Wednesday, February 18, 2015

Bishop Robert C. Morlino says doctrines cannot be changed yet on salvation he has accepted a change in doctrine and practise

Bishop Robert C. Morlino, Bishop of Madison,Wisconsin,USA says that the Church's teaching on the divorce and marriage and the family cannot be changed. Yet the Church's teaching on extra ecclesiam nulla salus has changed for him and he would regularise a marriage of a non Catholic with a Catholic.He says 'pastorally' it can be done, unlike in the past.
He was speaking with Raymond Arroyo on The World Over which Fr. John Zuhlsdorf has cited on his blog.1
Bishop Morlino said that in the past ( pre -1949 ?) such a marriage would not even be considered  by some  Catholic priests. If a Jewish woman wanted to marry a Catholic it would not be possible. The  couple would  be told that they are  going to Hell.Now  it is allowed.
When Bishop Morlino says the couple would be told that they are going to Hell Raymond Arroyo makes a gesture of disapproval indicating that he too is liberal on this subject.
The bishop says now there is a way Jewish and Catholic can marry.
For Bishop Morlino, the dogma on exclusive salvation has changed.He has accepted the change. There is a development of doctrine.
In the past it was said there is no known salvation outside the Church and all need to convert with no exception. Now it is said there is salvation outside  the Church, there are known cases in the present times, there are known cases of people saved without the baptism of water and Catholic Faith. So all do not need to formally enter the Church in the present times.
This was a major shift in Church teaching and it is accepted by the USCCB bishops and Popes Francis and  Benedict XVI. This teaching has been incorporated in the Catechism, of the Catholic Church 1257 which says God is not limited to the Sacraments.
So while bishop Morlino would  pastorally regularise the marriage of a Jew or Protestant with a Catholic he would pastorally not be willing to accept the changes set out for the family with regard to the Eucharist, as put forward by  Cardinal Kaspar.He would not  extend communion to divorced and remarried couples without an annulment. Neither would he accept same sex marriages according to Cardinal Marx.
The bishop says doctrines cannot change. Nor can they be changed in practise. Yet on salvation he has accepted the change in doctrine and practise , which come to us with the Cardinal Marchetti inference.
Bishop Robert  Morlino says someone living in adultery cannot receive the Eucharist yet he does not consider a non Catholic married to a Catholic  as being in adultery.Since the dogma has changed for him!
Raymond Arroyo  is the news director and lead anchor of EWTN News, the news division of the Eternal Word Television Network. He is creator and host of the news magazine The World Over Live. He is employed by EWTN.
-Lionel Andrades
February 18, 2015

Louie Verrecchio's wife is not Catholic, he interprets the dogma on exclusive salvation with an irrational premise and so it is not a sin for him

Louie Verrecchio's wife is not Catholic, he interprets the dogma on exclusive salvation with an irrational premise and so it is not a sin for him

Louie Verrecchio interprets Vatican Council II with the new theology.It comes from the Letter of the Holy Office 1949. In this theology  an irrational premise is used to create an irrational conclusion.The result is a break with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So he accepts the dogma with the irrational  proposition. This is also done by the magisterium, the USCCB bishops and the SSPX. He does not know of another way.This is how he interprets the Catechism too.He was born in 1961 and this was all normal.
For the U.S bishops there is salvation outside the Church. Those saved in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire are exceptions to the dogma. All need to enter the Church except for...the exceptions.So since there is salvation outside the Church, as the Marchetti 1949 letter infers, a Jew can be saved.Non Catholics do not necessarily need to enter the Catholic Church formally.Fr.Leonard Feeney was wrong and stands condemned by the liberals and traditionalists.
So a Catholic could marry a Jew and the marriage over time would be regularised.Why ? Since the teaching on salvation has been changed.The liberal premise of Cardinal Marchetti has entered theology. There is defacto, known, objective salvation outside the Church. We can see baptism of desire cases in real life, as Marchetti  inferred, irrationally . The dead-saved were visible exceptions to Tradition for him
Louie Verrechio says that his wife is Jewish.1 For a number of years he  had  not received  Holy Communion at Mass.They have now gone through the necessary canonical process to have their marriage validated.
This was possible since the U.S bishops reject the dogma as interpreted by the Church Fathers, the Church Councils, popes, saints and Fr.Leonard Feeney of Boston.
If Verrecchio accepted this  traditional understanding of extra ecclesiam nulla salus ( i.e no known exceptions) he would be living in adultery.It is only the Marchetti premise which prevents him accepting extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was known in the Church before 1949.
It is also because of the Marchetti premise which he uses in theology, that he interprets Vatican Council II as a break with extra ecclesiam nulla salus. It becomes a break with  the traditional Catholic teaching on other religions and Christian communities.He cannot conceive of another way to interpret the Council. For him his approach is perfectly rational.He is not aware of the irregular premise he uses for his reasoning.
If there was no known salvation outside the Church for him, if those saved with the baptism of desire are unknown to him in February 2015, then outside the Church there really would be no known salvation and his wife would be outside. She would be outside  the Church and on the way to Hell.Since, she is formally not a Catholic.Also he would be living in adultery.
Now he is not in adultery since his bishop would tell him outside the Church there is known salvation.Now he lives with a non Catholic wife and receives the Eucharist at Mass.This  is approved by bishops who reject the dogma and give the Eucharist to people in mortal sin.For them it is not a sin.They would be ready to regularise such a marriage.
Verrecchio is a popular speaker at SSPX conferences.The SSPX  rejects the Novus Ordo Mass because of its new theology and ecclesiology.However they would accept Louie's marriage  regularised by a liberal bishop.
His bishop would not consider Louie Verrecchio as being in adultery and neither would he expect Mrs. Verrecchio to convert or be separated from her husband.Since outside the Church there is salvation and Mrs. Verrecchio could be saved even outside the Church. We are back to Marchetti's new doctrine and theology.
-Lionel Andrades

Tradwriter 26: Is Vatican II an integral part of the tradition of the Church?.(15:00)


The SSPX must identify the Marchetti error and reject it. They have to make a common sense statement

Steve Skojec :
As an institution, they (SSPX)  do not hold a single theological position that is not clearly and unequivocally Catholic. They cannot be condemned because of their theology – it is simply not possible to show it to be in error.
In 1949 Cardinal Francesco Marchetti Selvaggiani made an objective error upon which he created a new theology. This irrational theology has been accepted by the Magisterium and the liberals - but also by the Society of St.Pius X.
The liberals use the irrational premise of Cardinal Marchetti to interpret Vatican Council II as a break with Tradition and so they accept the Council with the irrational inference.
The SSPX also uses the irrational premise of Cardinal Marchetti to interpret Vatican Council II as a break with Tradition and  they reject the Council with the irrational inference.
I ,Lionel, do not use the irrational premise of Cardinal Marchetti to interpret extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So the Council is NOT a break with extra ecclesiam nulla salus. I accept Vatican Council II interpreted without the irrational inference.
The hermeneutic of continuity or rupture in the interpretation of Vatican Council II depends on the use or omission of the irrational premise from Marchetti's letter.

February 17, 2015

The two hermeneutics depend on the use or omission of the irrational premise from Marchetti's letter


 Steve Skojec :
And yet…and yet they are what the Church was before it abandoned its patrimony.
Lionel :
They have accepted the Marchetti Inference. This is not what the Church was before 1949. They have changed the dogma on salvation with alleged exceptions. For them being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are objective exceptions in 2015 to all needing the baptism of water and Catholic Faith. They have mixed up what is accepted in principle ( baptism of desire etc) as being a defacto case, in the present times.The same irrational reasoning is used with reference to Lumen Gentium 16 ( invincible ignorance), Unitatitis Redintigratio 3(  imperfect communion with the Church), Ad Gentes 11( seeds of the Word ) , Nostra Aetate ( a ray of the Truth) etc. They are inferred to be defacto, known cases in 2015.
 Steve Skojec :
They give every appearance that they are doing their best to be faithful to an authentic Catholicism. Should any of us be surprised that there are many in the Vatican who want to keep them as far away as possible, and keep us confused and wary about them in the process?
The Vatican wants to keep them as far away as possibile since the SSPX correctly reject Vatican Council II interpreted with the Marchetti premise.The Vatican interprets the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and also Vatican Councl II in a heretical way.
  Steve Skojec :
They represent, to Rome at least, the sort of problem that would by its very solution create more problems than it alleviates. Thus, I cannot accept that the confusion surrounding them is entirely an accident. Too many contradictions in official statements exist; too many distinctions without differences are made. Meanwhile, nothing moves forward, and the majority of Catholics associate all traditionalists with the black legend of SSPX schism.
The leftist main stream media want the SSPX to interpret Vatican Council II with the Marchetti error. Then the Council becomes a break with Tradition. They are not doing it. So they are called reactionary etc.
Even though they make this error with Vatican Council II and the Marchetti error in general, the SSPX affirms Tradition. So they also affirm the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to Tradition. This is their confusing position. According to Tradition they affirm the dogma and with the 1949 theology  they reject it.
They offer the Traditional Latin Mass with the traditional dogma. So they are called reactionary and schismatic by the mainstream media.
  Steve Skojec :
What do you think?
I think the SSPX must identify the Marchetti error and reject it. They have to make a common sense statement. They must say that we cannot see on earth persons who are now in Heaven in 2015.Cases of the baptism of desire or being saved in invincible ignorance are not known and physcally visible to us on earth in 2015. So there are no known exceptions in 2015 to the traditional strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to the Church Councils, the popes and saints.There is nothing in Vatican Council II to contradict the rigorist interpretation of the defined dogma outside the Church there is no salvation.LG 16,LG 8,NA 2,UR 3 etc refer to possibilities only. They are known only to God . So they do not contradict Ad Gentes 7 which says all need faith and baptism for salvation. LG 16 etc do not contradict Ad Gentes 7 nor the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
The magisterium made an objective error in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 and in the criticism of the traditional interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney.
-Lionel Andrades

I accept Vatican Council II and the strict interpretation of the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Church. For me this is what 'the Church ' teaches

I have received an e-mail citing the great Fr. Frederick William Faber.

The Precious Blood or The Price of Our Salvation

By Frederick William Faber DD,
( pp. 92 & 93 )
(Fr. Frederick Faber (1814-1863): convert to Catholicism from the Anglican ecclesial community, poet and songwriter (ie. Faith of our Fathers)
" If the precious Blood had been shed, and yet we had no priesthood, no sacraments, no sacramentals, no jurisdiction, no mystical life of the visible unity of the Church----life so it seems, would be almost intolerable. This is the condition of those outside the Church; and certainly as we grow older, as our experience widens, as our knowledge of ourselves deepens, as our acquaintance with mankind increases, the less hopeful do our ideas become regarding the salvation of those outside the Roman Church. we make the most we can of the uncovenanted mercies of God, of the invisible soul of the Church, of the teaching of invincible ignorance, of the easiness of making acts of contrition, and of the visible moral goodness among men; and YET what are these but straws in our own estimation; if our own chances of salvation had to lean their weight upon them? They wear out or they break down. They are fearfully counterweighted by other considerations. We have to
draw on our imaginations in order to fill up the picture. They are but theories at best, theories unhelpful except to console those who are forward to be deceived for the sake of those they love,-- theories often very fatal by keeping our charity in check and interfering with that restlessness of converting love in season and out of seasons, and that impetuous agony of prayer, upon which God may have made the salvation of our friends depend. Alas ! the more familiar we ourselves become with the operations of grace, the further we advance into the spiritual life, the more we meditate on the character of God, and taste in contemplation the savor of his holiness, the more to our eyes does grace magnify itself inside the Church, and the more dense and forlorn becomes the darkness which is spread over those outside...... Would not the divine assurance of our salvation be a very heaven begun on earth? Yet the sacraments are the nearest approach to such a sweet assurance as the love of our heavenly Father saw to be expedient for the multitude of his children..... In truth, no created intelligence of angel or of man could have imagined it."

Pages 226, 227, 228, 229, 230, 231 & 232

" Hence it follows that all true devotion to the Precious Blood MUST be accompanied by a hearty devotion to the Church. Heresies, which have done despite to the Precious Blood by narrowing its sphere or by limiting its prodigality, have also been distinguished by want of loyalty to the Church. In ALL times we have seen that those who take a rigid view about the easiness of salvation ALSO take a lax view about the exclusive privileges of communion with the Church; while on the other hand, those who dwell more strongly on the doctrine of EXCLUSIVE SALVATION in the true Church are also most given to magnify the abundance of redeeming grace within its pale. At first sight it seems a strange inconsistency, that those who make it hard to be saved in the Church should make it comparatively easy to be saved out of it. ...... Yet so it is that a light esteem of the overwhelming advantages of the Church, and a want of appreciation of the sacraments, go along with
the most rigid and harsh views regarding the easiness of salvation and the number of the saved; and these errors go together for want of a true and tender devotion to the Precious Blood. The doctrine of the Sacraments is the touchstone of all theology of the day."
"Now that the world is overrun with heresy, and that in social life almost all distinctions between the faithful and others are obliterated, it is convenient to men's ease and acceptable to their cowardice to regard the faith as one of many saving options, and the church as one of many saving institutions." `
"The Church is a kingdom, not a literature--a life, not a congeries of doctrines; it is a rule and a sovereignty , a royalty which belongs to the Royalty of the Precious Blood. We MUST look at the Church habitually as the sole ark in the deluge of the world, the sole mistress of Salvation. We do not bind God further than he has been pleased to bind himself. We do not limit the far reaching excesses of His mercy. But we MUST remember that his ordinary law is, that there is no Salvation whatever outside the Roman Church......No near approaches, no sensible devotions, no felt actual graces, will make a man a living member of Jesus Christ, without communion with the Holy See. We must be jealous of the uncompromising simplicity of this old-fashioned doctrine. We must be suspicious of all the fine words and specious theories, and ingenious abatements, which the spirit of the day would suggest. We must be misled by no circumstances of TIME or place, by no prevalence of heresy, by no arguments drawn from consequences, which are the affair of God's government of the world...not ours."
" The sins of men cannot change the truth of God. They are at His mercy, not He at theirs. In the days of the antichrist, when two-thirds even of the faithful shall fall away from the Church, their apostasy will not make it less the exclusive mistress of Salvation. We must be loyal to the church in our least thoughts of it, nor even talk lightly of its majesty. We must put faith in it in all its contracts and concussions with the world, and in all its contradictions of the assumed grandeur of this nineteenth century, which is more than half spent, and has done nothing yet to justify its boasting, We must not measure the Church by unsupernatural standards, which it is the world's great object to persuade us to do .We must not be ashamed of it because it holds back when it seems grander to go forward. We must not be discontented with it when its action intersects some little favorite anticipations of our own. we must merge our own selves and our own
views in its consciously or unconsciously Spirit Guided policy. When we are perplexed, we must stand still and believe. Silence makes us great-hearted and judging makes us little minded, We must like its ways, as well as obey its precepts and believe its doctrines. We must not theorize; for if we once begin to theorize, we shall soon come to sneer. A mind NOT under authority always lies under a necessity of being pert. When the Church suffers, or souls suffer, we must not be content with the selfish consolation that, after all, the Church is eternal, and MUST conquer in the long run; but we must have an active sympathy with all its present vicissitudes, and an untiring zeal and unquenchable thirst for souls; and the Salvation of souls is a matter of the present; it cannot wait for the future, because men are dying daily."
(Yes ! Agreed!)

There are no exceptions whatsoever to no Salvation Outside the Catholic Church. Everyone who enters Heaven is Catholic.
      " The Catholic Church assures us that those who are translated to a state of grace through  the laver and spirit of regeneration, as well as through the  extra-sacramental baptisms of blood and desire, will be 
saved.( A person can be saved with the baptism of desire and blood followed by the baptism of water in a manner known only to God. So the baptism of desire and blood are not exceptions to the dogma.
Also if any one is saved as such in 2015 we would not know. It would be known only to God. So in reality, objectively in the present times also, these cases are not exceptions to the dogma.
The Catholic Church's position on this issue is confusing after 1949 when an objective error was made on this subject in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949).
The divine and ecclesiastical command that all men be  aptized in water and the spirit applies to every man  without exception. Outside the Church, there is no  salvation." (Yes!)
....and finally with humility as Catholics we are compelled out of love and obedience for our Catholic faith to Live our `faith as follows:
We must obey Church teaching on Baptism of Blood, Baptism of Desire and Invincible Ignorance as the Church understands it. (The Church's understanding of it today is conflict with the Church's understanding before 1949.
The Church accepts the 1949 letter issued by Cardinal Francesco Marchetti Selvaggiani. The first part of the letter is contradicted by the second part.This same pattern of error has been placed in the Catechism of the Catholic Church 1257. It says the Church knows of no means to eternal beatitude other than the Sacrament of baptism. However it also says that God is not limited to the Sacraments. The dogma tells us that God has limited salvation to the Sacraments in the Catholic Church. Here it infers that a person can be saved without the Sacraments.
How has this new teaching come into the Church?
It has come through Cardinal Marchetti assuming there is known salvation outside the Church. He assumed that there was known salvation outside the Church with the baptism of desire and blood and those saved invincible ignorance.
In the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 the first part supports the traditional interpretation of the dogma which does not mention any exceptions. The second part infers that implicit desire and being saved in invincible ignorance are exceptions to the traditional interpretation. In other words these cases are known in real life to be exceptions.People in Heaven are exceptions on earth?!
So Lumen Gentium 14 and Ad Gentes 7 mention being saved with implciit desire and in invincible ignorance.This can be interpreted with or without the inference.
The magisterium interprets it with the irrational inference. So the Council emerges as a break with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Tradition in general.
I interpret LG 14,AG 7 without the Marchetti error. So LG 14,AG 7 are not in conflict with extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Tradition. So I accept Vatican Council II and the strict interpretation of the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Church. For me this is what 'the Church ' teaches.
If we can not understand or comprehend the teaching then a true act of faith and submission to its teaching is most acceptable. (If we cannot understand the present teaching it is best to go to the pre-1949 sources in the Catholic Church. It was guided by the Holy Spirit.)

-Lionel Andrades

Bishop Claims Transgenderism Is Biological : Jesuit College Hosts Queer Prom