Thursday, January 3, 2013

Archbishop, numerous priests and lay Catholic apologist contradict CDF Prefects- baptism of desire cases are not visible to us


The Prefects of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican since the 1940's have assumed that we know cases saved with the baptism of desire and in invincible ignorance.(1) They wrongly assumed that these cases are exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. The baptism of desire is not visible to us says an Archbishop, many priests and the lay apologist John Martigioni.(2)

It was the Italian cardinal, Francesco Marchetti Selvagianni, the Secretary of the Holy Office and Vicar General of Rome who issued the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston regarding Fr.Leonard Feeney.(Wikipedia lists him as the Prefect of the CDF(Holy Office) or a pro-Prefect.April 30, 1939-January 13, 1951).

If he assumed that the baptism of desire was an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus he made a factual error. It is a fact that we cannot see the dead.We cannot see any case on earth saved with the baptism of desire. This would be an objective error from the Holy Office if the cardinal assumed that the dead are visible and so this contradicts Fr.Leonard Feeney and the St.Benedict Center. The Letter however mentions 'the dogma' and so supports Fr.Leonard Feeney. The text of the dogma does not mention any exceptions.

Since Selvagiani, Prefects and Secretaries of the Holy Office (CDF), have never corrected the secular media and now just about every body assumes that Fr.Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for heresy. The Letter mentions it was for disobedience and not heresy.

Th CDF Prefects allowed the error to be extended to Vatican Council II.It was assumed in the media that Lumen Gentium 16(invincible ignorance and a good conscience) contradicted the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Since invincible cases were assumed to be real and explicit, Vatican Council II would be contradicting itself (LG 16 vs AG 7).No clarification was issued by the CDF.

Yet the Council nor the Letter of the Holy Office states that these cases are explicit or that they contradict the literal interpretation of the dogma on salvation.

Even Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre founder of the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) seemed to imply that these cases were exceptions to the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. The SSPX has followed through with this error.The error is there in a book by Fr.Francois Laisney being sold by the SSPX. It is also there on the SSPX U.S website.

The SSPX was  excommunicated for rejecting a Vatican Council II with this false interpretation of being able to see the dead alive and saved on earth. Without this false premise Vatican Council II is traditional and in agreement with the SSPX position on other religions and ecumenism. Since Ad Gentes 7 says all need faith and baptism for salvation. Protestants, Jews and Muslims do not have Catholic Faith.

A CDF clarification is still needed.Since the premise of the dead man walking influences theology and the interpretation of Vatican Council II. The SSPX is not obliged to accept an interpretation of the Council using an irrational theory.The premise also decides how we interpret the Catechism of the Catholic Church- rationally or irrationally.
-Lionel Andrades

1.

THE PREFECTS OF THE CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH WHO OVERLOOKED THE CLAIM OF THERE BEING KNOWN EXCEPTIONS TO THE DOGMA

2.
ARCHBISHOP,CATHOLIC PRIESTS AND LAY APOLOGIST SAY VATICAN COUNCIL II DOES NOT CONTRADICT THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS AND THE SYLLABUS OF ERRORS : "We don't know any case of the baptism of desire or invincible ignorance.Only Jesus can judge"
REDEMPTORIST PRIEST SAYS VATICAN COUNCIL II DOES NOT CONTRADICT ITSELF NOR THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS

Implicit intention, invincible ignorance and a good conscience (LG 16) in Vatican Council II do not contradict extra ecclesiam nulla salus –John Martigioni

SSPX THE ONLY WAY OUT NOW!