Fr.Alessandro M.Minutella has been teaching false doctrine on the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and also Vatican Council II. He interprets both the dogma EENS and Vatican Council II by assuming hypothetical cases are not hypothetical but objectively visible.This creates a rupture with Tradition.
The error was expressed on a video shown on Gloria TV 1.
For me he is interpreting the dogma EENS and also Vatican Council II with innovative Cushingism instead of traditional Feeneyism.
He has rejected the dogma EENS by assuming being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire refer to 1) to known people in the present times who are 2) saved without the baptism of water.With this irrational premise he then concludes that there are known exceptions to the centuries old interpretation of the dogma EENS.
Since there is known salvation outside the Church he assumes that not every one in the present times needs to enter the Church. So he rejects an ecumenism of return based on the traditional strict interpretation of the dogma EENS.
Similarly in inter-religious dialogue not every Hindu, Buddhist or Jew would need to enter the Church in the present times but only those who know about the Church, those who are not in invincible ignorance. This is a new doctrine.It assumes there are known exceptions to the dogma EENS, like being saved in invincible ignorance.
These doctrines are not being affirmed by Fr. Alessandro intentionally but he is repeating what he has been taught in theology at the Pontifical Gregorian University, Rome.
Those Catholics who do not interpret Vatican Council II and the dogma EENS with the irrational premise and so affirm the traditional teachings, he would call fundamentalists( integralists) or Lefbvrists.
I affirm the dogma EENS and Vatican Council II. For me they are both in harmony.Since for me the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance refer to invisible cases and so they are not exceptions to the dogma EENS according to the 16th century missionaries.
The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 was a break with Tradition. It assumed that the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance referred to objectively and personally known cases. So it concluded that there were exceptions to the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma EENS.This was an objective mistake. Since people in Heaven saved with the baptism of desire etc cannot be known on earth. It is a fact of life that we cannot see the dead.Neither can we know who is living on earth and will not need the baptism of water for salvation.-Lionel Andrades
Amen. Da Radio Domina nostra