions to the dogma.
So neither can John Vennari nor the SSPX say that Vatican Council II II affirms the strict interpretation of the dogma with Ad Gentes 7 and there cannot possibly be exceptions in Vatican Council II to the traditional interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
This is a common mistake among the SSPX in Italy,too.
-Lionel Andrades
 
The two hermeneutics depend on the use or omission of the irrational premise from Marchetti's letter
 


There being exceptions is the irrational reasoning used to interpret Vatican Council II by John Vennari, Chris Ferrara, John Salza and Louie Verrecchio

 
John Vennari, Cardinal Kaspar and so many others are misinterpreting these Church documents and then repeating the error in Vatican Council II
 
Cardinal Kaspar,John Vennari and Louie Verrecchio make the Council ambigous
 
Bishop Athanasius Schneider makes the same error as John Vennari and Louie Verrechio http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/11/bishop-athanasius-schneider-makes-same.html
-Lionel Andrades
February 23, 2015

Bishop Fellay uses a false premise when he assumes LG 8 refers to visible in the flesh cases : Doctrine has not changed unless you use a false premise.


 

Biblical evidence for the Real Presence

No Wonder They Call it the Real Presence: Lives Changed by Christ in Eucharistic Adoration













Biblical evidence for the Real Presence
https://youtu.be/xOpJ_lGze0o

http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/pea/nowonder.htm

Immaculate Heart of Mary School – New Hampshire


Immaculate Heart of Mary School – New Hampshire
https://youtu.be/x_YDc5rtSUQ

http://www.ihmsnh.org/#

Are you looking for a private school that teaches in a Catholic tradition?
Please contact us if you are interested in enrolling your child. We have grades K-12 and a daily Latin Mass.
Do you have a vocation to teach?
If you would like to discuss becoming an intern and working in our school, please contact us.
 

Immaculate Heart of Mary School 95 Fay Martin Rd.Richmond, NH 03470,USA
Tel: 603-239-6495
Fax: 603-239-4502
 
 
 
 

Fr.John Zuhlsdorf does not believe in the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus : advice on interfaith marriages

ASK FATHER: Non-Catholic engaged to SSPX follower. What to do?

 

From a reader…
QUAERITUR:
A non-Catholic Christian co-worker has a daughter who is engaged to be married to a young man who was raised in, and still attends, an SSPX chapel in our diocese. The woman does not want to be married in the chapel, but is OK with being married in the Catholic Church. The young man agrees. What is the process for this to happen?

Pretty easy, really. The couple should approach the local Catholic parish where (hopefully) they will be welcomed with open arms.
Lionel:
Note Fr.John Zuhlsdorf does not believe in the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
So the non Catholic Christian is not outside the Church for him.She does not have to convert into the Catholic Church.
___________________
Since the Society of Pius X is a priestly society (and currently in an irregular state), there is no such thing as a lay “SSPXer”.
Lionel:
The SSPX are in an irregular state since they will not accept Vatican Council II interpreted with a false premise which makes the Council a break with the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
Fr.Zuhlsdorf also interprets Vatican Council II with this false premise.
____________________
I know I sometimes refer – loosely – to SSPXers who are lay people who attend SSPX chapels, but, technically, only the bishops, priests are true SSPXers.
Lionel:
There are lay persons who attend the SSPX Mass who accept Vatican Council II ( with the premise).
_____________________
 
I digress. We are, in this post, talking about Catholics who currently, regularly attend Mass in a chapel staffed by these validly ordained but nevertheless irregular priests.
Lionel:
The Vatican Curia is interpreting the Council with an irrational premise.They use the Marchetti-Cushing irrational premise. This is an irregular situation. The magisterium has gone off the rails.
________________________
Such a person remains a Catholic, but he might need to make a good confession to a priest with legitimate faculties (such as a priest of the local diocese). Such a Catholic should not be denied access to the sacraments, including marriage… witnessed by a minister who is duly authorized by the Church.
Bottom line: the Catholic who usually goes to the SSPX chapel is, quite simply, just a Catholic, just like every other Catholic who wants to marry. He is bound, just like every other Catholic, to observe the Church laws concerning marriage. That’s a commandment of the Church which every traditional Catholic has memorized.
Lionel:
However the Church's teachings on the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus were changed after 1949.This is an irregular situation.
____________________
The priest or deacon who prepares this couple for marriage will need to obtain permission for a mixed marriage, as the bride is a non-Catholic Christian. Such permission can be obtained from the local diocese.
Lionel:
The bishops in the local diocese do not believe in the strict interpretation of the dogma. They may even give permission for a ritual in the Church with a non Christian.
The couple would be living in adultery.
________________________
This is, by the way, a problem for the good men who are, I know, zealous priests of the SSPX. They have every desire to help couples who approach them. However, if a couple needs a dispensation to marry, or there is some question about a previous marriage bond, they have nowhere to turn within their own Society. They have no legitimate authority, alas, such as a tribunal set up by the local bishop who is in union with the See of Peter. I can’t tell you how much I look forward to the day when any priest of the SSPX will have unfettered recourse to the resources of dioceses in the same way that diocesan priests do. There is a great deal to accomplish together.
Lionel:
Primarily,all Catholics need  to affirm Vatican Council II without the premise.
They need to observe that there are no exceptions in Vatican Council II and other magisterial documents to the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
This will help priests in the dioceses and in the SSPX .
_____________________________
I digress.
The parish priest or deacon should take pains during the marriage prep to invite the groom back a parish in full communion with Rome.
Lionel:
The parish priest or deacon will be in full communion with the Church and denying the traditional dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus?
_______________________________
He should invite him to hear Holy Mass at one of the frequent and reverently celebrated Masses in the Extraordinary Form that are surely offered in the diocese. (Please God, there is one.)
Lionel:
He should invite him to hear Holy Mass as those of the FSSP where there is a split between liturgy and dogma. They are only allowed to offer the Traditional Latin Mass if they do not proclaim the strict interpretation of the dogma.
So they oblige.
_______________________
He should kindly invite him to make a good sacramental confession to a priest who has faculties from proper authority, such as the diocesan bishop or a religious superior.
Lionel : 'They need to make a good sacramental confession to a priest who has faculties from proper authority, such as the diocesan bishop or a religious superior' - and who has  changed the Nicene Creed ( I believe in one baptism to I believe in two or more known baptisms without the baptism of water) and who does not consider this a mortal sin of faith.He also will deny a defined dogma of the Church with alleged exceptions and not believe this is a sin.
_________________________
In any event, this isn’t all that complicated. It happens pretty often these days for a Catholic to need a dispensation to marry a non-Catholic.
Lionel:
'It happens pretty often these days for a Catholic to need a dispensation to marry a non-Catholic '- and they get the dispensation, since the priest or bishop does not believe in the strict interpretation of the dogma.He affirms the 'developed' version.So they do not tell the couple that they will be living in  adultery unless both spouses are Catholic in a sacramental marriage.
-Lionel Andrades
 
http://wdtprs.com/blog/2015/03/ask-father-non-catholic-engaged-to-sspx-follower-what-to-do/





Fr.John Zuhlsdorf interprets Vatican Council II with Marchetti's theory so the Council for him is ambigous and a break with extra ecclesiam nulla salus
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/02/frjohn-zuhlsdorf-interprets-vatican.html

Extra ecclesiam nulla salus is linked to Vatican Council II. Louie Verrechio and Fr.Zuhlsdorf have still to discover it.
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/02/extra-ecclesiam-nulla-salus-is-linked.html


Fr.John Zuhlsdorf made an objective mistake : irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/02/frjohn-zuhlsdorf-made-objective-mistake.html


Fr.John Zuhlsdorf interprets Vatican Council II with Marchetti's theory so the Council for him is ambigous and a break with extra ecclesiam nulla salus - 2
http://eucharistandssion.blogspot.it/2015/02/frjohn-zuhlsdorf-interprets-vatican_8.html

Fr.John Zuhlsdorf interprets Vatican Council II with Marchetti's theory so the Council for him is ambigous and a break with extra ecclesiam nulla salus - 3

 

Edward Pentin pulls down Cardinal Muller's controversial interview ? : still available on the Vatican website

Correction: The interview is available on the Vatican website.
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20120913_interview-muller_en.html 13 September 2012

On January 13, 2015 on this blog I posted a report Cardinal Muller's doctrinal error placed on the Vatican website!.1 That report has not been removed from the Vatican website. It has  been removed from Edward Penin's website or I am unable to find it if it is still there. The full text of the interview of Cardinal Muller by Edward Pentin though can also be read on the National Catholic Register and on this blog.
Here is the part where he made the common error on extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
 
Edward Pentin:
But do you feel there’s been a weakening of the Church’s teaching because of this underlying confusion of terminology. One example sometimes cited is that the teaching of “no salvation outside the Church” seems to have become less prominent. Can that be attributed to the Council in your view?
 
Cardinal Gerhard Muller:
That has been discussed, but here too there has been a development of all that was said in the Church, beginning with St. Cyprian, one of the Fathers of the Church, in the 3rd century. Again, the perspective is different between then and now. In the 3rd century, some Christian groups wanted to be outside the Church, and what St. Cyprian said is that without the Church, a Christian cannot be saved. The Second Vatican Council also said this: Lumen Gentium 14 says: “Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.” He who is aware of the presence of revelation is obliged by his conscience to belong publicly and, not only in his conscience, in his heart, to this Catholic Church by remaining in communion with the Pope and those bishops in communion with him. But we cannot say that those who are inculpably ignorant of this truth are necessarily condemned for that reason. We must hope that those who do not belong to the Church through no fault of their own, but who follow the dictates of their God-given conscience, will be saved by Jesus Christ whom they do not yet know. Every person has the right to act according to his or her own conscience...-National Catholic Register
Lionel:
Keep in mind that exceptions to the dogma must exist in the present times. Something or someone can only be an exception today. Every exception to all needing the baptism of water for salvation has to happen today.Otherwise it will not be an exception.
Something that happened in the past cannot be an exception to the dogma on March 17.
Something that will happen in the future cannot be an exception to the dogma on outside the church there is no salvation.
Something that happens in Heaven and is known only to God, cannot be an exception on earth to the dogma today;someone in Heaven cannot be an exception to all needing to convert formally into the Church on March 2017.
The message of the dogma is related to today.All need 'faith and baptism' for salvation today.All need to convert today into the Church to avoid the fires of Hell.
Even if someone were to die without faith and baptism ( which is not de fide) we would not know of it today. He would not be an exception to the dogma today.
So if a pope, cardinal or magisterial document infers that there are exceptions today it is false.It has to be rejected.This is common sense.The dead -past, present or future- cannot be exceptions to all needing to convert into the Church today.
there has been a development
Lionel:
How can there be a development when we do not know of any one saved outside the Church in the present times ? Who was the exception? Cardinal Muller cannot personally know of any exception.
Again, the perspective is different between then and now.
Lionel:
How can the perspective change ? There cannot be any known exception.
Cardinals Marchetti and Cushing in 1949 did not know of any exceptions.
At Vatican Council II ( 1960-1965) no one there knew of anyone saved without faith and baptism.
So where is the New Revelation? How could the dogma be different now?
 
He who is aware of the presence of revelation is obliged by his conscience to belong publicly
Lionel:
Yes he is obliged but is Cardinal Muller inferring that this case is an exception to the strict interpretation of the dogma. Only those 'who are aware' are obliged to enter the Church and not 'all' people in general ? I think he is implying this! This was the original mistake of cardinals Marchetti and Cushing in 1949.
They assumed that persons saved with the baptism of desire and in invincible ignorance were:-
1) Saved without the baptism of water.
2) They are known to us in the present times ( 1949 for them and 2015 for us)
3) They are now saved and in Heaven but are visible to us on earth to be explicit exceptions to the traditional interpretation of the dogma.
So every one does not need to enter the Church as the dogma taught but only those who 'know' .Since there were persons  in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire who were saved and they are known to us on earth.
 
But we cannot say that those who are inculpably ignorant of this truth are necessarily condemned for that reason
Lionel:
The dogma says all need to convert for salvation. All who have Original Sin need to be baptised with water in the Catholic Church. Vatican Council II (AG 7) also says 'all' need 'faith and baptism' for salvation.The Catechism of the Catholic Church 1257 says the Church knows of no means to eternal beatitude other than the baptism of water.
Cardinal Muller infers here that those who are in invincibll ignorance and will be saved or are saved, are known to us.Since they are known to us they become  exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. It is implied that they are saved without the baptism of water. They are in Heaven and are objectively visible to us.
How can they be known to us for them to be exceptions to the dogma today March 17, feast of St.Patrick?
Yet he implies this. Otherwise how can these cases in invincible ignorance be exceptions.
This is a common mistake of the Magisterium.
When Redemptoris Missio and Dominus Iesus were issued neither did Pope John Paul II and Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger know of any exceptions to the dogma.
There is no known case of salvation outside the Church i.e without the Catholic Faith and the baptism of water.
Yet the Catechism of Pope John Paul II, Dominus Iesus, Redemptoris Missio and other magisterial documents, over seen by Cardinal Ratzinger, imply that there is salvation outside the Church.
Cardinal Muller has made a factual error. He infers that there are exceptions to the traditional interpretation of the dogma. In other words there are known cases of persons now in Heaven saved without the baptism of water, who are personally known to us on earth.
It is a fact of life that those saved are in Heaven and are not personally known or visible to us on earth. So how can there be exceptions to the dogma for us humans on March 17?-Lionel Andrades
1.
January 13, 2015
Cardinal Muller's doctrinal error placed on the Vatican website!


'Poem of the Man God' supports the traditional understanding of extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS)

Comment. 1
I was surprised to see the claim that 'Poem of the Man God' supports the Traditional' understanding of extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS). Do you know where in the book that is supposedly stated?Lionel:
I don't have the book with me.
I have read some of the volumes a few times.
The traditional interpretation of the dogma was there. It was very clear.


1

THE POEM OF THE MAN GOD BY MARIA VALTORTA

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/10/the-poem-of-man-god-by-maria-valtorta.html
 
 
HOW CAN THE MAGISTERIUM APPROVE EENS?
 
The Good Thief on the Cross or St.Emerentiana cannot be exceptions to the strict interpretation of the dogma. Since they existed centuries back. Exceptions must exist in the present times. Something or someone can only be an exception today. A possibility can be a possibility only.It cannot be an exception to the dogma today.
Every exception to all needing the baptism of water for salvation has to happen today.Otherwise it will not be an exception.
An exception to the dogma on salvation must happen in the present times, today,living memory, existing time, visible and concrete, March 17,2015, Feast of St.Patrick.
Something that happened in the past cannot be an exception to the dogma on March 17.
Something that will happen in the future cannot be an exception to the dogma on outside the church there is no salvation.
Something that happens in Heaven and is known only to God, cannot be an exception on earth to the dogma today;someone in Heaven cannot be an exception to all needing to convert formally into the Church on March 2017.
The message of the dogma is related to today.All need 'faith and baptism' for salvation today.All need to convert today into the Church to avoid the fires of Hell.2
Even if someone were to die without faith and baptism ( which is not de fide) we would not know of any exception today.Humanly we cannot know. These persons would be dead and in Heaven.
So if a pope, cardinal or magisterial document infers that there are exceptions today it is false.It has to be rejected.This is common sense.The dead -past, present or future- cannot be exceptions to all needing to convert into the Church today.
Cardinals Marchetti and Cushing in 1949 did not know of any exceptions.
At Vatican Council II ( 1960-1965) no one there knew of anyone saved without faith and baptism.
When Redemptoris Missio and Dominus Iesus were issued neither did Pope John Paul II and Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger know of any exceptions to the dogma.
There is no known case of salvation outside the Church i.e without the Catholic Faith and the baptism of water.
So how can the Catechism of Pope John Paul II, Dominus Iesus, Redemptoris Missio and other magisterial documents, over seen by Cardinal Ratzinger, imply that there is salvation outside the Church? Yet they do.
The magisterium has made a factual eror. So how can it approve the traditional interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus. How can they say that Vatican Council II II affirms the strict interpretation of the dogma (Ad Gentes 7) and there cannot possibly be exceptions in Vatican Council II to the traditional interpretation of the Church Councils, saints and mystics.- Lionel Andrades
 
http://www.fatherspeaks.net/valtorta_intro.htm
_____________________________________________
 
 
2
A young Korean artist taken to Hell. Drew pictures of it.
The entrance it seems to me was similar to a very long and narrow alleyway, like an oven, low and dark and confined; the floor seemed to me to consist of dirty, muddy water emitting foul stench and swarming with putrid vermin...The bodily pains were so unbearable that though I had suffered excruciating ones in this life and according to what doctors say, the worst that can be suffered on earth for all my nerves were shrunken when I was paralyzed, plus many other sufferings of many kinds that I endured and even some as I said, caused by the devil, these were all nothing in comparison with the ones I experienced there...-St.Teresa of Avila's description of Hell.
http://www.tldm.org/news6/hell3.htm


These are the Tortures suffered by all the damned together, but that is not the end of the sufferings.Indescribable SufferingsThere are special Tortures destined for particular souls. These are the torments of the senses. Each soul undergoes terrible and indescribable sufferings related to the manner in which it has sinned.
I would have died
There are caverns and pits of torture where one form of agony differs from another. I would have died at the very sight of these tortures if the omnipotence of God had not supported me...-St.Faustina Kowalska's description of Hell.
 
 
 
 




There was a certain rich man, who was clothed in purple and fine linen; and feasted sumptuously every day. And there was a certain beggar, named Lazarus, who lay at his gate, full of sores,
Desiring to be filled with the crumbs that fell from the rich man' s table, and no one did give him; moreover the dogs came, and licked his sores. And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom. And the rich man also died: and he was buried in hell. And lifting up his eyes when he was in torments, he saw Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom: And he cried, and said: Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, to cool my tongue: for I am tormented in this flame. And Abraham said to him: Son, remember that thou didst receive good things in thy lifetime, and likewise Lazareth evil things, but now he is comforted; and thou art tormented.

And besides all this, between us and you, there is fixed a great chaos: so that they who would pass from hence to you, cannot, nor from thence come hither. And he said: Then, father, I beseech thee, that thou wouldst send him to my father' s house, for I have five brethren, That he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torments. And Abraham said to him: They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. But he said: No, father Abraham: but if one went to them from the dead, they will do penance.

And he said to him: If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they believe, if one rise again from the dead. -Luke 16: 19: 31 Dives and Lazarus




 

"Then I was pushed into one of those fiery cavities and pressed, as it were, between burning planks, and sharp nails and red-hot irons seemed to be piercing my flesh."

Here Josefa repeated the multiple tortures from which no single member of the body is excluded:

"I felt as if they were endeavoring to pull out my tongue, but could not. This torture reduced me to such agony that my very eyes seemed to be starting out of their sockets. I think this was because of the fire which burns, burns... not a finger-nail escapes terrifying torments, and all the time one cannot move even a finger to gain some relief, nor change posture, for the body seems flattened out and yet doubled in two.- Sr.Joseph Menendez's description of Hell.
Alse see Dante's similar experience in Hell (Divine Comedy-Inferno)
__________________________________________