Tuesday, September 1, 2015

My approach and that of the St.Benedict Centers, USA

Sisters, Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary
I have to keep explaining to Catholics that my approach to extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) is not that of the St.Benedict Centers,USA, the great communities of Fr.Leonard Feeney ,which held on to the truth about the dogma for all of us in confusion.
For them in the diocese of Manchester and Worcester, USA the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance  must be followed by the baptism of water( I agree with them) and so there cannot be any exception to EENS. Their approach is theological and correct.
For me being saved with the baptism of desire (BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) or invincible ignorance ( with the baptism of water) are not physically visible and known to us.They are known only to God.Since they do not exist in our reality they cannot be exceptions to EENS.
Physically no one in Boston or Rome in 1949 knew of an exception to the interpretation of EENS according to Fr.Leonard Feeney and the St.Benedict Center.
No pope or cardinal knew of an explicit case of BOD, BOB or I.I with or without the baptism of water.
Physically it is not possible.
Similarly in 1808 Baltimore, USA no one knew of a physical case of BOD or BOB.
So when the Baltimore Catechism was issued it should not have been implied that BOD and BOB were exceptions to EENS.They would not know of any such case past or present.
Similarly LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc , with or without the baptism of water,cannot be an exception to EENS in 1965 or now,2015 since there are no known cases.Similarly they did not know of any one who was saved or going to be saved in 1949, without 'faith and baptism'.Physically there cannot be an exception to EENS for us human beings.
So I keep saying that there are no known exceptions to EENS in the present times, and I mean it in the physical sense. They too say there are no exceptions to EENS and they emphasize it theologically.-Lionel Andrades



Franciscans of the Immaculate Superiors Meeting this month : unity in ecclesiology needed

Immagine correlata
The Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate priests, who say they want to offer only the Traditional Lartin Mass, are really saying whether they know it or not, that they want to offer Holy Mass with only the old ecclesiology.This is the ecclesiology in which the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) was still accepted.
These Friars don't know that they have choice.They can affirm the old ecclesiology along with Vatican Council II. Lumen Gentium 16(LG 16) being implicit for us does not contradict EENS.LG 16 explicit for us would be an exception to EENS.
So if they discard the LG 16 is explicit for us ecclesiology and choose the LG 16 is implicit for us ecclesiology they can still accept Vatican Council II.
It's Vatican Council II with the old ecclesiology.
Immagine correlata
Then they can ask Fr.Sabino Ardito SDB , the new Commissar, to also affirm that LG 16 is implicit for us and explicit only for God.This is rational. It is traditional.It is Catholic. It is dogmatic and post  Vatican Council II.
When Pope Francis closed the Franciscans Friars of the Immaculate seminary in Boccea, Rome , the Rector, Fr.Settimo Manelli F.I,like Pope Francis and Pope Benedict, was using the LG 16 is explicit for us ecclesiology.
Immagine correlata
So the traditional teachings of the Church were affirmed but there was a big question mark on some parts of Vatican Council II e.g LG 16.
Fr.Stefano Manelli F.I, the founder of the community,affirmed the old ecclesiology but interpreted Vatican Council II with the LG 16 is explicit for us ecclesiology.

Vatican Council II was criticized by Fr.Manelli, when the fault was there with the community's interpretation, which was magisterial.The magisterium interpreted Vatican Council II with the LG 16 is explicit for us ecclesiology.

This is the ecclesiology today of the Salesians, including the Commissar Fr. Sabino Ardito SDB. It is a break with the ecclesiology of Don Bosco.
Immagine correlata
So the meeting of the Superiors of the Franciscans of the Immaculate this month,  should not talk in terms of Traditional Latin Mass and Novus Ordo Mass  but  is  LG 16  explicit or implicit in ecclesiology.
Discuss if being saved in 'imperfect communion with the Church'(UR 3), seeds of the Word(AG 11) and 'elements of sanctification and truth'(LG 8) are invisible or visible for them.If they are invisible then they cannnot  be exceptions to Don Bosco and St.Francis of Assisi's interpretation of EENS.Can the Franciscans of the Immaculate interpret being saved in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire as being implicit for us and not objectively seen in 2015 ?
In this way they can have unity in ecclesiology and affirm Vatican Council II and the dogma EENS.
Presently with their LG 16 is explicit for us reasoning, Vatican Council II is a break with the dogma EENS, the Nicene Creed and the Syllabus of Errors.The baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance being explicit for us, creates a break with the old ecclesiology.
Pope Francis would want Fr.Stefano Manelli to accept the LG 16 is explicit for us reasoning and so interpret Vatican Council II as a break with the old ecclesiology.
He would consider it crypto Lefebvre when Vatican Council II,with the explicit for us reasoning is not used.This is the only reasoning and ecclesiology he accepts.
So Fr.Stefano Manelli could go ahead and affirm Vatican Council II, but with the LG 16 is implicit or us reasoning.This would mean Vatican Council II is not a break with the dogma EENS and the Syllabus of Errors.He could then announce that he affirms the rigorist interpretation of EENS along with Vatican Council II.With salvation in Heaven always being implicit for us, we can have it both ways here. He would of course,reject the pope's interpretation of Vatican Council II since it is irrational to assume that LG is explicit for us in the present times.
The advantage lies with those who are rational.Since then ecclesiology remains traditional before and after Vatican Council II.
-Lionel Andrades

Louie Verrecchio is living in adultery according to the old ecclesiology of the Traditional Latin Mass

A speaker on the SSPX circuit is living in adultery but  for the Novus Ordo Mass, the new ecclesiology and the accompanying liberal dispensations, which he has received.
According to the traditional ecclesiology of the Latin Mass, Louie Verrecchio would be in mortal sin for living with a Jew, since outside the Church there is no salvation.For the old Mass with the old ecclesiology there are no explicit exceptions to all having to formally enter the Church and avoid Hell.
In the old ecclesiology there is no baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOD), baptism of invincible ignorance(I.I) or other baptisms,without the baptism of water.
The Americans at Baltimore(1808), Boston(1949) and Vatican Council II ( 1965) made it easy for Louie Verrecchio to marry someone outside the Church and to go for Mass, as if it is not a mortal sin.
Verrecchio, like Bishop Bernard Fellay, uses a term(!°!!")  to describe the Novus Ordo Mass yet- but for the new ecclesiology, that term could be applied to his children according to the Catholic Church.This was the ecclesiology of the Old Mass, which he advocates today, without the old ecclesiology; without extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).
Louie got a dispensation to marry a non Catholic, at a Novus Ordo church, where they reject the dogma EENS.For them BOD, BOB, I.I etc refer to salvation outside the Church, without the baptism of water.So his wife could be saved, it was probably assumed, without her having to be a formal member of the Church.
This is the new and irrational ecclesiology. It is a new way of thinking.It is a (!++/") innovation. ? I could use the word Louie used for the Mass to describe this innovation but I will not. The origina of the new ecclesiology was an innocent mistake. Something overlooked.It contradicted the magisterium of the past.Yet this is the irrational reasoning, with which, he and many others link to the Novus Ordo Mass. It is with this doctrinal innovation in the Catholic Church, Louie can live with his wife, go to Church and attend Mass as a Catholic.
The Baltimore Catechism cleared the way for him when it said being saved with implicit desire and martyrdom were baptisms. It was implying that BOD and BOB were baptisms like the baptism of water.This was a false inference. Since implicit desire for the baptism of water and martyrdom are known only to God.They are not seen or known to us.These cases are not visible and repeatable like the baptism of water.This innovation would years later help change the ecclesiology of the Mass and Louie would not be considered living in adultery.

In 1949, Pope Pius XII and the Archdiocese of Boston did not defend Fr.Leonard Feeney.So it was confirmed magisterially that there was known salvation outside the church.The error was official. The exclusivist ecclesiology, associated with worship and salvation, had been discarded.A dogma is thrown out.Louie would no more be in mortal sin and he could receive the Eucharist at Mass.
So today Louie will write often on non Catholics needing to convert for salvation, and he will say it in charity and meaningfully, but he will not affirm the rigorist interpretation of the dogma EENS.If he did, he would be saying that his wife is outside the Church.
He now has even announced that his wife is a Jew implying she is going to Heaven and he is living with her.
All this was possible not because of any fault in the Novus Ordo Mass, but because of the Baltimore-Boston-Vatican Council II ecclesiology, attached to the Novus Ordo Mass. FSSP priests in Rome use this new ecclesiology also when they offer the Traditional Latin Mass.
When Louie and Bishop Fellay refer to innovation they are really referring to the LG 16-is-explicit-for-us ecclesiology, which they accept unknowingly.This is the innovation.The liturgy of the Novus Ordo Mass is not at fault.Since this Mass can be offered without this innovation.
When the Greek Mass was replaced with Latin, the Traditional Latin Mass was the new Mass but the ecclesiology was still traditional.When the Novus Ordo Mass replaced the Latin Mass, the ecclesiology was new and not traditional.
When will Louie discuss this point in relation to the Mass?
-Lionel Andrades