EVERYBODY NEEDS THE EUCHARIST TO GO TO HEAVEN - Fr.Marcos Renacia, Augustinian Recollect priest

‘The Eucharist is the ordinary means of salvation’, said Fr. Marcos Renacia, an Augustinian-Recollect priest. ‘Everyone on earth de facto needs the Eucharist to go to Heaven’.

Hypothetically, in a way known only to God, through the extraordinary means God can save a non Catholic who is not a member of the Church who has not received the Sacrament of the Eucharist, he agrees, de facto we do not know a single case such case.

De facto everyone on earth needs the Eucharist to avoid Hell. De jure, in principle, there could be the possibility of someone saved who has not received this Sacrament.

The Church is the ordinary means of salvation states Pope John Paul II in Redemptoris Missio 55. The Church is the Mystical Body of Christ (Ad Gentes 7).Jesus saves through the Sacraments, those who respond (Dominus Iesus 20) by entering the Church.

Fr. Marcos was commenting on the Gospel Reading last Sunday (Corpus Domini) in which Jesus says the Eucharist was needed for salvation (John 6). he was speaking with me at the Augustinian– Recollect Church in Rome. We were comparing the dogmatic teaching extra ecclesiam nulla salus (outside the Church there is no salvation) with the Eucharist being needed for all.

Fr. Marcos chose to use the defacto-dejure explanation of this issue, especially, when asked if ‘all non Catholics need to explicitly receive the Sacrament of the Eucharist for salvation; to go to Heaven and avoid Hell ?’

The words de facto and de jure are used in the Introduction to Dominus Iesus.

‘De facto salvation’  used here  is synonymous with explicit salvation. It refers to the baptism of water which is visible and repeatable. It refers to Catholic Faith which is taught explicitly. It is the ordinary means of salvation.

‘Dejure salvation’ is synonymous with implicit salvation. It refers to the baptism of desire, those saved in invincible ignorance, a good conscience, perfect contrition, in partial communion with the church or saved by the Word of God. It is not the ordinary means of salvation and depends on God’s grace. It’s an extra ordinary form of salvation.

When Fr.Marcos says that the Eucharist is the ordinary means of salvation he refers to de facto salvation. Since we do not personally know any case of de jure salvation, we assume everybody needs to de facto receive the Eucharist. Everyone we  meet needs the Sacraments. There is no exception that we know of.

This is the official teaching of the Church through the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.(Cantate Domino, Council of Florence 1441, Ad Gentes 7,Vatican Council II, Redemptoris Missio 55, Catechism of the Catholic Church 846, Dominus Iesus 20, Ecclesia di Eucarestia etc.)

The Church documents, Magisterial texts, indicate everyone de facto needs the Sacraments to go to Heaven.

The understanding of Church (ecclesiology) in Ecclesia di Eucarestia was based on outside the Church there is no salvation, complained Cardinal Walter Kasper. In the magazine 30 giorini he said no one today believes in outside the Church there is no salvation. He complained that Ecclesia di Eucarestia also ignored the Orthodox Christians, who have a valid Eucharist.

Orthodox Christians are ‘schismatics’ according to Cantate Domino, ex cathedra. They need to convert into the Catholic Church to avoid Hell according to the dogma. We may call them ‘true’ churches and ‘sister’ churches but the dogma says they are all oriented to Hell. We are not permitted to receive the Eucharist at their churches. Neither are they permitted to receive the Eucharist at Catholic Churches.

Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II has the same message. It says all need baptism for salvation. Catholics only give the baptism of water to adults with Catholic Faith. The Orthodox Christians donot have Catholic Faith.

Just as a Catholic in mortal sin is not to receive the Eucharist even though Jesus is still present in the Eucharist an Orthodox Christian is not to receive the Eucharist at a Catholic Church.it is a sin. Cantate Domino indicates Orthodox Christians are in mortal sin (‘schismatics’).De facto they are all on the way to Hell.

So when Jesus says ‘I am the Way, the Truth and the Life’- are there any exceptions?

De facto, none.

De jure, none. All those who are saved implicitly are saved through Jesus and the Church (CCC 846).

When the Augustinian Recollect priest says de facto everyone with no exception needs the Eucharist for salvation he is affirming the centuries old interpretation of Cantate Domino-just like St. Augustine.

If Fr. Marcos does not use the terms de facto-dejure (hypothetical) it would be confusing. It would be saying everyone needs the Eucharist except for…It would be saying yes and No. simultaneously.

There is no text in Vatican Council II which contradicts Cantate Domino or Ad Gentes 7 unless one mixes up de jure salvation for de facto salvation.

If one mistakenly says the baptism of desire refers to de facto salvation and contradicts Cantate Domino which also refers to de facto salvation, then something is wrong. It is in conflict with the Principle of Non Contradiction.

If one correctly infers that de jure baptism of desire does not contradict de facto Cantate Domino then it is rational. It also does not contradict the Principle of Non Contradiction.

So de facto everybody needs the Eucharist for salvation as Fr. Marcos Renacia says.

Outside the Church, outside the Eucharist, there is no salvation.

Photo Fr.Marcos offering Mass this week at the Augustinian Recollect church in Rome.

COUNCIL OF TRENT DOES NOT SAY IF THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE IS DEFACTO OR DE JURE KNOWN TO US

The Council of Trent mentions the baptism of desire but does not say if it is de facto or de jure known to us. Just about everyone, from the Most Holy Family Monastery to the Urbaniana, Angelicum, Gregorian and other Pontifical Universities in Rome assume, its is de facto known to us in the present times.

By which words, a description of the Justification of the impious is indicated,-as being a translation, from that state wherein man is born a child of the first Adam, to the state of grace, and of the adoption of the sons of God, through the second Adam, Jesus Christ, our Saviour. And this translation, since the promulgation of the Gospel, cannot be effected, without the laver of regeneration, or the desire thereof, as it is written; unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God.

Canon IV-If any one saith, that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary unto salvation, but superfluous; and that, without them, or without the desire thereof, men obtain of God, through faith alone, the grace of justification;-though all (the sacraments) are not indeed necessary for every individual; let him be anathema."-Council of Trent

________________________________________

American sedevacantists imply the Baptism of desire is de facto known to us in the present times.

Those who believe in this latter idea (that baptism of desire can apply to Jews or Muslims, etc.) would have to immediately abandon it upon seeing any of the infallible definitions on Outside the Church There is No Salvation. If not, they are definitely heretics who have been automatically excommunicated from the Church. One could not reasonably believe that members of non-Catholic religions being saved is compatible with Outside the Church There is No Salvation.
- page 167, The Dogma that there is No Salvation Outside the Catholic Church and without the Catholic Faith and refuting baptism of desire from the website of the Most Holy Family Monastery,NY

We do not know any case of the baptism of desire so Fr.Leonard Feeney was correct in saying that there is no de facto baptism of desire,that we know of

The Friars Minors in New York who produce  the magazine Seraph have placed the following quotation on the internet.

THE SALVATION OF NON CATHOLICS

Letter of the Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office August 8, 1949, to the Archbishop of Boston.

(Controversy which arose at Boston College on the subject of the axiom, "Outside the Church there is no salvation.")

We are bound by divine and Catholic faith to believe all those things which are contained in the word of God, whether it be Scripture or Tradition, and are proposed by the Church to be believed as divinely revealed, not only through solemn judgment but also through the ordinary and universal teaching office.

Now, among those things which the Church has always preached and will never cease to preach is contained also that infallible statement by which we are taught that there is no salvation outside the Church.

(Note: The ‘dogma’ the ‘infallible’ teaching is Cantate Domino, Council of Florence defined by Pope Eugene IV, 1441.)

However, this dogma must be understood in that sense in which the Church herself understands it. For, it was not to private judgments that Our Savior gave for explanation those things that are contained in the deposit of faith, but to the teaching authority of the Church.

Note :Fr.Leonard Feeney taught that every non Catholic in Boston needed to enter the Church formally for salvation and there were no exceptions. This was the message of Cantate Domino. So he could not have been excommunicated for heresy.(Also see Ad Gentes 7, Catechism of the Catholic Church 845,846, Dominus Iesus 20 ).

(The text specifies Jews, Protestants and Orthodox Christians. It says if they do not enter the Church they will not receive salvation. The only way they could enter the Church is through Catholic Faith and the baptism of water. This is the ordinary way. They could not enter the Church through the baptism of desire since this was a grace given by God. It cannot be administered like the baptism of water.)

Now, in the first place, the Church teaches that in this matter there is question of a most strict command of Jesus Christ. For He explicitly enjoined on his apostles to teach all nations to observe all things whatsoever He Himself had commanded.

(Note: ‘ Go out and preach the Good News’, ‘…those who do not believe will be condemned’-Mark 16:16 )

Obligation to enter the Church

Now, among the commandments of Christ, that one holds not the least place, by which we are commanded to be incorporated by Baptism into the Mystical Body of Christ, which is the Church, and to remain united to Christ and to his Vicar, through whom He Himself in a visible manner governs the Church on earth.

Therefore, no one will be saved who, knowing the Church to have been divinely established by Christ, nevertheless refuses to submit to the Church or withholds obedience from the Roman pontiff, the Vicar of Christ on earth.

Not only did the Savior command that all nations should enter the Church, but He also decreed the Church to be a means of salvation, without which no one can enter the kingdom of eternal glory.

The "desire" may suffice

In his infinite mercy God has willed that the effects, necessary for one to be saved, of those helps to salvation which are directed toward man's final end, not by intrinsic necessity, but only by divine institution, can also be obtained in certain circumstances when those helps are used only in desire and longing. This we see clearly stated in the Sacred Council of Trent, both in reference to the Sacrament of Baptism and in reference to the Sacrament of Penance.

The same in its own degree must be asserted of the Church, in as far as she is the general help to salvation. Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it is necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing.

The implicit "desire"

However, this desire need not always be explicit, as it is in catechumens; but when a person is involved in invincible ignorance, God accepts also an implicit desire, so called because it is included in that good disposition of soul whereby a person wishes his will to be conformed to the will of God.

(Note: The Letter mentions an implicit desire. We can only accept implicit desire as a probability, something that is possible. We accept it 'in principle' because of its very nature. It is known only to God and unknown to us.So we do not know any de facto case of a person saved with implicit desire. So it cannot contradict Cantate Domino.)

These things are clearly taught in that dogmatic letter which was issued by the Sovereign Pontiff, Pope Pius XII, on June 29, 1948, "On the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ". 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.

(Note: There are those who are incorporated into the Church with  Catholic Faith and the baptism of water. This is explicit. There are those who are incorporated into the Church only by desire and this is known only to God. We cannot imply that we know such cases and so this contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.)

Discussing the members of which the Mystical Body is composed here on earth, the same August Pontiff says: "Actually only those are to be included as members of the Church who have been baptized and profess the true faith, and who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or been excluded by legitimate authority for grave faults committed".

Toward the end of this same Encyclical Letter, when most affectionately inviting to unity those who do not belong to the body of the Catholic Church, he mentions those who "are related to the Mystical Body of the Redeemer by a certain unconscious yearning and desire", and these he by no means excludes from eternal salvation,

(Note: Those who 'are related to the Mystical Body of the Redeemer by a certain unconscious yearning and desire' are not excluded from eternal salvation. However they are known to God only .Also the baptism of desire is not  the ordinary means of salvation.The  ordinary means of salvation  is the baptism of water and Catholic Faith. Since we cannot know on earth who they are, with that 'yearning and desire' we cannot infer that they contradict Cantate Domino.

So Fr.Leonard Feeney was correct in infering that there is no baptism of desire that we know of and everyone with no exception needs to formally enter the Church to avoid Hell.This was the teaching in the text of Cantate Domino.)

but on the other hand states that they are in a condition "in which they cannot be sure of their salvation" since "they still remain deprived of those many heavenly gifts and helps which can only be enjoyed in the Catholic Church".

With these wise words he reproves both those who exclude from eternal salvation all united to the Church only by implicit desire,

(Note: We do not 'exclude from salvation all united to the Church only by implicit desire' however we accept it only as a possibility. Since it is known only to God it does not contradict the 'infallible' teaching the 'dogma'.

So when Fr.Leonard Feeney said every one needed to enter the Church with no exception for salvation he was not contradicting the Church teaching on (dejure) baptism of desire.)

and those who falsely assert that men can be saved equally well in every religion.

Necessity of faith

But it must not be thought that any kind of desire of entering the Church suffices that one may be saved. It is necessary that the desire by which one is related to the Church be animated by perfect charity. Nor can an implicit desire produce its effect, unless a person has supernatural faith: "For he who comes to God must believe that God exists and is a rewarder of those who seek Him". The Council of Trent declares: "Faith is the beginning of man's salvation, the foundation and root of all justification, without which it is impossible to please God and attain to the fellowship of his children".

(Practical dispositions relative to Reverend Leonard Feeney.)

Submission to the Church

Therefore, let them who in grave peril are ranged against the Church seriously bear in mind that after "Rome has spoken" they cannot be excused even by reasons of good faith.

(Note: Fr.Leonard  Feeney was affirming Cantate Domino and since the baptism of desire is always de jure and known only to God how could he deny something that none of us knows of personally; none of us knows any case of a non Catholic in the present times being saved with the baptism of desire.
Those who are saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance are known only to God. Since we do not know a single case on earth, it does not contradict Cantate Domino which says formal entry into the Church is needed for all.

Since we do not know any case on earth of the baptism of desire, Fr.Leonard Feeney was correct in saying that there is no de facto baptism of desire (that we know of).

Certainly, their bond, and duty of obedience toward the Church is much graver than that of those who as yet are related to the Church `'only by an unconscious desire". Let them realize that they are children of the Church, lovingly nourished by her with the milk of doctrine and the sacraments, and hence, having heard the clear voice of their Mother, they cannot be excused from culpable ignorance, and therefore to them apply without any restriction that principle: submission to the Catholic Church and to the Sovereign Pontiff is required as necessary for salvation.

Placed by friarsminor.org/boston.html Most Rev. Bishop Louis O.F.M. ,SERAPH - P.O. Box 16194 Rochester, NY 14616  USA

Note: the Catholic Church has not officialy retracted the dogma Cantate Domino. Fr.Leonard Feeney had the same message as Cantate Domino. He had the same message as the popes and saints throughout history, those who offered the Tridentine Rite Mass.

How could he claim that de jure baptism of desire was an exception to the dogma ? The baptism of desire cannot never be de facto known to us so it does not contradict extra ecclesiam nulla salus.-Lionel Andrades
E-mail: lionelandrades10@gmail.com

WHAT IS THE CREDIBILITY OF URBANIANA PONTIFICAL UNIVERSITY, ROME ?

The Rector and professors at the Urbaniana Pontifical University, Rome are teaching the same error as the sedevacantists Most Holy Family Monastery (MHFM), USA. They both imply that those saved with the  baptism of desire are de facto known to us in the present times so it contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

The sedevancantists reject the baptism of desire completely. The MHFM believes it’s an exception to Cantate Domino, Council of Florence 1441, on extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Sandra Mazzolini a professor at Urbaniana rejects Cantate Domino as it was interpreted for centuries. She also believes that those saved with the baptism of desire or invincible ignorance are known to us in the present times. So it contradicts the dogma Cantate Domino.

The sedevacantists affirm extra ecclesiam nulla salus, Urbaniana denies it. They both wrongly assume that cases of the baptism of desire are as real as the baptism of water.

They both believe that the dogma is opposed by a baptism of desire which is defacto, real and known to us personally .They are united in the error here.

Yet a student at Urbaniana University could reason out that the baptism of desire is only known to God. It is de facto for God only. We do not know a single case. We can only accept it in principle (de jure).It is always hypothetical, a concept for us.

How can what is hypothetical for us contradict Cantate Domino on everyone explicitly needing to be a formal member of the Catholic Church for salvation?

Sandra Mazzolini is promoting her book in Italian in which she implies non Catholics are de facto saved with the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance. These cases it is implied are known to us in the present times. So she assumes this contradicts the ‘rigorist interpretation’ of the centuries-old dogma.

She offers a course for students at the Urbaniana which teaches that the dogma extra eccleisam nulla salus has ‘developed’. This claim is made in the Urbaniana University Handbook (Kalendarium).

It has ‘developed’ for her in Vatican Council II as it has for the Urbaniana Rector, since Vatican Council II says non Catholics could be saved in invincible ignorance with a good conscience, by the Word of God, in partial communion with the Church. All these examples according to Urbaniana, refer to de facto cases known in the present time.

Yet it is common sense that we do not personally know any of these cases. They are hypothetical for us. Something we can only accept in principle, so how can they contradict Cantate Domino?

Is this what is being taught to Catholic students and seminarians at this  Pontifical University approved by the Congregation for Catholic Education? Yes.

The university assumes there is text in Vatican Council II which contradicts the dogma. There is no text.

The Catholic Church has not retracted the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus . For centuries the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance were known and it was not an issue. It was not made into a new doctrine to change, reject or ‘develop’ extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

The dogma is in accord with Ad Genets 7, Catechism of the Catholic Church N.845, 846.

Dogmas and doctrines are being changed in Pontifical Universities - in this case, with a common sense error.

Photo top: His Eminence, Zenon Cardinal Grocholewski, Prefect, Congregation  for Catholic Education (below) Sandra Mazzolini

THE GREAT BAPTISM OF DESIRE HOAX : FROM THE MOST HOLY FAMILY MONASTERY, CATHOLIC ANSWERS,USCCB,PONTIFICAL UNIVERSITIES AND SEMINARIES TO NUMEROUS OTHERS TODAY

I can infer that the baptism of desire is unknown to us since, it is only accepted in principle and is never defacto known in the present times in particular cases.

1. Only Jesus knows who is saved with the Baptism of desire.

2. We do not personally know any case in the past, present or future. We cannot say we know someone saved with the baptism of desire. None of us knows any person.

3. Since the baptism of desire is a concept, something accepted in principle, it cannot be real and repeatable like the baptism of water.

4. Since we can only accept it in principle(de jure)it does not conflict with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (outside the Church there is no salvation).The dogma Cantate Domino, Council of Florence 1441 indicates all non Catholics need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation. There are no exceptions since the baptism of desire or blood cannot be administered.

5. So everyone with no exception needs the baptism of water with Catholic Faith to go to Heaven and avoid Hell. If there is anyone saved with the baptism of desire it will be known to God only.

6. The Catholic Church has not retracted the dogma outside the church there is no salvation (Cantate Domino, Bull Unam Sanctam, Fourth Lateran Council) which is in accord with Ad Gentes 7,Vatican Council II ( all need baptism for salvation), Catechism of the Catholic Church 846( the Church is like a door in which all enter), 845 (The Church is like the only Ark of Noah that saves in the Flood and God wants all to be united in the Catholic Church), Dominus Iesus 20 etc.

7. So when the sedevacantists Most Holy Family Monastery (MHFM) claim that the baptism of desire is an exception to the dogma Cantate Domino it is irrational. For them the baptism of desire is not just a concept but a de facto, visible reality like the baptism of water. This is a hoax.

8. Similarly when the liberals who oppose the MHFM say Lumen Gentium 16 (on invincible ignorance) contradicts the dogma it is irrational. They (USCCB, Notification on Fr. Peter Phan etc) imply that we know cases in the present times saved in invincible ignorance. So for them it contradicts the dogma Cantate Domino. Yet we know that those saved in invincible ignorance can only be a concept, a principle we accept. It’s a hoax (by Catholic Answers, EWTN etc) to suggest that those saved in invincible ignorance, unknown to us, contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus or Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II.

CATHOLIC HOAX

Will Gerry Matatics leave sedevacantism ?

Gerry Matatics has communicated to us that he is in full agreement on sedevacantism and the salvation dogma. That is to say, Gerry holds the sedevacantist position and also agrees that is the infallible teaching of the Catholic Church that the Catholic Faith and the Sacrament of Baptism are absolutely necessary for salvation with no exceptions for “baptism of desire”- from the website of the Most Holy Family Monastery.

I Lionel Andrades wish to communicate to all that I am ‘in full agreement with the salvation dogma’. I agree to the ‘infallible teaching of the Catholic Church that Catholic Faith and the Sacrament of Baptism are absolutely necessary for salvation’, and there are no ‘ exceptions for ’ a de facto, known to us in the present times, “baptism of desire”.

However I am a member of the Catholic Church,faithful to His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI and his predecessor popes and I am not a sedevacantist

In 2005 apologist Gerry Matatics , Founder and President, Biblical Foundations International http://www.gerrymatatics.org/  ,did not know there was an alternative.

Now I am saying that the baptism of desire in its very nature is not an exception to the dogma, since it cannot be defacto known to us ever ; we do not know anyone on earth saved with the baptism of desire ,invincible ignorance etc.

De facto every adult with no exception needs to enter the Catholic Church with Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation.

De jure in principle, as a possibility known only to God, a non Catholic can be saved with the baptism of desire or invincible ignorance in the manner God wants.This would include the baptism of water in the Catholic Church, for me, since this is the dogmatic teaching of extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Jesus said all need the baptism of water for salvation (John 3:5) and those who do not believe in Him in the only Church he founded would be condemned(Mark 16:16). At that time there were no Protestant churches and communities.
We do not and cannot know of any de facto cases of the baptism of desire. So it does not contradict the dogma Cantate Domino.
-Lionel Andrades

Peter and Michael Dimond call people heretics: for the MHFM baptism of desire is de facto knowable and contradicts Cantate Domino

Commonsense says the baptism of desire in its nature is always known only in principle, de jure, so how can it contradict Pope John Paul II, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and numerous others charged as heretics and apostates.

Peter and Michael Dimond, sedevacantists  of the Most Holy Family Monastery, NY are calling people heretics on their website. Since they believe that the baptism of desire is de facto and known personally and so contradicts Cantate Domino, Council of Florence, the ex cathedra dogma on extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

The baptism of desire is not like the baptism of water which is real, de facto, tangible, visible and repeatable. Everybody needs it for salvation and there are no exceptions. The baptism of desire is not an exception, to everybody needing the baptism of water. Since the baptism of desire is known only to God .It is not de facto and real for us.

The baptism of desire does not contradict the dogma as the MHFM state in their book on this subject and in comments all over their website.

Those who believe in this latter idea (that baptism of desire can apply to Jews or Muslims, etc.) would have to immediately abandon it upon seeing any of the infallible definitions on Outside the Church There is No Salvation. If not, they are definitely heretics who have been automatically excommunicated from the Church. One could not reasonably believe that members of non-Catholic religions being saved is compatible with Outside the Church There is No Salvation.

- page 167, The Dogma that there is No Salvation Outside the Catholic Church and without the Catholic Faith and refuting baptism of desire

They have been informed. These posts have been sent to them. If they persist would it not be calumny and scandal? A mortal sin?

Saturday, June 18, 2011
MOST HOLY FAMILY MONASTERY SEDEVACANTISTS CONSIDER BAPTISM OF DESIRE DE FACTO AND KNOWABLE IN THE PRESENT TIME
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/06/most-holy-family-monastery.html

Wednesday, June 22, 2011
SEDEVACANTISTS SLIP ON BOD UNDERSTANDING AND CRITICIZE POPE JOHN PAUL II
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/06/sedevanatists-slip-on-bod-understanding.html#links

Wednesday, June 22, 2011
MHFM SLIPS ON BOD DEFINITION AND CRITICIZES SSPX
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/06/mhfm-slips-on-bod-definition-and.html

SEDEVACANTISTS SLIP ON BOD UNDERSTANDING AND CRITICIZE POPE JOHN PAUL II

It’s a common error on the website of Peter and Michael Dimond. They assume that the Baptism of desire is de facto known to us in the present times. They make this  error and  criticize the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX). Here they assume that Pope John Paul II was wrong.

Pope John Paul II was correct there are those saved explicitly and others implicitly through Jesus and the Church.

How?

Subject: Hi-EWTN exposed?
Hi,
Who are you ? How can you say all of these things about the church and the Pope and EWTN? It is all so shocking? Why are you saying these things?
Judy

MHFM: … Here’s just one heresy from … John Paul II. This statement denies defined Catholic dogma. Again, this is just one of many:

John Paul II, Redemptoris Missio (#10), Dec. 7, 1990: “The universality of salvation means that it is granted not only to those who explicitly believe in Christ and have entered the Church.”

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, dogmatic Athanasian Creed, 1439: “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… But it is necessary for eternal salvation that he faithfully believe also in the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ...”

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence ,dogmatic Athanasian Creed is saying that everyone with no exception needs to be an explicit member of the Church to go to Heaven.

Pope John Paul too is saying that the ‘universality of salvation is granted to those who explicitly believe in Christ and have entered the Church’. This is the same message as the Council of Florence.

 Pope John Paul II also refers to those saved implicitly (baptism of desire, invincible ignorance etc), as taught in Mystici Corporis, Council of Trent, Vatican Council II etc. They  also are saved. We must remember that those saved implicitly can only be known to God. They can never de facto known to us as we know the baptism of water. They can never be real and known and so they do not contradict the Council of Florence. Everyone explicitly needs to enter the Church for salvation and there are no known exceptions on earth. If there are any exceptions (invincible ignorance etc) it will be known only to God.

Those saved explicitly refer to de facto cases that we can know of. Those saved implicitly refer to de jure cases that we can only accept in principle and can only know as a concept.

Since one is de facto and the other de jure it does not contradict the Principle on Non Contradiction.

So there is no contradiction between the statements of Pope John Paul II and Pope Eugene IV.

MHFM SLIPS ON BOD DEFINITION AND CRITICIZES SSPX

The Most Holy Family Monastery(MHFM) advises a young man to avoid the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) since they allege that the SSPX like the Catholic Church rejects the dogma Cantate Domino, Council of Florence on extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

The young man must realize that it is the MHFM which is making an error with the baptism of desire (BOD). In its nature BOD is always unknown defacto to us, it can never be known in reality to us humans, it must be always accepted in principle ( dejure) only. It is unlike the baptism of water which is de facto and repeatable, real and visible.

So if BOD is not defacto known to it does not contradict the dogma as the sedevacantists MHFM state on  their website critical of the SSPX.

SSPX

Hello, I am a 22 year old who recently started going to the TLM mass at the SSPX. I have stumbled across your videos and would like to ask you a few questions…

2.) What are your main problems with the SSPX?...

Thank you

Brian

MHFM:… 2. The SSPX believes in salvation outside the Church… The members of the SSPX also demonstrate a schismatic mentality by regarding Benedict XVI and his “hierarchy” as valid, but obstinately operating independently of them. All of that is explained in this file: The Society of St. Pius X [Link to Section]. Here are two quick examples of blatant heresy:

Fr. Schmidberger, Time Bombs of the Second Vatican Council, Angelus Press [SSPX], p. 10: “Ladies and gentlemen, it is clear that the followers of other religions can be saved under certain conditions, that is to say, if they are in invincible error.”

Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Against the Heresies, Angelus Press [SSPX], 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.”-- E-Exchanges on the Catholic Church and other issues, Most Holy Family Monastery

Note :  the followers of other religions ‘in certain circumstances’ (Letter of the Holy Office 1949) and known only to God can be saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance. This is a probability, we accept this in principle. We do not know any such case on earth. So it does not contradict the dogma Cantate Domino or Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II.

When Archbishop Lefebvre said ‘Souls can be saved in a religion other than the Catholic religion (Protestantism, Islam, Buddhism, etc.) he was referring to a probability known to God and which in its very nature is always de jure and never de facto known to us. So Archbishop Lefebvre was not denying or contradicting the dogma Cantate Domino, Council of Florence on extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

The MHFM,Peter and Michael Dimond,  make this common error since they assume that BOD is as visible and real as the baptism of water and so it contradicts the dogma outside the church there is no salvation.

Since they consider BOD as real and known to us, they reject BOD. This is a rejection of a teaching of the Council of Trent and is heresy.

BISHOP KEVIN RHOADES CHAIRMAN OF OUR SUNDAY VISITOR

Bishop Kevin C. Rhoades former bishop of Harrisburg,Pennsylvania who denies Church teaching on extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the need for Jews to convert according to the Bible and Magisterial texts, is the Chairman of the Board of Our Sunday Visitor. The liberal bishop also heads the diocese of Notre Dame University where the former bishop refused to support abortion and President Obama’s visit there.

Within the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), Rhoades is a member of the Committee on Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs . He refused to affirm the Catholic Faith in basic questions put to him.

It is expected that Our Sunday Visitor will produce similar dissent as The Catholic Reporter, USA and t The Tablet, England.

OUR SUNDAY VISITOR
Publishing Division,200 Noll Plaza,Huntington, IN 46750 Phone: (260) 356-8400,Publishing Fax: (260) 356-8472
Bishop Kevin C. Rhoades, Chairman of the Board,
Greg Erlandson, President & Publisher
Msgr. Owen Campion, Associate Publisher/Editor
Michelle Hogan, Executive Assistant (260) 359-2536

Bishop Rhoades and Robert Sungenis:

In 2008, Sungenis' bishop, Kevin C. Rhoades, denounced his views of the Jewish people and Judaism as "hostile, uncharitable, and un-Christian" and required Sungenis to stop writing about them. He also directed him to stop using the word "Catholic" in his organization's name.[3] Sungenis has stated that he will only comply with Bishop Rhoades' directive to stop writing about Jews and Judaism if he is forced to do so "under the aegis of a canonical trial".[11]

In 2008, Sungenis took credit for the fact that the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops voted to remove a sentence from the next printing of the U.S. Catholic Catechism for Adults that involves the Jewish people and the Mosaic covenant ("Thus the covenant that God made with the Jewish people through Moses remains eternally valid for them",[12] see also dual-covenant theology). The bishops proposed to replace it with a sentence from the universal Catechism of the Catholic Church.[3][13] Sungenis expressed concerns about the original sentence at his website and said he wrote to the Vatican about it.[14] The executive director of evangelization and catechesis for the USCCB's committee on the catechism denied that the change occurred because of Sungenis' intervention.[3]-Wikipedia

Alongwith Catholics United for the Faith (CUF), Steubenville,USA a campaign was begun on a website critical of Robert Sungenis who accused Bishop Kevin Rhoades and CUF of being in heresy.

The CUF still has a report on its website on outside the church no salvation written by Phillip Gray and which supports the USCCB (United States Conference of Catholic Bishops) and Bishop Kevin Rhoades heresy on this issue.

The USCCB in the Fr.Peter Phan case issued a Notification which stated that every needs to enter the Church except for those in invincible ignorance etc. The USCCB assumes that those saved with invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire are known to us in the present times. This contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus which states every one on earth needs to be a de facto member of the Catholic Church.

ANGELICUM UNIVERSITY RECTOR REJECTS CHURCH TEACHING ON EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS REPRESENTED THE VATICAN AT FAILED TALKS WITH THE SSPX

The  Dominican Rector of the Angelicum , University of St.Thomas Aquinas, Rome,  Fr.Charles Morerod O.P who rejects the Church teaching on extra ecclesiam nulla salus represented the Vatican and the Catholic Church in failed talks with the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) recently.

Fr. Morerod who never answers posts from this blog  e mailed to him and the faculty, spoke on No Salvation Outside the Church according to a report on the internet.

FRIDAY, APRIL 29th

2:00 PM : Fr. Charles Morerod, O.P., Rector of the Angelicum and Secretary of the International Theological Commission

'No Salvation Outside the Church': Understanding the Doctrine with Thomas Aquinas and Charles Journet.

St. Thomas Aquinas and the Church:Theo-Centric Ecclesiology,A Theological Symposium, April 29th-30th, 2011

(Pontifical Faculty of the Immaculate Conception,Dominican House of Studies,487 Michigan Avenue, NE Washington, DC 20017 202-495-3836 )

He represented the Vatican alongwith the Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, a Gregorian professor, in talks with the SSPX.

4. Can you describe the Roman panelists?

They are experts, in other words, theology professors who are also consulting members of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. One can say that they are “professionals” in theology. One is Swiss, the Rector of the Angelicum, Fr. Morerod, O.P., another is a Jesuit who is somewhat older, Fr. Becker; another is a member of Opus Dei, the Vicar General, Msgr. Ocariz Braña; then Archbishop Ladaria Ferrer, Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and finally the moderator, Msgr. Guido Pozzo, Secretary of the Ecclesia Dei Commission.http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/02/vatican-sspx-talks-collapse-none-of-two.html#links

The rector of the Angelicum also encourages Fr. Robert Christian to teach outside the Church there is no salvation with no texts from Vatican Council II to support his view. I attended an ecclesiology class at thet Angelicum when he spoke on this subject. He has the approval of the Rector.http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2009/12/angelicum-university-priest-professor.html#links

Fr.Morerod teaches that Fr. Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for heresy and the baptism of desire is de facto and known to us humans . He will not affirm Cantate Domino, Council of Florence nor teach that Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II is in accord with this ex cathedra dogma.
This is all contrary to St.Thomas Aquinas who taught that de facto everyone needs to enter the Church for salvation, the Church being the only Ark of Noah that saves in the flood and in principle ( de jure) and known only to God there could be the man in the forest in invincible ignorance to whom God will send a preacher or someone to baptize him with water.

Photo from the Thomistic Institute, Washington

CNA ACCORDING TO VATICAN COUNCIL II AND CANTATE DOMINO, COUNCIL OF FLORENCE ALL ORTHODOX CHRISTIANS ARE ORIENTED TO HELL

from Catholic News Agency.

Lionel's comments included in the text of this report available on the internet.

May 31, 2011

Is only Rome right?

By Father Rocky Hoffman *

I would like some information about being a Catholic and a question my daughter has, are all churches the same? Do we have to be Catholic to get into heaven? Can a person pick any denomination even though they were baptized a Catholic? What can a person do if they are going to a church and the priest really isn't a good preacher – can they go to a different denomination and find a good preacher at another church?

You ask a litany of short and clear questions and you deserve a litany of short and clear answers. But the questions you ask are really big questions and defy simple answers.

To the first: “are all Churches the same.” Yes and no. In the sense that most people understand the term “church” the answer is “no, all churches are not the same.” The Catholic Church is different from protestant denominations which are different from Jewish synagogues which are different from Muslim mosques. In the sense that there is “only one true Church” then the answer is “Yes.” In essence the Roman Catholic Church and all other “true” Churches (i.e. the Orthodox churches) are the same in so far as they share the same faith, the same sacraments, the same canon of sacred scripture, and the same apostolic succession. The only difference is the recognition of the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome.

(Lionel: Are all the members in general in the ‘true’ Churches (Orthodox Christians) saved according to the teachings of the Catholic Church ?

No. According to the ex cathedra dogma Cantate Domino, Council of Florence and according to Ad Gentes 7. They are all oriented to Hell unless they enter the Catholic Church formally i.e with the baptism of water and Catholic Faith. )

Question two: “Do we have to be Catholic to get into heaven?” Again, the answer is yes and no, and depends on what you mean by Catholic. What can be stated with certainty is that anyone who is ultimately saved is saved through the merits of Christ which come to us through His one true Church, which subsists in the Roman Catholic Church. The noble pagan who knows nothing of Jesus Christ or his Church, who nevertheless tries to live his life in accord with the first principle of moral behavior, that is do good and avoid evil, can be saved by the merits of Christ and the grace of God.

(Lionel: “Do we have to be Catholic to get into heaven?”. Yes. Every one on earth with no exception needs Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation.(Cantate Domino, Ad Gentes 7, Catechism of the Catholic Church 846, 845, Dominus Iesus 20 etc).

De facto every one needs Catholic Faith and the baptism of water to be saved.

Dejure (in principle) as CNA says there could be the ‘noble pagan’ saved in invincible ignorance or with the baptism of desire and this would be known only to God. )

Third question: “Can a person pick any denomination even though they were baptized Catholic?” Can? Or should? Certainly anyone can because everyone is free. However free a person might be to choose his or her actions, he is not free to choose the consequences. I can state with reasonable certainty that “if you were baptized a Catholic, you are supposed to remain a Catholic.” What we positively need to avoid is the error of indifferentism, specifically condemned by the Bishops of the United States as early as the Second Plenary Council of Baltimore in 1866. That error proposes that one religion is just as good as another so long as you are honest and just with your neighbor.

And the final question you ask is: “What can a person do if they are going to a church and the priest really isn't a good preacher – can they go to a different denomination and find a good preacher at another church?” Catholics are always free to attend Mass wherever they want, so long as it’s a Catholic Mass. Attending services at an evangelical Church on Sunday morning, because you prefer the vibe and energy of the entire experience, and the dynamic preaching of the minister, does not excuse you from the serious obligation of attending Mass. You are free to attend Mass in any parish you wish. However, the pastor of the parish where you actually reside, continues to have responsibility for the care of the souls within his territorial jurisdiction (cf. Canon 518.)

You may find it helpful to reflect on John Paul II’s response to a similar question posed to him in his book “Crossing the Threshold of Hope” (Knopf, 1994): “People are saved through the Church, they are saved in the Church, but they always are saved by the grace of Christ. Besides formal membership in the Church, the sphere of salvation can also include other forms of relation to the Church. … This is the authentic meaning of the well-known statement “Outside the Church there is no salvation.”

(Lionel: ‘People are saved though the Church’, this does not contradict the ‘rigorist interpretation’ of outside the Church there is no salvation.

‘that they are always saved through Christ and the Church’ does not conflict with Cantate Domino, Council of Florence. One is dejure the other de facto.

‘the sphere of salvation can also include other forms of relation to the Church’, true and this is always de jure and never de facto known to us so it does not conflict with the need for ‘formal membership in the Church’ for all people with no exceptions.

This is outside the Church there is no salvation as it was known for centuries and is known in present day Magisterial texts. )

Finally, let me offer a piece of pastoral advice to those who are less than enthusiastic with the Roman Catholic experience in their parish: the solution is not to fix the parish, the solution is for the person to fix himself and the shortcut to get there is the practice of generous sacrifice for God and for others expressed through frequent prayer, sacrifice, confession, and the corporal and spiritual works of mercy.

* Father Rocky Hoffman is a nationally known radio priest and a widely sought inspirational speaker and retreat leader. He has been instrumental in the founding of several private Catholic academies and preparatory schools nationwide. Currently he serves as Senior Director of Mission, Programming, and Development for Relevant Radio. Ordained to the priesthood by Blessed Pope John Paul II in 1992, Fr. Rocky is a Certified Public Accountant (CPA), and holds an MBA degree earned at the University of Notre Dame and a doctorate in Catholic canon law earned at the Pontifical University of the Holy Cross in Rome. He is an avid waterskier and snowskier, as well as an accomplished jazz pianist.
_______________________________________________

Photo:  Extra ecclesiam nulla salus mugs by Zazzle

THERE IS NO BAPTISM OF DESIRE THAT WE CAN KNOW OF- Fr.George Puthoor

Second Catholic priest in Rome affirms Cantate Domino, Council of Florence, on extra ecclesiam nulla salus (outside the church there is no salvation)

A second priest in Rom within a few weeks affirms Cantate Domino, Council of Florence pointing out that there is no baptism of desire that we can personally know of.

A Rossiminian priest from South India Fr.George Puthoor said yesterday, Sunday morning, that there is no baptism of desire that we can know of.

He was speaking with me at the Basilica Santi Ambrogio e Carlo, Via del Corso, Rome where he was to offer Holy Mass in Italian at 12 p.m on Trinity Sunday.He gave me permission to quote him on this blog.

Since the cases of non-Catholic saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance are de facto unknown to us and can only be accepted in principle it does not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus he observed.

If there is no case of the baptism of desire or implicit faith that we know of then Vatican Council II does not contradict the dogma Cantate Domino.



The secular media hype and those of the liberals have claimed that Lumen Gentium 16, Vatican Council II has changed church teaching with refrence to extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Their claim is that every one does not have to enter the Church since there could be non Catholics saved with invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire.This is the claim of Wikipedia on the Internet, Catholic Answers and the Pontifical Universities and seminaries in Rome and abroad.They could quote Pope John Paul II on ‘silent apostasy’ in the Church, as if, they are not a part of it.


So when EWTN says everyone does not have to enter the Church to avoid Hell it is irrational. Since EWTN implies the baptism of desire is de facto known to us.


There is also no Magisterial text to support this position.


Since we do not know any case of a person saved in invincible ignorance Fr. George Puthoor is getting rid of another modernist sacred cow- the lie about a priest, Leonard Feeney.


When Fr.Leonard Feeney said that there is no baptism of desire (that we know of) he was correct. There is no de facto baptism of desire that we can know of because of the very nature of baptism of desire. It is de facto only for God and never de facto known to  us.


Fr.Leonard Feeney taught:  everyone needed the baptism of water (given to adults with Catholic Faith) for salvation – and there were no exceptions, de facto.


He was affirming Cantate Domino. So how could he be excommunicated for heresy?


The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 refers to ‘the dogma’, the ‘infallible’ teaching. The dogma Cantate Domino indicates all Jews in Boston ( and other non Catholics) need to convert into the Catholic Church to avoid Hell.


With Vatican Council II and Fr.Leonard Feeney ‘out of the way’ we are back to the centuries-old intrpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

The centuries old teaching of the popes and saints is affirmed by the Catechism of the Catholic Church 846.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church 846(Outside the Church no Salvation) says all people need to enter the Church as ‘through a door’. This does not conflict with CCC846 also saying all those who are saved are saved through Jesus and the Church i.e. there are those 1) saved explicitly with Catholic Faith and the baptism of water and there are those saved 2) implicitly through the baptism of desire etc. and which is known only to God.


Fr. George Puthoor is the second Catholic priest in Rome who within a few weeks has affirmed Cantate Domino, which the Church has not retracted through any Magisterial document.. Earlier Fr. Francesco Giordano an Italian diocesan priest said the same.

Unlike these Catholic priests, the American sedevacantists Most Holy Family Monastery, NY, assume that the baptism of desire is known to us in the present times. They seem unaware that it can only be accepted in principle. It can only be a concept for us and real for God. So it does not contradict Cantate Domino. The sedevacantists reject the baptism of desire. This is heresy. They could be correct though, in saying that Catholic clergy, educational institutions and websites are in heresy and general apostasy on the issue of outside the church there is no salvation. .Since they deny Cantate Domino because they believe, like the sedevacantists, in a de facto baptism of deny known to us personally.