SIMON RAFE NON CONOSCE CASO DELL'IGNORANZA INVINCIBILE

L'apologista Simon Rafe ha scritto  un e-mail a me:

L'insegnamento della chiesa è che una persona PUÒ essere salvare se non sono un membro visibile della chiesa. Per negare questo è di cessare di dare l'accettazione completa alla chiesa. Non desideriamo essere partito a tali cose.

Apologista Simon Rafe delle Real Catholic TV.com bisogno leggere Lumen Gentium 16, Concilio Vaticano II secondo analisi in seguente cinque punti.

Sì.L'insegnamento della Chiesa nel Concilio Vaticano II, Lumen Gentium 16 è che una persona può essere salvare nell'ignoranza invincibile ecc e così un membro non convenzionale e visibile della chiesa.

1. Non c’è l'ignoranza invincibile genuina di cui possiamo sapere umanamente. Non sappiamo chi Gesù Cristo giudicherà il Giorno di Giudizio come avendo ignoranza invincibile.

2. Non c’è l'ignoranza invincibile esplicita (esterno, visibile, ripetuto) conosciuta a noi.

3. Non c’è l'ignoranza invincibile implicita (in principio non conosciamo alcun caso). 4. Non conosciamo un singolo caso dell'ignoranza invincibile durante gli ultimi 100 anni.

5. Possiamo accettare soltanto l'esistenza dell'ignoranza invincibile come concetto. È ipotetico, una probabilità, una possibilità conosciuta soltanto al Dio. Così quando il LG 16 dice che i non cattolici nell'ignoranza invincibile possono essere salvare è ipotetico, qualcosa accettiamo in principio. Nessuno di noi conosce chiunque nell'Islam o nelle altre religioni che è nella genuina ignoranza invincibile. Non possiamo giudicare.

Ad Gentes 7, Concilio Vaticano II dice che la Fede Cattolica e di battesimo di acqua e bisogno per tutti per evitare inferno ed andare a cielo. AG 7 sta dicendo che ` assolutamente non c’e salvezza fuori della Chiesa Cattolica ‘. Così la Chiesa Cattolica sta affermando nel Concilio Vaticano II.

L’interpretazione rigorista dell’ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus `del salus e un insegnamento infallibile che può soltanto avere un'interpretazione; solo uno.

Similmente nessuna parte nel Catechismo della Chiesa Cattolica ce un riferimento o una citazione che contraddicono l'interpretazione rigorista di ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Senza prova contraria Rafe dovrebbe essere d'accordo con un'interpretazione del Concilio Vaticano II secondo Sacra Tradizione della Chiesa Cattolica.

Il Padre Santo Il Papa Benedetto XVI ha detto che il Concilio Vaticano II non è una rottura da tradizione.

Il battesimo dell'acqua è sia un concetto anche una realtà conosciuta (vedi esterna, ripetibile ed esplicito).

L'ignoranza invincibile e soltanto un concetto per noi poiché è conosciuto soltanto al Dio.

Potrei dire che tutto senza eccezione deve entrare formalmente nella Chiesa Cattolica (con Fede Cattolica ed il battesimo di acqua), mentre una persona nell’Induismo,’ in certo circostanze’ (Lettera dell'Ufficio Santo 1949) potrebbe essere salvare nell’Induismo e questo sarebbe conosciuto soltanto al Dio.

Michael Vorris di Real Catholic TV non ha problema con questo. Sul programmo The Vortex ha detto che ci sono soltanto Cattolici nel Paradiso.

Tutto nell'ignoranza invincibile salvare da Dio è solo cattolico.

_____________________________________________

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 2010

SIMON RAFE KNOWS NO CASE OF INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE

Apologist Simon Rafe wrote in an e-mail to me:

The teaching of the Church is that a person CAN be saved if they are not a visible member of the Church.

To deny this is to cease to give full acceptance to the Church. We do not wish to be party to such things.

Yes the teaching of the Church in Lumen Gentium 16 Vatican Council II is that a person can be saved in invincible ignorance etc and so not a formal,visible member of the Church.

Apologist Simon Rafe of Real Catholic TV.com needs to read Lumen Gentium 16, Vatican Council II according to the following step by step analysis in five points.

1. There is no genuine invincible ignorance which we humanly can know of. We do not know whom Jesus Christ will judge on the Day of Judgement as having invincible ignorance.

2. There is no explicit invincible ignorance (external, seeable, repeatable) known to us.

3. There is no implicit invincible ignorance (In principle we do not know any case).

4. We do not know a single case of invincible ignorance over the last 100 years.

5. We can only accept the existence of invincible ignorance as a concept. It is something hypothetical, a probability, a possibility known only to God.

So when LG 16 says non Catholics in invincible ignorance can be saved it is hypothetical, something we accept in principle. None of us knows any person in Islam or the other religions who is in genuine invincible ignorance. We cannot judge.

Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II states ‘all people’ need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water to avoid Hell and go to Heaven. AG 7 is saying ‘there is absolutely no salvation outside the Catholic Church’

So the Catholic Church is affirming in Vatican Council II. the ‘rigorist interpretation’ of the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, an infallible teaching which can only have one interpretation.

Similarly no where in the Catechism of the Catholic Church is there a quotation or citation which contradicts the rigorist interpretation of the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Without proof of anything contrary Rafe would have to agree with a Vatican Council II interpretation according to Sacred Tradition of the Catholic Church.

The Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI has said that Vatican Council II is not a break from Tradition.

The baptism of water is both a concept and a known reality (see able, repeatable and explicit).

Invincible ignorance can only be a concept for us since it is known only to God.

I could say that everyone with no exception needs to enter the Catholic Church formally (with Catholic Faith and the baptism of water), while a person in Hinduism, ‘ in certain circumstances ‘(Letter of the Holy Office 1949) could be saved in Hinduism and this would be known to God only.

Real Catholic TV's Michael Vorris has no problem with this. On The Vortex he said there are only Catholics in Heaven.

Everyone in invincible ignorance saved by God is a Catholic.

_____________________________________________

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2010/09/simon-rafe-non-conosce-caso.html#links

SIMON RAFE KNOWS NO CASE OF INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE

Apologist Simon Rafe wrote in an e-mail to me:

The teaching of the Church is that a person CAN be saved if they are not a visible member of the Church.

To deny this is to cease to give full acceptance to the Church. We do not wish to be party to such things.

Yes the teaching of the Church in Lumen Gentium 16 Vatican Council II is that a person can be saved in invincible ignorance etc and so not a formal,visible member of the Church.

Apologist Simon Rafe of Real Catholic TV.com needs to read Lumen Gentium 16, Vatican Council II according to the following step by step analysis in five points.

1. There is no genuine invincible ignorance which we humanly can know of. We do not know whom Jesus Christ will judge on the Day of Judgement as having invincible ignorance.

2. There is no explicit invincible ignorance (external, seeable, repeatable) known to us.

3. There is no implicit invincible ignorance (In principle we do not know any case).

4. We do not know a single case of invincible ignorance over the last 100 years.

5. We can only accept the existence of invincible ignorance as a concept. It is something hypothetical, a probability, a possibility known only to God.

So when LG 16 says non Catholics in invincible ignorance can be saved it is hypothetical, something we accept in principle. None of us knows any person in Islam or the other religions who is in genuine invincible ignorance. We cannot judge.

Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II states ‘all people’ need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water to avoid Hell and go to Heaven. AG 7 is saying ‘there is absolutely no salvation outside the Catholic Church’

So the Catholic Church is affirming in Vatican Council II. the ‘rigorist interpretation’ of the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, an infallible teaching which can only have one interpretation.

Similarly no where in the Catechism of the Catholic Church is there a quotation or citation which contradicts the rigorist interpretation of the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Without proof of anything contrary Rafe would have to agree with a Vatican Council II interpretation according to Sacred Tradition of the Catholic Church.

The Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI has said that Vatican Council II is not a break from Tradition.

The baptism of water is both a concept and a known reality (see able, repeatable and explicit).

Invincible ignorance can only be a concept for us since it is known only to God.

I could say that everyone with no exception needs to enter the Catholic Church formally (with Catholic Faith and the baptism of water), while a person in Hinduism, ‘ in certain circumstances ‘(Letter of the Holy Office 1949) could be saved in Hinduism and this would be known to God only.
 Real Catholic TV's Michael Vorris has no problem with this. On The Vortex he said there are only Catholics in Heaven.

Everyone in invincible ignorance saved by God is a Catholic.




_____________________________________________

1. Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience.-Lumen Gentium 16, Vatican Council II.

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2010/09/simon-rafe-knows-no-case-of-invincible.html#links

BISHOP BERNARD FELLAY AFFIRMS RIGORIST INTERPRETATION OF EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS : CONFUSION ON SEDEVANTIST WEBSITE

 I could say that everyone with no exception needs to enter the Catholic Church formally (with Catholic Faith and the baptism of water), while a person in Hinduism, ‘ in certain circumstances ‘(Letter of the Holy Office 1949) could be saved in Hinduism and this would be known to God only.

This it seems is what Bishop Bernard Fellay the leader of the Society of St.Pius X could have meant in the quotations cited in an article on the website of the Most Holy Family Monastery where is he is quoted and criticized.

It’s simple: St.Thomas Aquinas taught that everyone with no exception needed to be a formal member of the Holy Roman Catholic Church to avoid Hell and go to Heaven yet as a concept Aquinas believed there could be a man in the forest in invincible ignorance to whom God would provide the helps necessary to become a Catholic.

There is no other way to salvation  says Bishop Fellay except for the Church which Jesus has founded. Extra ecclesiam nulla salus !

Bishop Bernard Fellay, Conference in Denver, Co., Feb. 18, 2006: “So Faith is necessary. The Church is necessary. If we want to be saved, there is no other way except for the Church which Jesus has founded. Between God and creation, there is an infinite gap. On the side of man, since Original Sin, there is no way to cross this infinite abyss except by the bridge imposed and created by God in His only-begotten Son made flesh, Our Lord Jesus Christ. There is no other way to go to heaven except Our Lord Jesus Christ and Our Lord Jesus Christ wanted to associate with this work of Redemption the souls who would be united with Him, in Him, through Baptism, and which constitute the Mystical Body of Christ, the Catholic Church. What a tremendous mystery. This is why the Church is as necessary as Jesus; because it is the same reality.” (The Angelus, “A Talk Heard Round the World,” April, 2006, p. 5.)

The Hindu in Tibet is a hypothetical case. The bishop is not referring to a particular Hindu in Tibet whom he knows. In principle he accepts that there could be a Hindu in Tibet known to God only with the baptism of desire or who is in genuine invincible and has not had the Gospel preached to him or her. Since he is not referring to an explicit case he does not contradict the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus which says everybody needs to explicitly enter the Catholic Church and there are no exceptions.

Bishop Bernard Fellay, Conference in Denver, Co., Feb. 18, 2006: “We know that there are two other baptisms, that of desire and that of blood. These produce an invisible but real link with Christ but do not produce all of the effects which are received in the baptism of water… And the Church has always taught that you have people who will be in heaven, who are in the state of grace, who have been saved without knowing the Catholic Church. We know this. And yet, how is it possible if you cannot be saved outside the Church? It is absolutely true that they will be saved through the Catholic Church because they will be united to Christ, to the Mystical Body of Christ, which is the Catholic Church. It will, however, remain invisible, because this visible link is impossible for them. Consider a Hindu in Tibet who has no knowledge of the Catholic Church. He lives according to his conscience and to the laws which God has put into his heart. He can be in the state of grace, and if he dies in this state of grace, he will go to heaven.” (The Angelus, “A Talk Heard Round the World,” April, 2006, p. 5.)

So the above quotation is not a contradiction of the rigorist interpretation of the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

_______________________________________________

Bishop Bernard Fellay of the SSPX blatantly denies Catholic dogma by teaching that Hindus can be saved

By Bro. Peter Dimond, O.S.B.

-5/05/06-

We’ve repeatedly documented that almost all traditionalist priests deny the dogma Outside the Church There is No Salvation. We’ve also documented that among those dogma deniers, the priests of the SSPX are prominent. We’ve also pointed out that almost all of these dogma deniers sometimes make statements which seem to indicate that they hold the dogma; when, in fact, they don’t. All of this was on display in Bishop Bernard Fellay’s recent Conference in Denver, Colorado. His speech was printed in the recent issue of The Angelus. Notice that near the beginning of his Conference, Fellay made statements which absolutely seemed to indicate that he holds strictly to the necessity of the Catholic Faith and Jesus Christ for salvation.

Bishop Bernard Fellay, Conference in Denver, Co., Feb. 18, 2006: “So Faith is necessary. The Church is necessary. If we want to be saved, there is no other way except for the Church which Jesus has founded. Between God and creation, there is an infinite gap. On the side of man, since Original Sin, there is no way to cross this infinite abyss except by the bridge imposed and created by God in His only-begotten Son made flesh, Our Lord Jesus Christ. There is no other way to go to heaven except Our Lord Jesus Christ and Our Lord Jesus Christ wanted to associate with this work of Redemption the souls who would be united with Him, in Him, through Baptism, and which constitute the Mystical Body of Christ, the Catholic Church. What a tremendous mystery. This is why the Church is as necessary as Jesus; because it is the same reality.” (The Angelus, “A Talk Heard Round the World,” April, 2006, p. 5.)

Very shortly after making these statements, however, Fellay proceeded to deny the dogma and reveal that he doesn’t believe anything he just said.

Bishop Bernard Fellay, Conference in Denver, Co., Feb. 18, 2006: “We know that there are two other baptisms, that of desire and that of blood. These produce an invisible but real link with Christ but do not produce all of the effects which are received in the baptism of water… And the Church has always taught that you have people who will be in heaven, who are in the state of grace, who have been saved without knowing the Catholic Church. We know this. And yet, how is it possible if you cannot be saved outside the Church? It is absolutely true that they will be saved through the Catholic Church because they will be united to Christ, to the Mystical Body of Christ, which is the Catholic Church. It will, however, remain invisible, because this visible link is impossible for them. Consider a Hindu in Tibet who has no knowledge of the Catholic Church. He lives according to his conscience and to the laws which God has put into his heart. He can be in the state of grace, and if he dies in this state of grace, he will go to heaven.” (The Angelus, “A Talk Heard Round the World,” April, 2006, p. 5.)

These words are found on the very same page of The Angelus as the words in the first quote above. This is disgusting and bold heresy, and proves that Fellay doesn’t believe anything he said above. First, notice that he says “We know that there are two other baptisms.” Excuse me, but we know that there is ONLY ONE BAPTISM OF WATER. Catholics confess one baptism. If you don’t confess only one baptism, you are not a Catholic.

Pope Clement V, Council of Vienne, 1311-1312, ex cathedra: “Besides, one baptism which regenerates all who are baptized in Christ must be faithfully confessed by all just as ‘one God and one faith’ [Eph. 4:5], which celebrated in water in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit we believe to be commonly the perfect remedy for salvation for adults as for children.” (Denz. 482)

Second, Fellay says a Hindu – that is, an idolater who worships many false gods and doesn’t believe in Jesus Christ – can be in the state of grace and be saved. This is a total rejection of infallible Catholic dogma. This proves again that Bishop Bernard Fellay is not a member of the Catholic Church. He rejects the solemn teaching that all who die in non-Catholic religions and without the essential mysteries of the Catholic Faith will be lost. He has changed the dogma that no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church or without the Catholic Faith (the truth that all individuals who die as non-Catholics will be lost, all the Hindus, Muslims, Jews, etc.) to the heretical idea that no one can be saved except through the Catholic Church (meaning that all individuals who are saved, even if they are not Catholic and part of a false religion or even worshipping false gods, are saved in their religions but through the Catholic Church). This is evil heresy which is contradicted by ex cathedra Papal teaching. The fact that he holds that Hindus, etc. can be saved in their false religions reveals that he has no Faith. (By the way, notice that he also teaches the condemned heresy of an invisible Church by teaching that non-Catholic Hindus are invisibly united to the Church.) The fact that he is guiding a large body of those who consider themselves traditional Catholics in our day is a frightening signal of exactly where we are in history and the Great Apostasy.

We hear all the time from people who deny that their “traditionalist” priest denies the salvation dogma. “No, my priest doesn’t believe that,” they say about SSPX priests, CMRI priests, SSPV priests, etc. We try to tell them “yes, your priest does believe that.” This Heresy of the Week shows us again how priests who deny the salvation dogma will make statements (often in the same speech) which make it seem as if they believe in it.

Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos (# 13), Aug. 15, 1832: “With the admonition of the apostle, that ‘there is one God, one faith, one baptism’ (Eph. 4:5), may those fear who contrive the notion that the safe harbor of salvation is open to persons of any religion whatever. They should consider the testimony of Christ Himself that ‘those who are not with Christ are against Him,’ (Lk. 11:23) and that they disperse unhappily who do not gather with Him. Therefore, ‘without a doubt, they will perish forever, unless they hold the Catholic faith whole and inviolate (Athanasian Creed).”

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, The Athanasian Creed, Sess. 8, Nov. 22, 1439, ex cathedra:

“Whoever wishes to be saved, needs above all to hold the Catholic faith; unless each one preserves this whole and inviolate, he will without a doubt perish in eternity.” (Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, Vol. 1, pp. 550-553; Denzinger 39-40.)

Pope Gregory XVI, Summo Iugiter Studio (# 2), May 27, 1832:

“Finally some of these misguided people attempt to persuade themselves and others that men are not saved only in the Catholic religion, but that even heretics may attain eternal life.”

Pope Pius IV, Council of Trent, Iniunctum nobis, Nov. 13, 1565, ex cathedra: “This true Catholic faith, outside of which no one can be saved… I now profess and truly hold…” (Denz. 1000)

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Cantate Domino,” 1441, ex cathedra:

“The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the Church before the end of their lives; that the unity of this ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do the Church’s sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia produce eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and even if he has shed blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”

Bishop Fellay is preaching a new gospel directly contrary to Sacred Scripture. He is preaching that idolaters (Hindus) can actually be saved.

1 Corinthians 6:9- “Know you not that the unjust shall not possess the kingdom of God? Do not err: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor the effeminate, nor liers with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor railers, nor extortioners, shall possess the kingdom of God.”

www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com

_____________________________________________________________

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2010/09/bishop-bernard-fellay-affirms-rigorist.html#links

MOST HOLY FAMILY MONASTERY VATICAN COUNCIL II INDICATES ‘THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO SALVATION OUTSIDE THE CHURCH’, EVERYONE NEEDS TO BE A FORMAL MEMBER OF THE CHURCH TO AVOID HELL

Sedevacantists interpret Vatican Council II according to Rabbis Rosen and Segno

The sedevantists, Most Holy Family Monastery, USA (MHFM) call the Catholic Church the Vatican Council II sect and they criticize the liberal Jewish Left lobby for putting pressure on the Church to compromise in many ways.

Yet they use the interpretation of Vatican Council II as is done by the liberal Rabbis who are constantly seeking doctrinal changes in the Church in exchange for peace and economic prosperity.

Vatican Council II actually indicates that there is ‘absolutely no salvation outside the Catholic Church’.

The MHFM needs to read Lumen Gentium 16, Vatican Council II (1) according to the following step by step analysis in five points.

1. There is no genuine invincible ignorance which we humanly can know of. We do not know whom Jesus Christ will judge on the Day of Judgement as having invincible ignorance.

2. There is no explicit invincible ignorance (external, seeable, repeatable) known to us.

3. There is no implicit invincible ignorance (in principle we do not know any case).

4. We do not know a single case of invincible ignorance over the last 100 years.

5. We can only accept the existence of invincible ignorance as a concept. It is something hypothetical, a probability, a possibility known only to God.

So when LG 16 says non Catholics in invincible ignorance can be saved it is hypothetical, something we accept in principle. None of us knows any person in Islam or the other religions who is in genuine invincible ignorance. We cannot judge.

Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II states ‘all people’ need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water to avoid Hell and go to Heaven. AG 7 is saying ‘there is absolutely no salvation outside the Catholic Church’.(2)

So the Catholic Church is affirming in Vatican Council II the ‘rigorist interpretation’ of the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, an infallible teaching which can only have one interpretation.

Similarly no where in the Catechism of the Catholic Church is there a quotation or citation which contradicts the rigorist interpretation of the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Without proof of anything contrary even the Rabbis Rosen and Segno would have to agree with a Vatican Council II interpretation according to the Sacred Tradition of the Catholic Church.

The Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI has said that Vatican Council II is not a break from Tradition.

The Most Holy Family Monastery say that there is no baptism of desire. They are correct there is no explicit or implicit baptism of desire. In this sense there is no baptism of desire. However they cannot say there is no baptism of desire as a concept. Since they discuss and write about the baptism of desire, so in this sense, at least they accept it as a concept.

The baptism of water is both a concept and a known reality (see able, repeatable and explicit).

The baptism of desire can only be a concept for us since it is known only to God.

___________________________________________________________________

1. Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience.-Lumen Gentium 16, Vatican Council II.

2.Therefore, all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church's preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door.-Ad Gentes 7,Vatican Council II.



 (Photo from the website of the Most Holy Family Monastery)

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2010/09/most-holy-family-monastery-vatican.html#links

CDF, VATICAN, SSPX, MOST HOLY FAMILY MONASTERY IN TENSION OVER STRAWMAN

The Society of St. Pius X teaches that there is a baptism of desire (BOD) and so attacks supporters of St. Benedict Centre ,the community of Fr. Leonard Feeney. The Most Holy Family Monastery (MHFM), sedevacantists in New York, believe there is no baptism of desire. They criticize the Catholic Church which claims there is a baptism of desire. The MHFM remain outside the Church because they choose to. The Sisters of St. Benedict Centre, Worcester and the St. Benedict Centre, NH say there is no baptism of desire and choose to remain within the Catholic Church. The sisters have been granted canonical status.

The Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican was a professor at the Gregorian University where the Jesuits suggest there is an explicit baptism of desire. So for the MHFM, the Jesuits and the Pontifical Universities and the CDF are in mortal sin for rejecting an ex cathedra dogma, extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Explicit baptism of desire means everyone does not have to visibly enter the Church as states the dogma.

Is this complicated enough?

None of the parties in this tension know a single case of the baptism of desire.

They cannot name a single person who has the baptism of desire in the present times.

They cannot name a single person who has had the baptism of desire over the last 100 years.

So what are they all disagreeing about?

For the Gregorian University professors the baptism of desire can only be a concept, a probability, and a possibility known only to God.

De jure, in principle there can be a BOD. De facto (explicitly) we do not know any case.

Explicitly (externally, visibly) the CDF Secretary does not know of any case of BOD.

Implicitly (in principle) he cannot name any person with BOD.

Yes, as a concept we believe it is possible. Something hypothetical. BOD is only hypothetical. Never explicit.

The SSPX are realizing that there is no explicit or implicit BOD. The Saint Benedict Centre, NH on its website (Catholicism.org) have provided a definition of BOD which is acceptable to them. So when priests on the SSPX website say the SBC is in heresy because they reject the BOD they need to check the SBC website and update theirs.

The issue became complicated when the bishops and priests of the SSPX misinterpreted Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, the founder of the SSPX. When Lefebvre mentioned that persons in non Catholic religions could be saved it is something known to us in principle, hypothetically. We do not know a single person in Islam or the other religions being saved with the baptism of desire.

So when Archbishop Lefebvre says that a person in another religion can be saved he means: God will send someone to baptise that person or provide the helps he need (St. Thomas Aquinas).

“There are only Catholics in Heaven”, says Michael Vorris of Real Catholic TV’s, The Vortex.

Archbishop Lefebvre called on Catholics  to “preach”, “extra ecclesiam nulla salus” in it its rigorist interpretation, since there is only one interpretation of an infallible teaching. Extra ecclesiam nulla salus is an ex cathedra dogma we all have in common. Archbishop Lefebvre, the MHFM and the CDF. The Church never retracted extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Church Documents support the dogma (Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II, Dominus Iesus 20, CDF Notification on Fr. Jacques Dupuis S.J etc. )

Rationally we Catholics know that there is no baptism of desire that we can know of.

Explicit, knowable baptism of desire is a straw man.

So we are back to: everybody with no exception needs to enter the Catholic Church with Catholic Faith and the Baptism of water to go to Heaven and avoid Hell (Cantate Domino, Council of Florence ex cathedra, Ad Gentes 7 etc). Those saved with the baptism of desire, invincible ignorance etc are known only  to God.

________________________________________________________

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2010/09/cdf-vatican-sspx-most-holy-family.html#links

ARCHBISHOP MARCEL LEFEBVRE CALLED "TO PREACH" THE RIGORIST INTERPRETATION OF "EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS"

Ex cathedra dogma is Magisterial teaching and not been retracted. Liberal teaching 'except for those in invincible ignorance etc' is not official teaching but sustained by the media

On a Catholic forum it has emerged that after all these years of misinformation Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, the founder of the Society of St. Pius X called to preach the rigorist interpretation of the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, which has only one interpretation.

Pages 217-218: “This is then what Pius IX said and what he condemned. It is necessary to understand the formulation that was so often employed by the Fathers of the Church: ‘Outside the Church there is no salvation.’ When we say that, it is incorrectly believed that we think that all the Protestants, all the Moslems, all the Buddhists, all those who do not publicly belong to the Catholic Church go to hell. Now, I repeat, it is possible for someone to be saved in these religions, but they are saved by the Church, and so the formulation is true: Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus. This must be preached.”[Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Against the Heresies, pp. 217-218] (Emphasis added)

Here is the ex cathedra dogma, advocated by Fr.Leonard Feeney and the SSPX founder but misinterpreted by the SSPX bishops, priests and lay persons.

The dogma does not refer to explicit or implicit baptism of desire or invincible ignorance. Humanly we cannot know any such case if it exists. It is only known to God.

1. “There is but one universal Church of the faithful, outside which no one at all is saved.” (Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, 1215). Ex cathedra.

2.“We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” (Pope Boniface VIII, the Bull Unam Sanctam, 1302.).Ex cathedra.

3.“The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.” (Pope Eugene IV, the Bull Cantate Domino, 1441.) Ex cathedra – from the website Catholicism.org and “No Salvation outside the Church”: Link List, the Three Dogmatic Statements Regarding EENS http://nosalvationoutsideofthecatholicchurch.blogspot.com/

So in a sense the dogma is saying ‘there is no baptism of desire’ or ‘invincible ignorance’.

So it is this dogma which the SSPX founder called to proclaim when he said "preach" extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

The infallible teaching says everyone on earth needs to be an explicit formal member of the Catholic Church for salvation and there are no exceptions. It does not rule out that known to God only, there could be people saved with the baptism desire, invincible ignorance etc. 'in certain circumstances' (Letter of the Holy Office 1949).For the Archbishop and us, this is a just a hypothetical probability and not an actuality that can ever be known.

God could provide the helps needed for these special cases.St Thomas Aquinas said God would tell the person what to do or send someone to baptize him.Hence the communities of Fr. Leonard Feeney agree that a person can be saved with the baptism desire which must culminate with the baptism of water.

For centuries the interpretation of this dogma was the same, constant, in the Catholic Church and never was the theology, the mantra, used:'everybody needs to enter the Church except for those in invincible ignorance, the baptism of desire etc. This teaching was not part of the Catholic deposit of faith but was introduced by dissident Cardinal Richard Cushing and the Jesuits at Boston. This was of course before Vatican Council II.

This liberal thinking was somehow picked up by the followers of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and used to reinterpret his teachings with the liberal mantra.

This is heresy. 1) It is implying that we can know people in genuine invincible ignorance etc and they are exceptions to everybody needing to explicitly enter the Church.2) It is irrational. No SSPX priest knows a single case of explicit or implicit baptism of desire. How can he ever claim anyone is an exception? And if he does not know any exceptions in particular why mention it?

The SSPX needs to again reaffirm the ex cathedra dogma and make its text available for all its members to read.

This ex cathedra teaching states all Protestants (heretics) and Orthodox Christians (schismatics) are on the way to Hell, and not just only 'those who know' about the Catholic Church. It includes those 'who know' and all others too. It includes non Catholics born with Original Sin and who commit mortal sins in that state .We do not know any genuine case of those ‘who do not know’ since only God can judge them and it is unknown to us.

The ex cathedra dogma is in accord with Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II ‘all people’ need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation and the Catechism of the Catholic Church 845,' the Church is the only Ark of Noah that saves in the Flood'. God the Father wants all people to be united in the Catholic Church. (CCC)

 Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre was affirming the traditional rigorist interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

It means 1) all who are saved are saved by Jesus and this church (CCC) and 2) 'all  people' need to be explicit, formal members of this Church for salvation (Cantate Domino, Council of Florence, Dominus Iesus 20, Ad Gentes 7 etc)

Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Against the Heresies, p. 216:


“Evidently, certain distinctions must be made. Souls can be saved in a religion other than the Catholic religion (Protestantism, Islam, Buddhism, etc.), but not by this religion. There may be souls who, not knowing Our Lord, have by the grace of the good Lord, good interior dispositions, who submit to God...But some of these persons make an act of love which implicitly is equivalent to baptism of desire. It is uniquely by this means that they are able to be saved.”[Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Against the Heresies, Angelus Press, 1997, p. 216]


Bishop Lefebvre, Address given at Rennes, France: “If men are saved in Protestantism, Buddhism or Islam, they are saved by the Catholic Church, by the grace of Our Lord, by the prayers of those in the Church, by the blood of Our Lord as individuals, perhaps through the practice of their religion, perhaps of what they understand in their religion, but not by their religion…” [Quoted in Bro. Robert Mary, Fr. Feeney and the Truth About Salvation, p. 213]

The dogma indicates that billions of non Catholics are on the way to Hell unless before they die they convert into the Catholic Church. The ex cathedra teaching is not referring to only those millions of informed non Catholics in modern cities like Rome, who will be lost to eternal death (AG 7) since they did not enter the Church even after being informed.

There are presently talks between the SSPX and the Congregation or the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican. Both groups acknowledge that extra ecclesiam nulla salus is a Magisterial teaching and the Church has not retracted this dogma.

It’s the secular media which refers to the ‘rigorist interpretation’ implying there are two or more interpretations of an infallible teaching.

Protestant sources over the years have alleged that the Church has retracted this dogma, developed or changed its meaning. Dominus Iesus, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith Notification on Fr. Jacques Dupuis 2001etc  shows  there has been no change.

SSPX priests who understand the situation do not know a way out. They realize there can be no such thing as an explicit or implicit baptism of desire that we can know of. Yet they need to be faithful to the misinterpretation of the teachings of Archbishop Lefebvre on this subject.
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2010/09/archbishop-marcel-lefebvre-called-to.html#links

Lionel's E-News for the week Sept 19-25, 2010 : DR.BRIAN KOPP DENIES AN EX CATHEDRA DOGMA AND IN MORTAL SIN RECEIVES THE EUCHARIST AT A TRIDENTINE RITE MASS

Lionel's E-News for the week Sept 19-25, 2010


THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 2010

DR.BRIAN KOPP DENIES AN EX CATHEDRA DOGMA AND IN MORTAL SIN RECEIVES THE EUCHARIST AT A TRIDENTINE RITE MASS

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2010/09/drbrian-kopp-denies-ex-cathedra-dogma.html

ONLY THE CATHOLIC CHURCH-CATHOLIC MISSION OFFICE TO THE JEWS AND GENTILES IN ROME

…but he that believeth not shall be condemned.’-Mark 16:16

Lionel Andrades, Catholic layman

E-mail: lionelandrades10@gmail.com

Blog: http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/

YouTube: http://it.youtube.com/LionelAndrades

ARCHBISHOP MARCEL LEFEBVRE HAD AFFIRMED THE RIGORIST INTERPRETATION OF THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS

Yesterday (25.09.2010) on a pro-SSPX forum Fisheaters Traditional Catholic Forum I asked an administrator, (who said Abp. Lefebvre did not agree with the rigorist interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus) where is the text, the proof for the claim. It could not be the following text often quoted by the Society of St. Pius X?

Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Against the Heresies, p. 216:

“Evidently, certain distinctions must be made. Souls can be saved in a religion other than the Catholic religion (Protestantism, Islam, Buddhism, etc.), but not by this religion. There may be souls who, not knowing Our Lord, have by the grace of the good Lord, good interior dispositions, who submit to God...But some of these persons make an act of love which implicitly is equivalent to baptism of desire. It is uniquely by this means that they are able to be saved.”[Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Against the Heresies, Angelus Press, 1997, p. 216]

Bishop Lefebvre, Address given at Rennes, France: “If men are saved in Protestantism, Buddhism or Islam, they are saved by the Catholic Church, by the grace of Our Lord, by the prayers of those in the Church, by the blood of Our Lord as individuals, perhaps through the practice of their religion, perhaps of what they understand in their religion, but not by their religion…” [Quoted in Bro. Robert Mary, Fr. Feeney and the Truth About Salvation, p. 213]

The founder of the Society of St. Pius X was correct when he said that souls can be saved in a religion other than the Catholic religion (Protestantism, Islamism, Buddhism etc) however this is only a possibility, de jure ‘in certain circumstances’ (Letter of the Holy Office 1949).Otherwise, we know everyone with no exception needs to explictly enter the Catholic Church to avoid Hell (Cantate Domino, Council of Florence, ex cathedra extra ecclesiam nulla salus, Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II, Catechism of the Catholic Church n.836, Dominus Iesus 20 etc).This is the Catholic Deposit of Faith.

On this forum Father.Cedraka of the SSPX is a contributor. Could he cite any text other then the above, I asked, which would suggest that Archbishop Lefebvre rejected the rigorist interpretation?

It is the SSPX priests who have interpreted the Archbishop using the same liberal mantra ‘everybody needs to enter the Catholic Church except for those in invincible ignorance etc... .’

This is heresy. 1) It is implying that we can know people in genuine invincible ignorance etc and they are exceptions to everybody needing to explicitly enter the Church.2) It is irrational. No SSPX priest knows a single case of explicit or implicit baptism of desire. How can he ever claim anyone is an exception? And if he does not know any exceptions in particular why mention it?

Yet  SSPX priests criticize Fr. Leonard Feeney and his present-day supporters because they believe that the Archbishop Lefebvre did the same. But it is really their interpretation of the Archbishop who was in accord with the Councils and saints of the past who affirmed the ‘rigorist interpretation’ of extra ecclesiam nulla salus. St.Maximillian Kolbe, St.Francis of Assisi, St.Anthony Mary Claret, St.Teresa of Avila...

The above two passages quoted are in accord with the rigorist interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. There are those who can be saved with the baptism of desire etc and they are known only to God. There is no explicit or implicit baptism of desire that we can know of. It is always a probability not an actual reality for us. So the dogma stands: everybody needs to explicitly be a member of the Catholic Church with no exception to avoid Hell.

Pages 217-218: “This is then what Pius IX said and what he condemned. It is necessary to understand the formulation that was so often employed by the Fathers of the Church: ‘Outside the Church there is no salvation.’ When we say that, it is incorrectly believed that we think that all the Protestants, all the Moslems, all the Buddhists, all those who do not publicly belong to the Catholic Church go to hell. Now, I repeat, it is possible for someone to be saved in these religions, but they are saved by the Church, and so the formulation is true: Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus. This must be preached.”[Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Against the Heresies, pp. 217-218]

That they can be saved is only a possibility, it is not de facto. If it was de facto then it would contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus which says everyone needs to explicitly be a visible member of the Catholic Church to avoid Hell. There are no exceptions.

SSPX supporters using the assumed interpretation of the founder of the SSPX have been on a constant attack against those who claim there is no baptism of desire. The enemies of the Church could be happy that traditionalists are fighting over a strawman.

Father.Cedraka is on line (quoted on the website of Father. Paco of the SSPX) as saying that the ‘Feeneyites’ are in heresy....

When an SSPX priest agrees that there is no external-seeable baptism of desire (explicit) that anyone of us can know he is in agreement with the communities of Fr. Leonard Feeney. He is saying the same thing. There is no baptism of desire (external or implicitly knowable)

When an SSPX priest realizes that the baptism of desire, invincible ignorance can only be a concept we accept in principle (as Abp. Lefebvre in the passage quoted above) then he is saying the same as the Saint Benedict Centre, (SBC) New Hampshire and the Sisters of St. Benedict Centre, Worcester,USA. The SBC has posted a definition of the baptism of desire on their website (Catholicism.org). So the SBC states there is a baptism of desire as a concept. So how can Fr.Cedraka and Fr.Scott and Fr.Laisney say they are in heresy?

On the issue of there being no explicit or implicit baptism of desire that we can know of the SSPX and the communities of Fr. Leonard Feeney are in agreement.

On the issue of the ex cathedra dogma saying there are no exceptions to everyone needing to enter the Church with no exception Archbishop Lefebvre is in accord with Fr. Leonard Feeney.

_______________________________________________________________________________

CAPTION OF PHOTO: In April 1967, three years before founding the SSPX, Archbishop Lefebvre (left) briefly met Padre Pio to ask his blessing on a forthcoming general chapter of the Holy Ghost Fathers.^[3]

DR.BRIAN KOPP DENIES AN EX CATHEDRA DOGMA AND IN MORTAL SIN RECEIVES THE EUCHARIST AT A TRIDENTINE RITE MASS

Podiatrist drags his feet on Church teaching. Kopp cops out on mortal sin.

Dr. Brian Kopp DPM an American Catholic podiatrist and writer denies the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, does not consider it Magisterial,does not consider himself to be in mortal sin and still receives the Eucharist at a Traditional Mass.

Dr. Kopp 44 has been in private practice since 1995 in Johnstown, PA, USA. He is a regular contributor to several national Catholic periodicals, writing on issues of morals and ethics.

In his correspondence on the Pascendi Catholic Forum the doctor who has to choose between being faithful to the Church or his worldly practise, chooses the latter.

He would also like to change the Church’s teachings on abortion, ex cathedra dogma, mortal sin etc so that he can comfortably deny the faith.

After much correspondence the podiatrist, was asked if he affirmed the following ex cathedra dogma of the Catholic Church which the Church has not retracted. Also he was asked if the dogma said that everyone with no exception needed to be a visible member of the Church for salvation.He would not answer in the affirmative.

1. “There is but one universal Church of the faithful, outside which no one at all is saved.” (Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, 1215). Ex cathedra.

2.“We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” (Pope Boniface VIII, the Bull Unam Sanctam, 1302.).Ex cathedra.

3.“The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.” (Pope Eugene IV, the Bull Cantate Domino, 1441.) Ex cathedra – from the website Catholicism.org and “No Salvation outside the Church”: Link List, the Three Dogmatic Statements Regarding EENS http://nosalvationoutsideofthecatholicchurch.blogspot.com/

Yes answered Paul the administrator. It is a mortal sin if it is done ' intentionally and knowingly'.

So Kopp knows and he is not saying yes.

It is a mortal sin writes Rasha Lampa if the person knows. Kopp knows.

Kopp denies that he is denying the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. He says he is being faithful to the teachings of the Catholic Church. 

The pro abortion politicians whom he opposes say the same.

I informed him that the Catholic Church affirms the rigorist interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Are you also saying that?

Could I say that Dr. Brian Kopp says all Muslims are on the way to Hell and there are no exceptions unless they convert into the Catholic Churh?

No answer here. 

Instead he  quotes CCC 836,837,838,846,847,849-852.

None of these quotations from the Catechism of the Catholic Church contradict the rigorist interpretation of the ex cathedra dogma extra eccleisam nulla salus.

So we are sadly back to square one: a Catholic doctor in manifest public mortal sin; denying an ex cathedra dogma on a public forum and yet going to receive the Eucharist at a Tridentine Mass on Sunday.

He has no qualms of a sacrilege.

___________________________________________________

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2010/09/drbrian-kopp-denies-ex-cathedra-dogma.html

ANNIVERSARY TODAY FOR CARDINAL ANGELO BAGNASCO’S OFFICAL DENIAL OF THE CATHOLIC FAITH:JEWS DO NOT HAVE TO CONVERT IN THE PRESENT TIMES

Last year Sept 22,2009 Cardinal Angelo Bagnasco,President of the Italian Catholic Bishops Conference (CEI) before two Jewish rabbis gave into pressure by them  and issued a CEI directive that Jews do not have to convert in the present times.

This teaching was contrary to the Bible and the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and has been criticized by a Catholic priest.

The Cardinal stated that he had the support of the Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Bertone and the Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI. There has been no contradiction from the Vatican.

Cardinal Bertone also had called the attention of the Chief Rabbinate of Israel to a front page article in the L'Osservatore Roamano written by Cardinal Walter Kaspar in which he stated  Jews do not have to convert in the present time.

The cardinals were selling the Church to create peace with Israel and the Jewis Left rabbis associated with the Rabbinate of Israel.Just as these days politicians and governments are being made to accept homosexuality and abortion in their countries the Catholic Church's teachings on extra ecclesiam nulla salus is also being changed through pressure on the Vatican Curia.

An Italian diocesan priest in Rome had appealed to the Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI to correct the statement of the Conference of Italian Bishops President Cardinal Angelo Bagnasco, who has assured the pro-homosexuality, abortion and syncretism Jewish Left that Jews do not have to convert and that the Church will not actively seek their conversion.

The cardinal issued the statement on Sept.22,2009 .It was reported in the daily Avvenire, on Sept.23, 2009 the feast day of Padre Pio.

Father Tullio Rotondo in a an e-mail message to me said that the cardinal’s statement was contary to the Bible in which all Jews are called to conversion.

Fr.Rotondo said that Jesus had called all people to convert, especially the Jews. Jesus had sent His Apostles to convert all people.

Fr.Rotondo referred to Bible passages Matt.3:2.Matt.4:17,Matt.11:20, Matt.12:41,Matt.13:15,Matt 18:3,Mark 1:15,Marck 4:12, Mark 6:12,Luk 5:32, Luke 10:30,Luke 11:32,Luk 13:3,Luke 13:5,Luke 15:7,Luke 15:10,John 12:40,Acts 3:26,9:35,Acts.20:21,Acts.26:20,Acts.28:27,2 Tim.2:25.

The above Biblical quotations Fr.Tullio Rotondo said help us understand that first and foremost the Jews need to convert and then the others. It makes us understand that we must preach for the conversion of the Jews and we must pray and appeal to the saints for this conversion.

We pray also for the conversion of the cardinals, he said, who say things that appear scandalous and contrary to the Sacred Faith. Don Tullio said that he is praying also that the Holy Father intervenes.

Don Tullio said that we must fight also in the Church of God, for the Truth.

IT'S A MORTAL SIN TO GIVE A DONATION TO EWTN THIS CHRISTMAS

According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church when the subject of a sin is grave matter, and it is committed freely and knowingly then it is a mortal sin. According to Veritatis Splendor a mortal sin is always a mortal sin and the external action indicates the internal intention.

Grave matter: The Eternal word Television Network (EWTN) denies/changes on their website and television programs, the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. This infallible teaching must be firmly believed and not denied in public by Catholics.

Knowingly: EWTN continues a policy on this issue which is the same as the enemies of the Church (Zionists). EWTN has been informed many times directly and reports exist on the Internet.

Here is the ex cathedra dogma which is at the centre of the EWTN controversy.

1. “There is but one universal Church of the faithful, outside which no one at all is saved.” (Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, 1215). Ex cathedra.




2.“We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” (Pope Boniface VIII, the Bull Unam Sanctam, 1302.).Ex cathedra.


3.“The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.” (Pope Eugene IV, the Bull Cantate Domino, 1441.) Ex cathedra – from the website Catholicism.org and “No Salvation outside the Church”: Link List, the Three Dogmatic Statements Regarding EENS http://nosalvationoutsideofthecatholicchurch.blogspot.com/

Mother Angelica, EWTN’s founder, was supportive of this dogma. She had a special page on extra ecclesiam nulla salus placed on the EWTN website. That page with the statement of the Church Fathers was removed by the new management and the local bishop. Mother Angelica had to leave EWTN. In the name of obedience she allowed EWTN to be taken over by those who oppose the ‘rigorist interpretation’ of the extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Yet the ‘rigorist interpretation’ is a Magisterial teaching of the Catholic Church and the Church has not retracted, at any time, extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Mother Angelica‘s page was replaced on the website created by Trinity Communications' Jeffrey Mirus. He placed on the EWTN website a heretical article by the late Fr. William Most. It called the Church Fathers teachings cited by Mother Angelica, as ‘restrictive texts’. It never mentioned that the ‘restrictive texts’ were ex cathedra. He claimed the dogma does not say everyone needs to be a formal, invisible ‘card carrying’ member of the Catholic Church. He then began misinterpreting Vatican Council II to adapt to his heresy.

Fr. Most, Jeffrey Mirus and Patrick Madrid say on EWTN that the dogma does not claim everyone must be a formal, visible member of the Church to go to Heaven and avoid Hell.

Here is part of the dogma which says just that!

it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” (Pope Boniface VIII, the Bull Unam Sanctam, 1302.).Ex cathedra.


none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation


No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.” (Pope Eugene IV, the Bull Cantate Domino, 1441.) Ex cathedra

Vatican Council II has the same message.

Therefore, all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church's preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door…-Ad Gentes 7.Vatican Council II.

So will you give your donation to an organisation which rejects an infallible ex cathedra teaching? EWTN changes it to adapt to wild interpretations of the Council and Catechism. These interpretations are a break from Sacred Tradition.

It's a mortal sin to knowingly give a donation to EWTN.

Here are Fr. William Most's claims:

1) The ex cathedra dogma on salvation does not state everyone needs to be a formal, visible member of the Church to go to Heaven and avoid Hell.

2) He indicates Fr. Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for affirming the rigorist interpretation of the dogma. No text is cited as proof (See Letter to the Holy Office, Updated Apologetics- extra ecclesiam nulla salus).

3) He believes that this infallible teaching does not teach that God will send millions of people to Hell.

For centuries the Church taught that millions of people are on the path to Hell.Now EWTN gives us a new doctrine, a new interpretation and claims it’s a Catholic teaching.

Extra ecclesiam nulla salus had now been politicised. It is rejected by the leftists-secularists who do not even want any mention of Hell. The Cantate Domino, Council of Florence, ex cathedra, says clearly- that Hell has fire.

So EWTN has to accept extra ecclesiam nulla salus seen by many as an ideological issue similar to abortion and homosexuality. While EWTN opposes abortion and homosexuality, on extra ecclesiam nulla salus, it has the same position as Masons, Communists and those working for the coming of the Anti Christ.

This is grave matter. The subject of mortal sin.

Give your money to groups that affirm ‘the rigorist interpretation’ of extra ecclesiam nulla salus e.g. The Sisters of St. Benedict Centre Worcester, USA, by email: info@sistersofstbenedictcenter.org

By mail:

Sisters of Saint Benedict Center

Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary

254 Still River Road

Still River, MA 01467-0022

Or

The Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, Richmond New Hampshire, USA. The Diocese of Manchester has appointed a chaplain to for this the community.
Saint Benedict Center

Post Office Box 627

Richmond, New Hampshire 03470,USA

Give your money to groups who will fight against the lies of EWTN; individuals who want to hold extra ecclesiam nulla salus  Conferences. There those who can start advocacy groups for those Catholics marginalised for affirming the Church's teaching on extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Remember to deny an ex cathedra dogma is serious. Fr. Tissa Balasuriya OMI was excommunicated by Pope John Paul II.He denied the Immaculate Conception of Our Lady.

So if between ‘your gas and electric bill’ you send money to EWTN you are cooperating with an organization controlled by religious who are in grave sin. You are placing your soul at risk. You will also go to receive the Eucharist at Mass in this condition. Please do not send EWTN money and then at Mass go forward to receive the Eucharist.

For secular organisations, charity includes donations for homosexuality and abortion. This is not the concept of charity for the Catholic Church.

Do not think that since the U.S bishops do not correct EWTN it is truly Catholic. EWTN is supported by U.S bishops who do not think it is a mortal sin, for bishops and priests, to give the Eucharist to pro abortion politicians.

There are also cardinals who believe Jews do not have to convert in the present times. The same message has been expressed by Jewish leaders on a program telecast by EWTN, according to the website of the apologist Robert Sungenis. Sungenis who keeps repeating that the  Bibles says Jews needs to convert is prohibited from appearing on EWTN. It’s been many years now that he has been banned by the EWTN management.

It’s the influential Jewish Left which decides who can appear on EWTN and what can be said or not said by Catholics approved by them.

Apologist Patrick Madrid has been approved. On EWTN Radio I heard him say that evangelisation is important. In answer to a question, he said, everyone needs to enter the Church except for those in invincible ignorance, the baptism of desire etc. This is a contradiction of the ex cathedra dogma and so a heretical statement.

1.There can be people saved who are in invincible ignorance etc and they will be known only to God. 2.While everyone with no exception needs to be a formal, visible member of the Catholic Church to got to heaven. In the words of Vatican Council II, ‘all people’ need Catholic Faith and the Baptism of water for eternal salvation. (Ad Gentes 7). These two teachings (1&2) do not have to be contradictory.(Also See Catechism 1257,845).

Patrick Madrid does not know of any particular case with the baptism of desire or invincible ignorance. So why does he say it is an exception to the infallible teaching ? Its’ a straw man. It’s a way to change and deny the dogma on EWTN. This is a new doctrine that has been brought into the Catholic Church since the 1950's by Cardinal Cushing and the Jesuits at Boston.Patrick Madrid is irrational. Since how can he say everyone needs to enter the Church and yet also say there are people one can know who do not have to enter the church for salvation.

It is contrary to the Principle of Non Contradiction. It is implying that explicitly everyone needs to enter the Church for salvation and explicitly there are people saved with the baptism of desire, invincible ignorance tec.

Yet many of these errors are there in EWTN's heretical report Tragic Errors of Leonard Feeney placed on the Internet by Jeffrey Mirus’ Trinity Communications. Mirus, is president of Catholic Culture, another organisation whose staff members should not receive not receive the Eucharist.

Catholics can say that as a concept, a probability known only to God a person can be saved in invincible ignorance, with the baptism of desire or blood. However this is only hypothetical for us and not an actuality now; not a reality that we know of. We do not know of a single case of the baptism of desire in the present times or the last 100 years.

The EWTN report on the Internet is:

1. A rejection of the Vatican Council II, Ad Gentes 7 which states ‘all people’ need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation.

2. A rejection of the Catechism of the Catholic Church 845 a misrepresentation of CCC 1257, The Necessity of Baptism.

3. It’s a misrepresentation of Lumen Gentium 16, Vatican Council II.

 Remember -EWTN’s stand on this issue is the same as that of the Masons. Your donation to EWTN this Christmas means encouraging their false teachings. EWTN is denying the truth. Or, they hide it so that is barely noticeable.

A Catholic does not send money to an organisation that promotes abortion.

A Catholic does not send money to an organisation that denies or changes an ex cathedra dogma.

Don’t commit a mortal sin. The issue is grave matter and you have been informed.

__________________________________________________________________

UPDATED APOLOGETICS: EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS 


1. LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE 1949


In the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 Pope Pius XII said all Jews in Boston are on the way to Hell and they need to convert. He indicated this when he referred to the ‘dogma’, ‘the infallible teaching’.

2. VATICAN COUNCIL II, LUMEN GENTIUM 16

There cannot be an explicit baptism of desire that we know of, neither can we judge cases of explicit invincible ignorance since we cannot read the heart of any person.

LG 16 refers to something implicit, known only as a concept. Probable, possible but not a reality. We do not know explicitly or implicitly (in principle) any case of a good conscience, the baptism of desire or blood or invincible ignorance in the present times or the last 100 years (If the Church declares that someone is a martyr only the Church has the right to judge).

3. FR. LEONARD FEENEY NOT EXCOMMNICATED FOR HERESY

There is no church document which says he was excommunicated for heresy. He was excommunicated for disobedience. Over time it has become clear that it was the Archbishop and Jesuits at Boston who rejected the rigorist interpretation of the ex. cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.The Archbishop Richard Cushing never issued a clarification when the Boston newspapers reported that eh Church has changed its centuries old teaching.

4. INFALLIBLE DOGMAS DO NOT DEVELOP

There is no Church document to support the position that the ex cathedra dogma extra excclesiam nulla salus has been ‘developed’ or ‘changed’ or ‘retracted’. Infallible teachings defined three times do not 'develop'.

5. SALVATION OF CHRISTIANS (NON CATHOLICS)

Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council Ii says all people need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation. No church document says Christians (non Catholics) religions are the ordinary way to salvation. If a Christian is saved in his religions it will be known to only God. God can provide the helps in this exceptional case, which could include the baptism of water. In Heaven there are only Catholics.

6.HERESY

In the Apostles and Nicene Creed we pray, ‘I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sin’ and ‘I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Holy Catholic Church’. Everyone needs the baptism of water to remove Original sin for salvation. It is the Holy Spirit which guides the Church to teach through the centuries the ‘rigorist interpretation’ of extra ecclesiam nulla salus. To reject the Nicene and Apostles Creed is a first class heresy in the hierarchy of truths. It would also be a rejection of the Athanasius Creed which states outside the church there is no salvation.

7. EUCHARIST

So it is mortal sin to change an ex cathedra dogma or to reject its meaning. It is a first class heresy.A person is automatically excommunicated.He has no right to receive the Eucharist at Mass.Neither can he offer Mass if he is a priest.He first needs to receive absolution in the Confessional and remove the public scandal.

8.SUPERIOR HAS TO BE A CATHOLIC

A Superior ( juridical person according to Canon Law ) has to be a Catholic. So he needs to affirm in public every ex cathedra dogma.Otherwise he cannot hold his office.Neither can one receive the Eucharist in this condition.

Here is the ex cathedra dogma which every Superior according to Canon Law are obligated to affirm and teach others.

1. “There is but one universal Church of the faithful, outside which no one at all is saved.” (Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, 1215). Ex cathedra.

2.“We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” (Pope Boniface VIII, the Bull Unam Sanctam, 1302.).Ex cathedra.

3.“The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.” (Pope Eugene IV, the Bull Cantate Domino, 1441.) Ex cathedra – from the website Catholicism.org and “No Salvation outside the Church”: Link List, the Three Dogmatic Statements Regarding EENS

9.THERE ARE TWO INTERPRETATIONS OF VATICAN COUNCIL II

The first is: everyone needs to enter the Catholic Church for salvation (Ad Gentes 7) except for those in invincible ignorance, the baptism of desire etc (LG 16).

The second is: everyone needs to be a visible, formal, ‘card-carrying member’ of the Catholic Church and there are no exceptions (AG 7) and if there was someone in invincible ignorance, the baptism of desire or a good conscience it would be known only to God.

10. BAPTISM OF DESIRE IS NOT OPPOSED TO THE DOGMA

Baptism of desire is usually interpreted as being opposed to the dogma which says that everyone needs to be a visible, formal member of the Church with no exceptions. We can also interpret Vatican Council II as saying that everyone needs to be a visible member of the Church to avoid Hell and if there is anyone with the Baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance it will be known only to God.

There is no Church Document which suggests that baptism of desire, invincible ignorance should be placed in opposition to the need of formal entry into the Catholic Church for everyone with no exception.

11. CCC 1257 (THE NECESSITY OF BAPTISM) AND DE FACTO, DE JURE CONCEPT

The Catechism of the Catholic Church ( CCC 1257 ) refers to de facto salvation in the first part and de jure (in principle) salvation in the second part. Otherwise it would be ludicrous and make no sense.

It means Lumen Gentium 16 (LG 16) could refer to de jure (in principle) salvation.

If LG 16 is de jure then it is not in conflict with Ad Gentes 7, which states ,'all people' need Catholic Faith and the Baptism of water for salvation.LG 16 would be in accord with tradition.

If is not in conflict with AG 7 then it is not in conflict with the ex cathedra dogma which says everyone with no exception needs to de facto enter the Church for salvation and there are no exceptions.

12. SUPPORTERS OF FR.LEONARD FEENEY SAY THERE IS NO BAPTISM OF DESIRE

I could agree with them. It is true in a sense but it has to be clarified. Words could be used with precision.

I would say they mean:

1.There is no explicit Baptism of desire (BOD).It cannot be external and seen.

2.There is no implicit baptism of desire (BOD).It cannot be known in principle in a particular time.

3.There is no BOD without the Sacraments.(So there could be a BOD with the Sacrament).

4.There is no explicit BOD without the Sacrament of the Baptism of water.

5.There is no implicit BOD without the Sacrament of the Baptism of water.

6.There is a BOD with the Sacrament of the Baptism of water known to us as a concept and something possible 'in certain circumstances' and known always only to God.

13.CONFUSION ON EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS

Here are some important comparisions on the extra ecclesiam nulla salus confusion.

A. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states that there are people who can be saved with the baptism of desire or blood, in invincible ignorance etc. Fine! And they are known only to God. It does not contradict the ex cathedra teaching that every one with no exception needs to enter the Church.

B. The teaching that there can be non Catholic saved in invincible ignorance etc is placed in opposition to the infallible teaching that everyone with no exception needs to enter the Church for salvation.

A. The Catechism states that outside the church there is no salvation means that all salvation comes from God and that whoever is saved is saved through Jesus and the Catholic Church. Fine. This is acceptable to us Catholics.
B. The Catechism states that outside the church there is no salvation means that all salvation comes from God and that whoever is saved , is saved through Jesus and the Church .So there can be people saved who are not formal members of the Church so everyone does not have to enter the church as the infallible teaching says.

A. Pope Pius XII in 1949 in the Letter of the Holy office mentioned 'the dogma' the 'infallible teaching' extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So the dogma is not something from medieval times. Pope Pius XII was saying through the Letter issued by Cardinal Ottaviani that all Jews in Boston and the rest of the world need to convert into the Catholic Church with no exception.

B. They suggest that the dogma is from medieval times.

A. No where in Vatican Council II is this theology presented. There is no text which claims everybody needs to enter the Church except for those in invincible ignorance, the baptism of desire etc. It is an interpretation. Just one interpretation.

B. They claim it is the official teaching of Vatican Council II. It is repeated in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. They cannot cite any text.

A. It is heresy since it rejects an ex cathedra dogma which states everyone needs to enter the Church with no exceptions to avoid Hell (Cantate Domino, Council of Florence.

B. It is not heresy since it is the teaching of Vatican Council II and not just an interpretation, one of two interpretations.

A. There can be only one interpretation of an infallible teaching; the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

B. There is the ‘rigorist interpretation’ and the non rigorist.

A. It is also irrational since how can you say everyone needs to enter the Church and yet there are people one can know who do not have to enter the church for salvation?

B. It is not irrational. It is a ‘mystery’.

A. It is also contrary to the Principle of Non Contradiction. Since it is saying explicitly everyone needs to enter the Church for salvation and explicitly there can be people saved with the baptism of desire, invincible ignorance etc.

B. It is an accepted mystery of the Church.

A. It’s a straw man since explicitly we do not know any case in the present times of someone with the baptism of desire etc. Neither can we implicitly (in principle) know of any such case. The baptism of desire etc is accepted only as a concept a probability, known to God only. It is not an actuality for us, never.

B. The baptism of desire etc is explicit.

A. The Catholic Church has always taught and still teaches that everyone with no exception needs to enter the Church to avoid Hell. That there could be non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance etc does not contradict the infallible, ex cathedra teaching that everyone formally needs to be a Catholic to go to Heaven.

When the Catechism says those who know and yet do not enter it is referring to people, non Catholics, who are definitely going to Hell. This statement was placed in the Catechism to distinguish between those who will be saved in invincible ignorance, the baptism of desire or blood or a good conscience.

Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.-Catechism of the Catholic Church 846

B. That there could be non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance etc contradicts the infallible, ex cathedra teaching that everyone formally needs to be a Catholic to go to Heaven.

A. Everyone needs to be a visible, formal, ‘card-carrying member’ of the Catholic Church and there are no exceptions (AG 7) and if there was someone in invincible ignorance, the baptism of desire or a good conscience it would be known only to God.

B.The second is: everyone needs to enter the Catholic Church for salvation (Ad Gentes 7) except for those in invincible ignorance, the baptism of desire etc (LG 16).


__________________________________________________

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2010/09/its-mortal-sin-to-give-donation-to-ewtn.html#links