Thursday, March 5, 2015

March for Life 2015 : double standards


The March for Life will be held in Rome on May 10, 2015. Cardinal Raymond Burke is expected to be present.
Cardinal Raymond Burke approved an article by Fr.John Hardon, which rejects the traditional strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.If the dogma on salvation, approved by three Church Councils can be changed why would His Eminence expect Church teachings on pro-life and family issues to not also change?
There will be other particpants at the March for Life who also reject the traditional interpretation of the dogma on salvation.Among them could be the Catholics,John Henry Weston and Hilary White of Lifesites news.
 
I have mentioned in a previous blogpost that Fr.John Hardon's error was that he made an irrational inference. He assumed that being saved in invincible ignorance or with implicit desire referred to personally known, nameable cases in the present times.This was a false inference.This then became a false premise for him. Since he concluded that these cases of persons saved, this category of people, now in Heaven, were explicit exceptions to all needing the baptism of water, in the present times.They were exceptions to all needing to enter the Catholic Church for salvation. So based on the wrong premise, he wrongly concluded that every one did not defacto, in the present times, need to enter the Church for salvation. He used an irrational premise ( the dead-saved are visible on earth) which resulted in an irrational conclusion ( everyone does not have to defacto enter the Church).
Since he assumed that salvation in Heaven is explicit for us, those saved with the baptism of desire and in invincible ignorance, became exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So for him every one did not have to become a formal member of the Church, but only they had to, who were not in invincible ignorance.While those who knew about Jesus and the Church and yet did not enter were on the way to Hell.So he changed the original teaching which said all with Original Sin need the baptism of water.
This was the original mistake made by the Holy Office and the Archdiocese of Boston in 1949 when they assumed that a category of people now in Heaven were objective exceptions on earth to the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
 
Fr.Hardon wrote an article on outside the Church there is no salvation in which he repeated this mistake.Also as a consultant to the Holy See on the Catechism of the Catholic Church he let this error pass conspicuously in CCC 1257 (The Necessity of Baptism) and with confusion in CCC 846 (Outside the Church No Salvation).
 
Cardinal Raymond Burke approved this article by Fr.Hardon. Cardinal Burke  also recommends the Catechism of the Catholic Church which incorporates this confusion while he has never affirmed the traditional strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
This is also observed in Cardinal Raymond Burke's criticism of Vatican Council II. Salvation in Heaven is an explicit exception to the traditional interpretation of the dogma. So LG 16,LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc refer to visible in the flesh cases in 2015. Vatican Council II contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors for Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke. It is a break with the traditional teaching on other religions and Christian communities.This was also Fr.John Hardon's mistake.
 
If salvation in Heaven was not explicit, seen in the flesh for them, then there would be nothing in Vatican Council II to contradict the 'rigorist interpretation' of the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.Vatican Council II would be Feeneyite.It would not contradict the traditional teaching on non Catholics needing to convert into the Church to avoid Hell. Since the ecclesiology would still be traditional.
 
The 2015 March for Life seems like another case of Mark Shea being all for pro life issues and other Catholic teachings but changing the Nicene Creed, rejecting the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and interpreting Vatican Council II with an irrationality.
John Henry Weston and Hilary White of LifeSites.com use the same irrationality, approved by Cardinal Francesco Marchetti Selvaggiani and Cardinal Richard Cushing in 1949 - and Cardinal Raymond Burke.
Weston will not say that all need to enter the Church for salvation in 2015 ,with no exceptions.Life sites' cofounder is Protestant Steve Jalsevac.

According to the teachings of the Catholic Church, Jalsevec like the founder of Lifenews Steve Ertelt are on the way to Hell unless they convert into the Church formally.This is also the doctrine of the Church (without the irrational premise and conclusion).They  ignore this when they cover Catholic issues.
Like Cardinal Raymond Burke, John Henry Weston and Hilary White interpret Vatican Council II with an irrationality.Lumen Gentium 16 etc would refer to known exceptions to the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Church. They would have to be known to be exceptions.This shows up on Lifesites reports on Vatican Council II, Franciscans of the Immaculate etc.
For these pro life Catholics participating in the March for Life annually in Rome, abortion would be a mortal sin.To change the Church teachings on salvation would not be a mortal sin (or possibly they are not aware of the irrationality). How can those who 'develop' a dogma defined by three Church Councils not expect teachings on the family and divorced and remarried receiving the Eucharist, not also develop.Cardinal Kaspar has  said that he rejects the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Just as pro-life Catholics expect  Catholics to live the teachings of the Church on abortion, contraceptives etc they also must affirm the Church's teaching on exclusive salvation in the Church. Abortion is a mortal sin. So also is denying the Nicene Creed and the defined dogma with an irrational premise and conclusion.

-Lionel Andrades

For me too Fr.John Hardon was a holy priest and I admire Cardinal Raymond Burke

 
Lionel:
Cardinal Raymond Burke approved Fr. John Hardon's error
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/03/cardinal-raymond-burke-approved-fr-john.html

BloggerVox Cantoris said...

I am publishing your comment however, Father John Hardon was a holy priest and devoted his life as a true servant of Our Lord Jesus Christ and His people. Raymond Cardinal Burke is a profoundly holy, strong and courageous man; a Canonist of high reputation and integrity another true servant of Our Blessed Lord and a consolation to us.
I only briefly glanced at your link and I do not have time for a deep analysis or rebuttal suffice to say I disagree with you.
Others may choose to challenge your hypothesis and are welcome to do here.
Vox
____________________________ 
 
BloggerLionel:
For me too Fr.John Hardon was a holy priest and I admire Cardinal Raymond Burke. I have not been able to meet him in Rome.

My report refers to a general oversight in the Catholic Church, an error which is innocent.
I too once upon a time made this same error.

I think the Church needs to identify it, correct it and then move on.
_____________________________

BloggerVox Cantoris said...
Thank you; truly there seem to have been many errors that even pre-dated the Council that some day need to be clarified but what a debate that would open.

Liturgically, I would even go back to 1951 and start over!

-Lionel Andrades


https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=20981956&postID=9146538378469423885&isPopup=true

What was Fr. Hardons error that Cardinal Burke approved?

What was Fr. Hardons error that Cd. Burke approved? Just trying to keep up.
Lionel:
Fr.John Hardon's error was that he made an irrational inference. He assumed that being saved in invincible ignorance or with implicit desire referred to personally known, nameable cases in the present times.This was a false inference.This then became a false premise for him. Since he concluded that these cases of persons saved, this category of people, now in Heaven, were explicit exceptions to all needing the baptism of water, in the present times.They were exceptions to all needing to enter the Catholic Church for salvation. So based on the wrong premise, he wrongly concluded that every one did not defacto, in the present times, need to enter the Church for salvation. He used an irrational premise ( the dead-saved are visible on earth) which resulted in an irrational conclusion ( everyone does not have to defacto enter the Church).
 
Since he assumed that  salvation in Heaven is explicit for us, those saved with the baptism of desire and in invincible ignorance, became exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So for him every one did not have to become a formal member of the Church, but only they had to,  who were not in invincible ignorance.While  those who knew about Jesus and the Church and yet did not enter were on the way to Hell.So he changed the original teaching which said all with Original Sin need the baptism of water.
This was the original mistake made by the Holy Office and the Archdiocese of Boston in 1949 when they assumed that a category of people now in Heaven were objective exceptions on earth to the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
Fr.Hardon wrote an article on outside the Church there is no salvation in which he repeated this mistake.Also as a consultant to the Holy See on the Catechism of the Catholic Church he let this error pass conspicuously in CCC 1257 (The Necessity of Baptism) and with confusion in CCC 846 (Outside the Church No Salvation).
Cardinal Raymond Burke approved this article by Fr.Hardon. Cardinal Burke  also recommends the Catechism of the Catholic Church which incorporates this confusion while he has never affirmed the traditional strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
This is also observed in Cardinal Raymond Burke's criticism of Vatican Council II. Salvation in Heaven is an explicit exception to the traditional interpretation of the dogma. So LG 16,LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc refer to visible in the flesh cases in 2015. Vatican Council II contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors for Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke. It is a break with the traditional teaching on other religions and Christian communities.This was also Fr.John Hardon's mistake.
If salvation in Heaven was not explicit, seen in the flesh for them, then there would be nothing in Vatican Council II to contradict the 'rigorist interpretation' of the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.Vatican Council II would be Feeneyite.It would not contradict the traditional teaching on non Catholics needing to convert into the Church to avoid Hell. Since the ecclesiology would still be traditional.
-Lionel Andrades
 
 
March 4, 2015

 

Wednesday, March 4, 2015

The Rosary

The Greatest Marian Prayer

“The Rosary is my favorite prayer, a marvelous prayer. Marvelous in its simplicity and depth. It can be said that the Rosary is, in a certain way, a prayer-commentary on the last chapter of the constitution, Lumen Gentium, of Vatican II, a chapter which deals with the wonderful presence of the Mother of God in the mystery of Christ and the Church. Against the background of the words, Ave Maria (Hail Mary), there passes before the eyes of the soul the main episodes of the life of Jesus Christ, and they put us in living communication with Jesus through, we could say, His mother’s heart. At the same time, our heart can enclose in these decades of the Rosary all the facets that make up the life of the individual, the family, the nation, the Church and all mankind, particularly of those who are dear to us. Thus the…

Read more

The Fifteen Promises of Our Lady to Those Who Pray the Rosary Faithfully

The Blessed Virgin Mary promised to Saint Dominic and to all who follow her urgings that “Whatever you ask in the Rosary will be granted.” These are the fifteen promises she imparted to Saint Dominic and Blessed Alan de la Roche, granted to all Christians who faithfully recite the Rosary. All that remains for us is to pray and to respond to the great graces she gives to us. –Assistant Ed.

1. Whoever shall faithfully serve me by the recitation of the Rosary, shall receive signal graces.
2. I promise my special protection and the greatest graces to all those who shall recite the Rosary.
3. The Rosary shall be a powerful armor against hell, it will destroy vice, decrease sin, and defeat heresies.
4. The Rosary will cause virtue and good works to flourish; it will obtain for souls the abundant mercy of God;…

Read more

Rosarium Virginis Mariae, Part I

1. The Rosary of the Virgin Mary, which gradually took form in the second millennium under the guidance of the Spirit of God, is a prayer loved by countless Saints and encouraged by the Magisterium. Simple yet profound, it still remains, at the dawn of this third millennium, a prayer of great significance, destined to bring forth a harvest of holiness. It blends easily into the spiritual journey of the Christian life, which, after two thousand years, has lost none of the freshness of its beginnings and feels drawn by the Spirit of God to "set out into the deep" (duc in altum!) in order once more to proclaim, and even cry out, before the world that Jesus Christ is Lord and Savior, "the way, and the truth and the life" (Jn 14:6), "the goal of human history and the point on which the…

Read more

Rosarium Virginis Mariae, Part II

CHAPTER II – MYSTERIES OF CHRIST—MYSTERIES OF HIS MOTHER
The Rosary, "a compendium of the Gospel"
18. The only way to approach the contemplation of Christ’s face is by listening in the Spirit to the Father’s voice, since "no one knows the Son except the Father" (Mt 11:27). In the region of Caesarea Philippi, Jesus responded to Peter’s confession of faith by indicating the source of that clear intuition of his identity: "Flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven" (Mt 16:17). What is needed, then, is a revelation from above. In order to receive that revelation, attentive listening is…

Read more


The Rosary, October, and World Peace

We are already on the threshold of the month of October, which, with the liturgical memorial of Our Lady of the Rosary, inspires us to rediscover this traditional prayer, so simple yet so profound.

The Rosary is a way of contemplating the face of Christ, seeing him—we may say—with the eyes of Mary. For this reason, it is a prayer that drawing upon the core of the Gospel is in full accord with the inspiration of the Second Vatican Council and very much in keeping with the direction I gave in the Apostolic Letter Novo Millennio Ineunte: the Church has to launch out “into the deep” in the new millennium beginning with the contemplation of the face of Christ.
Therefore, I wish to suggest the recitation…

Read more


The Inestimable Fruits of the Rosary

Never will anyone really be able to understand the marvelous riches of sanctification which are contained in the prayers and mysteries of the Holy Rosary. This meditation on the mysteries of the life and death of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is the source of the most wonderful fruits for those who use it.

Today people want things that strike and move and that leave deep impressions on the soul. Nor has there ever been anything in the whole history of the world more moving than the wonderful story of the life, death and glory of Our Savior which is contained in the Holy Rosary. In the fifteen tableaux the chief scenes or mysteries of His life unfold before our eyes. How could there ever be any prayers more wonderful and sublime than the Lord’s…

Read more


Blessed Bartolo Longo – Apostle of the Rosary

Sinner. Satanist. Social worker. Saint. A strange progression taken by Blessed Bartolo Longo. On February 11, 1841, a sweet tempered physician’s wife of Latiano, Italy, gave birth to a son whom she named Bartolo. Devoted to Our Lord and His Mother, she taught all her children to pray the Rosary daily and to visit and care for the poor while Dr. Longo instilled in them a love of music and beauty. Bartolo would later describe himself as “a lively and impertinent imp, sometimes rather a rascal.” The priests who educated him found Bartolo to be highly intelligent, cordial, and accommodating although prone to a fiery temper.

When Bartolo was ten, his mother died. Slowly Bartolo began to drift away from his faith. Eventually he studied law from a private tutor, then attended the University of…

Read more


Sister Lucia’s Rosary Meditations: The Joyful Mysteries

The visionary and seer, Sr. Lucia of Fatima, provided the world with profound and inspired Rosary meditations in her book, “Calls” from the Message of Fatima. We begin this week by presenting her meditations on the Joyful Mysteries. – Ed.

Having seen that the prayer of the Rosary is the one which God has recommended most for all of us in general, both by means of the Church’s Magisterium and through the Message which He sent to us by Our Lady, we will now look at the mysteries of our Redemption which this prayer leads us to recall and contemplate in each decade.

For the majority of Christians who live in the corrupt atmosphere of the world, it is almost pointless to talk about mental prayer. Hence, what is most suitable for them is vocal prayer, in common or in private: the liturgical prayer of the Holy Mass and the recitation…

Read more


The Rosary and the Family

“Dear Children! You have helped me along by your prayers to realize my plans. Keep on praying that my plan may be completely realized. I request the families of the parish to pray the Family Rosary. Thank you for having responded to my call” (Our Lady of Medjugorje, September 27, 1984).
The call to pray the Rosary is the principal form of prayer requested by the Blessed Mother, not only in the message of Medjugorje but in the overall Marian message to the modern world. I want to discuss this favored Marian prayer under three categories. First of all, I will discuss briefly the Rosary in this general Marian call to the modern world. Secondly, I will discuss a little bit of the origins, the history, and the nature of the Rosary. What is this prayer of the Rosary that Our Lady has called us to so regularly? Thirdly, and…

Read more


The Family Rosary: Practicality in Family Prayer

How can we practically involve our children in family prayer? What are ways that we can teach them the beauty of communing with Jesus in prayer, even though homework needs to be completed, dishes washed, pajamas put on little ones, and we may even want to reserve a few moments of peace and quiet for ourselves after a busy day? In my last article dealing with the Family Rosary (see article “The Family Rosary” in the Marian Devotion section) I identified the need for parents to make the call of the family Rosary heard, knowing the result will at times be met with resistance and indifference. For the encouragement of parents, I reminded the reader that the suffering encountered in family prayer is redemptive, and that its application in the home ensures that spiritual goods soak into the little hearts and minds of their children, even if parents feel…

Read more



The Importance of the Rosary for Priests

Dear ministers of the Most High, you my fellow priests who preach the truth of God and who teach the gospel to all nations… I beg of you to beware of thinking of the Rosary as something of little importance—as do ignorant people and even several great but proud scholars. Far from being insignificant, the Rosary is a priceless treasure which is inspired by God.

Almighty God has given it to you because He wants you to use it as a means to convert the most hardened sinners and the most obstinate heretics. He has attached to it grace in this life and glory in the next. The saints have said it faithfully and the Popes have indorsed it.
When the Holy Spirit has revealed this secret…

Read more



Rosary “Helps to Put Christ at the Center, as the Virgin Did”

Pope Benedict XVI gave the following catechesis on the Rosary at the Basilica of St. Mary Major in Rome on May 3, 2008.

Dear Brothers and Sisters,
At the conclusion of this moment of Marian prayer, I would like to address my cordial greeting to all of you and thank you for your participation. In particular I greet Cardinal Bernard Francis Law, Archpriest of this stupendous Basilica of St. Mary Major. In Rome this is the Marian temple par excellence, in which the people of the City venerate the icon of Mary Salus Populi Romani with great affection. I gladly welcomed the invitation addressed to me to lead the Holy Rosary on the First Saturday of the month of May, according to the beautiful tradition that I have had since my childhood. In fact, in my generation’s experience, the evenings of May evoke sweet memories linked to the vespertine gatherings to…

Read more


“The Keystone of Marian History” – Message of the Lady of All Nations, October 5, 1952

In this message Our Lady tells us that he proclamation of the Dogma of Mary Co-redemptrix, Mediatrix, and Advocate will become the “keystone of Marian History”. She then asks the theologians: “Why can you not come to an agreement about this?” Why not, indeed! – Ed.

Message of October 5, 1952

“Here I am again. I have come to bring a special message. Pass on everything well.
Never has Miriam, or Mary, officially been called Co-redemptrix in the community, in the Church. Never has she officially been called Mediatrix. Never has she officially been called Advocate. These three thoughts belong closely together. These three thoughts form one whole. That is why this will be the keystone of Marian history; it will become the dogma of the Co-redemptrix, Mediatrix and Advocate.

And I am not reproaching theologians now as I say: why can you not come to an agreement about this…

Read more
 

I knew Willy

Did They “Bury a Bum” at the Vatican?


Willy Herteleer
Willy Herteleer
My latest article for CRUX highlights the controversy that has arisen over PewSitter’s offensive headline about the burieal of homeless pilgrim Willy Herteleer
On Dec. 12, Willy died in a hospital near the Vatican and a few of his friends began to look for a burial place for him. German journalist Paul Badde, author of “The Face of God” — a book about the Holy Veil of Manopello — had just become a brother in the Confraternity of the Campo Santo of the Teutons. The Campo Santo Teutonico, or Teutonic Cemetery, is a small piece of land within the Vatican walls donated by Charlemagne as a burial plot for pilgrims of German or Flemish descent who died on pilgrimage to Rome.
Because Willy Herteleer was Flemish, Badde suggested that he be buried in the historic Vatican cemetery. Angela Ambrogetti, writing for the Catholic News Agency, recalled how “Willy’s friends organized everything, obtaining the necessary permission from the Vatican, Italy, and Belgium, where Willy began his life. They made contact with his family — his four children whom he had not seen for decades.”
This simple act of charity might have remained no more than a touching story of a few Catholics performing a corporal work of mercy by giving a dignified burial to a poor man. Instead, it has erupted into an online firefight illustrating the polarization within the American Catholic Church.
Go here to read the whole article
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/standingonmyhead/2015/03/did-they-bury-a-bum-at-the-vatican.html


 
For many years Willy would come for the Three O'clock Divine Mercy Prayers at the Church Santo Spirito in Rome. He would always wave out to me and greet me with a big smile.
The last I saw him, a few months back ( since I have not been going there for some time) he had a big white beard and had put on weight.The photo above is an old photograph of him.
A few years back he told me he slept under a bridge near the Vatican. He would cook his own meals there.He would not eat meat. He had to avoid it he said for health reasons.
Every morning he would go for Mass at a church near the Vatican.
He liked Rome he said . He liked the churches in Rome and did not want to go to his hometown.He lived an austere life in Rome.
I am glad that he was buried at the Vatican.-Lionel

Cardinal Raymond Burke approved Fr. John Hardon's error

The Real Presence Association has posted on its website an article by Fr.John Hardon s.j, Christ to Catholicism. Part two: Dogmatic Ecclesiology, No Salvation Outside of the Church'. Cardinal Raymond Leo  Burke has approved it.1
 
There are factual errors in the article. The same errors are there in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 issued by Cardinal Francesco Marchetti Selvaggiani.
Like Cardinal Francesco Marchetti Selvaggiani, Fr.John Hardon assumed that being saved with implicit desire ( and without the baptism of water) or in invincible ignorance, were exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, exceptions to the strict interpretation of the dogma.
We now know that those who are saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance, allegedly without the baptism of water, are in Heaven. So how can they be explicit exceptions on earth to the strict interpretation of the dogma, it is asked.
 
Fr.John Hardon also assumed that the Church Fathers and Church documents before 1949 tell us that the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance are exceptions to the dogma. There is no such magisterial document before 1949. They only refer to persons being saved with implicit desire or in inculpable ignorance. They do not tell us that these cases are known to us.Nor is it said that they are explicit exceptions to the dogma. This has to be inferred- wrongly. Fr.Hardon like Cardinal Marchetti makes this wrong inference in the article.
 
In the recent interview given to Rorate Caeili Cardinal Raymond Burke recommended the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
The Catechism in 1257 says the Church knows of no means to eternal beatitude other than the baptism of water. CCC 1257 also says God is not limited to the Sacraments,.This is contrary to the Principle of Non Contradiction. It cannot be said all in 2015 need the baptism of water for salvation but some do not.
 
This confusion comes from the Letter of the Holy Office. The first part of the Letter affirms the traditional interpretation of the dogma which does not mention any exceptions. The second part of the Letter infers that the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance are exceptions to the dogma. So the second half of the Letter contradicts the first half.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church, like the International Theological Commission, assumes that those saved with the baptism of desire and in invincible ignorance, refer to objective cases. This is a false premise. Then it is assumed that these persons  now in Heaven, are explicit exceptions to the strict interpretatiion of the dogma. This is a false conclusion.An irrational premise will produce an irrational conclusion.
Fr.John Hardon also used an irrational premise to create an irrational, non traditional conclusion.
This was approved by Cardinal Raymond Burke who probably also uses the false premise, the Marchetti Inference, to reject the traditional interpretation, the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.For him too the dogma 'developed' in 1949.
-Lionel Andrades
Rome made a mistake in 1949 and Fr.John Hardon did not notice it
 
 
The Catechumen you refer to is a hypothetical case for you and me. So it is not an explicit exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus : Fr.John Hardon too did not notice this
 
 
The Council of Trent, Mystici Corporis no where says that these cases are exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus : Rome made a mistake in 1949

The Catechumen you refer to is a hypothetical case for you and me. So it is not an explicit exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus : Fr.John Hardon too did not notice this.

MRyan:

Lionel Andrades wrote:March 3, 2015
Rome made a mistake in 1949 and Fr.John Hardon did not notice it
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/03/rome-made-mistake-in-1949-and-frjohn_3.html
Really, I’ve read both, and can’t see where Fr. Hardon did not notice the alleged "mistake" in the 1949 Holy Office Letter, probably because I could not find the “mistake”.

Let’s see if you can find it for me. One response at a time.

Lionel Andrades wrote:
Letter of the Holy Office 1949: 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.
Mystici Corporis does not state that those who are united only by desire are personally known to us and so are explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. It only mentions these cases are possibilities. It does not state also that these possibilities could not also receive the baptism of water. This sadly has all been inferred by Cardinal Francesco Marchetti Selvaggiani.
 MRyan:
Category error. The question before us pertains to the dogma of Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus - meaning, a question of SALVATION, and the conditions necessary to attain this end.

So where does the dogma of Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus state that those [adults] SAVED by the laver of regeneration are or must be “personally known to us”, when we do not know the interior sanctity of any man, baptized or not? We only know that their salvation is certain IF they persevere in grace. But, seeing that we cannot "see" their souls, we can only say that their salvation is "possible" and conditional, the same with the faith-filled Catechumen the Church considers as one of her own, but not formally so.
Lionel:
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
 United to the Church only by desire? He infers  that those saved with implicit desire or the baptism of desire are exceptions to the dogma. Otherwise why mention them?  In other words they are known to us, we can name them. So since they are known to us they become exceptions to the traditional interpretation of the dogma. But how can they be known to us? They are in Heaven. Also how can we say that someone will be saved without the baptism of water and with the baptism of desire? This would be known only to God if it was possible.
It is only because the Letter of the Holy Office 1949  assumes that these cases are visible, known,objectively seen, nameable that it refers to them. The baptism of desire is irrelevant to the dogma.
_____________________________________
So where does the dogma of Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus state that those [adults] SAVED by the laver of regeneration are or must be “personally known to us”, when we do not know the interior sanctity of any man, baptized or not?
Lionel:
1.The dogma does not mention that those saved with the baptism of desire are known to us or are an exception to the traditional interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
2. Experience in daily life tells us it is not possible.
3.Neither does Vatican Council II make this irrational claim.
Yet for you and numerous good Catholics the baptism of desire is an exception to the dogma.
The dogma tells us that all need the baptism of water ( saved by the laver of regeneration) for salvation and there is no mention of the baptism of desire.The irrationality came into the Church in 1949.
__________________________________________
We only know that their salvation is certain IF they persevere in grace. But, seeing that we cannot "see" their souls, we can only say that their salvation is "possible" and conditional, the same with the faith-filled Catechumen the Church considers as one of her own, but not formally so.
I've asked you this question before, and all you do is repeat the same fallacy. Now please answer the actual question, or tell me which premise behind it is wrong - and prove it.
Lionel:
The Catechumen you refer to is a hypothetical case for you and me. So it is not an explicit exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Since a theoretical case, a speculative case, cannot be a defacto, objective exception to all needing Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation in 2015. That you still mention this case would suggest that you know who this Catechumen is, personally.
To presume that we personally know this Catechumen is a false premise. Then to conclude that this hypothetical person is an exception to the dogma is a false conclusion. A hypothetical person cannot  be an explicit exception.
Fr.John Hardon too did not notice this.
-Lionel Andrades