Friday, December 9, 2011

ENGLISH CATHOLIC BISHOPS CONCEDE THERE IS NO VISIBLE BAPTISM OF DESIRE - LAY CATHOLICS AFFIRM VATICAN COUNCIL II AND THE DOGMA IN MISSION PROGRAMS


On Saturday and Sunday mornings give the Jehovah Witnesses a surprise

English Catholic Bishops concede there is no visible baptism of desire. Those saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are not exceptions to the dogma outside the church there is no salvation. So lay Catholics in England could begin mission based on the dogma and Vatican Council II.



In ecumenism and inter religious dialogue they could know that all non Catholics are oriented to Hell with no known exceptions, unless they convert into the Catholic Church. This is the official teaching of the Catholic magisterium documents (Vatican Council II, Ad Gentes 7, Lumen Gentium 14 etc).

In sharing the Faith and in street mission it needs to be said that the Catholic Church teaches all people need to enter the Church, Jesus- Mystical Body, for salvation. There are no exceptions on earth. We do not know any case of a non Catholic saved in invincible ignorance, the baptism of desire, a good conscience (which should have led him to the Catholic Church if it was good) etc.

Jesus asks us to love all people irrespective of their religion. So we love all and work with all people, knowing that all non Catholics need to respond to Jesus, they need to enter the Catholic Church which is  the only Ark of Noah that saves in the flood.

In Rome Cardinal Angelo Amato, Prefect of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints called for an evangelization based on Vatican Council II (AG 7,LG 14).In mission we need to interpret Vatican Council II as a continuation of Tradition and in accord with the define dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

An existing association or group, or a new one, needs to be formed which will educate Catholics on the true teachings of the Church and which will affirm the dogma outside the church there is no salvation being in agreement with Vatican Council II.

Evangelise as did St. Ignatius of Loyola, St. Francis Xavier and the Jesuit saints.
- Lionel Andrades

CONFERENCE OF CATHOLIC BISHOPS OF ENGLAND AND WALES AGREE THAT THERE IS NO VISIBLE BAPTISM OF DESIRE : breakthrough in salvation dogma, back to centuries old interpretation.




DID MSGR.JOSEPH C.FENTON DISCOVER THOSE SAVED IN INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE AND THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE ARE NOT EXCEPTIONS TO THE DOGMA ?

SSPX priests assume that those saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance are known to us in the present time and so are exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Young priests with the SSPX have read Msgr. Joseph Fenton as part of their formation and so believe that the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 was a criticism of Fr. Leonard Feeney and not the Archbishop of Boston.

Msgr.Joseph Fenton, editor of The American Ecclesiastical Review  defends the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and remains faithful to teachings of the traditional Magisterium. He had to be faithful to the teachings of the Church while the ecclesiatiscal magisterium, at least in the USA, was promoting a new doctrine which said that the dogma had exceptions. This was heresy. He was faced with the intellectually impossible task of reconciling the dogma which said every one needs to convert into the Church, with the new teaching, that there are defacto exceptions. How could he still be faithful to the tradition of previous popes and the confusion in the USA?

He bravely fought on. In his writings he focused on the dogma and so did not err but the gaps showed when it came to the issue of those non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire.

He believed that Fr. Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for denying that there could be de facto exceptions to the dogma. It seems so, from his writings which refer to the priest being condemned.

He never mentioned that the dogma supported Fr. Leonard Feeney and there was no defacto known exception like the baptism of desire etc. He  was using the defacto -defacto reasoning of the Archbishop. He never called attention to the defacto–dejure theme which was there in Vatican Council II and other magisterial documents.

Did he discover all this before he surprisingly resigned as editor of The American Ecclesiastical Review

He must have been up against the Principle of Non Contradiction numerous times.Finally he could have realised the error. He was interpreting the Letter of the Holy Office according to the Archbishop and the Jesuits of his time and assuming this was the teaching of the Holy See.

It was obvious to him that the dogma could not be reconciled with the new errors in Boston.(1). This was the error years before Vatican Council II.

There are those who can be saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire as exceptions and it would be known only to God. These exceptional cases could have,a genuine desire and charity and God could give them the grace, in these exceptional cases, to receive the baptism of water . This is possible. We do not know.


We do not know who these exceptional cases are on earth and so they do not contradict the ‘the dogma as it has been stated in the authoritative declarations of the ecclesiastical magisterium and even as it is expressed in the axiom or formula ‘Extra ecclesiam nulla salus.’ We do not even know if God permits these cases, hypothetical for us, to be saved after they receive the baptism of water.

In general, the ordinary means of salvation Msgr. Fenton knew was Catholic Faith and the baptism of water (Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II).

The Catholic Church and Salvation by Msgr. Fenton is published by the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX). SSPX priests also assume that those saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance are known to us in the present time and so are exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.This error is there in the writings of Fr.Peter Scott and Fr.Francois Laisney of the SSPX.

Young priests with the SSPX have read Msgr. Fenton as part of their formation and so believe that the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 was a criticism of Fr. Leonard Feeney and not the Archbishop of Boston. The Letter does not mention that the baptism of desire is an exception to the dogma they have to imply this just as the Archbishop of Boston Richard Cushing.
One could also imply that the Letter of the Holy Office 1949  was a criticism of the Archbishop since it clearly endorsed 'the dogma', 'the infallible statement'. Doctrinally, Fr.Leonard Feeney was in agreement with 'the dogma' which does not mention any exceptions, implicit or explicit.
-Lionel Andrades.

1.
Msgr. Joseph Clifford Fenton, The Catholic Church and Salvation, 1958, pp. 124, 126: “The teaching that the dogma of the necessity of the Church for salvation admits of exceptions is, in the last analysis, a denial of the dogma as it has been stated in the authoritative declarations of the ecclesiastical magisterium and even as it is expressed in the axiom or formula ‘Extra ecclesiam nulla salus.’