Tuesday, April 7, 2015

Rome Vicariate, Ecclesia Dei, SSPX,FSSP,CMRI contradict Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

The Rome Vicariate, Ecclesia Dei, SSPX,FSSP,CMRI agree with me. There are no known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. They also agree that Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger made an error in the Catechism of the Catholic Church 1257 when it states God is not limited to the Sacraments. They also agree that there can be no exceptions mentioned in Vatican Council II to the traditional, rigorist interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
For Fr.John Zuhlsdorf Vatican Council II contradicts the rigorist interpreation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, since there are known exceptions.
He has also assumed that those who have been martyred allegedly without the baptism of water,in the past are known cases on April 7, 2015. So they become exceptions today  to the teaching on all needing to be formal members of the Church to avoid Hell.Cases from the past become exceptions in the present for him.People from the past are explicit and objective for us in the present times, according to Fr.Z.
The Rome Vicariate, Ecclesia Dei, SSPX,FSSP,CMRI are not able to deny what I write on this blog.Since it is common sense. They cannot deny that today (April 7, 2015) there is no known case of someone saved without 'faith and baptism'. There is no one known saved outside the Church this Tuesday. Today there can never be known any one saved without faith and baptism.
For me we human beings cannot see persons in Heaven with the naked eye.We cannot meet them personally today morning,afternoon or night.The Rome Vicariate, Ecclesia Dei, SSPX,FSSP and CMRI agree with me.I have been sending them these blog posts.
The Rome Vicariate, Ecclesia Dei, SSPX,FSSP,CMRI contradict Fr.John Zuhlsdorf. Fr.Zuhlsdorf is following the error of Cardinal Marchetti which has been approved by the contemporary Magisterium.
-Lionel Andrades

Fr.John Zuhlsdorf repeats Marchetti's error on the baptism of blood
Contemporary Magisterium is in doctrinal error : Rome Vicariate, Ecclesia Dei, SSPX,FSSP,CMRI agree

Islamic State wants “to control the entire world. To annihilate the infidels”

Amir Ahmed Ali



Maine: Lacrosse coach loses job for criticizing Islam


Curtis_Hall,_Fryeburg_Academy,_Fryeburg_MEFreedom of speech, you say? Increasingly not, in the United States: those who dare notice jihad violence and Islamic supremacism are vilified, marginalized, and defamed. When Scott Lees was fired, was truth a criterion? Apparently not. “Facebook post on Muslims costs Fryeburg coach his job,” by Daymond Steer, Conway Daily Sun, March 24, 2015 (thanks to all who sent this in):
FRYEBURG – After four years at the helm of Fryeburg Academy’s boys lacrosse team, Scott Lees of Conway said he was forced by academy officials to resign as head coach after sharing on Facebook an open letter to President Barack Obama that was unflattering to Muslims.
The letter, written by “An American Citizen,” was about Obama’s speech given in Cairo in 2009. In that speech and in another made last month, the president said Islam has long been a part of American history.
In the first part of the letter, it wonders whether anyone has have ever seen a Muslim hospital or heard a Muslim orchestra. The writer goes on to charge that Muslims “are still the largest traffickers in human slavery,” that they were allied with Adolf Hitler in World War II and that they were either pleased with or silent on the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. The writer adds that the Barbary pirates were Muslims.
“I just thought it was an interesting article,” said Lees, who added he’s a politically minded independent conservative. “I thought it was an interesting letter to President Obama and his current administration who are not paying attention to Israel and focusing on Iran.”
Lees, 48, shared the letter on his personal Facebook page on March 17. Two days later, he was handing in his resignation as Fryeburg Academy’s lacrosse coach. He said that although he was supposed to meet with Head of Schools Erin Mayo and Dean Charlie Tryder on March 19, Athletic Director Sue Thurston told him a decision to fire him had already been made.
According to Lees, a property manager who is married and has two children, said he did not want a firing to go on his record. He asked Thurston if they would consider a letter of resignation.
“I’ve never been fired in my life,” said Lees, who also coaches hockey locally. “I’ve been coaching kids since 1992.”
Mayo said the season will start on time. She said Thurston is looking for coaches and Thurston will provide updates as they become available.
“We’ve got a great team,” said Mayo.
The decision on an interim coach could be made as soon as today, Thurston said.
Regarding the letter that led to his departure as coach, Lees said a friend had emailed it to him, and he posted it to see what people would say. Lees — who has since removed it from his Facebook page — said he did not comment on the letter online and that he meant no disrespect to anyone.
Lees said the post didn’t get much response. No students “liked” the post though it was liked by four adults, one of whom commented on it. “It’s not like it went viral,” said Lees. “It’s not like everyone and their brother saw it.”
But according to Mayo Fryeburg Academy has “a number” of Muslim students as well as students of numerous other faiths.
“We prize each young person we enroll as an individual, and we prize the diversity that they bring,” said Mayo, who pointed to the school’s mission statement, which says that “the Academy believes that a strong school community provides the best conditions for learning and growth. Therefore, we strive to create a supportive school environment that promotes respect, tolerance, and cooperation, and prepares students for responsible citizenship.”
Mayo said the school’s teachers, coaches and other staff need to live up to the mission statement.
Lees said he is not a bigot. In fact, he said that two years ago he invited a former Fryeburg student from New York City named Mohammed Islam to stay at his house for nine days. At the time, Islam had a court date in the area for a minor offense.
“If I had a problem with people who are Muslim, then why would I have allowed a Muslim to stay in my home?” asked Lees.
In a phone interview, Islam, who now attends Drexel University in Pennsylvania, confirmed that his former coach had opened his home to him.
“I never saw him as a bigot,” said Islam, who played under Lees for three years.
When asked of the posting, Islam said he spoke to Lees about it. He didn’t think it should have cost Lees his coaching job. Islam said Lees seems to take issue with Obama’s handling of the Middle East.
“I don’t agree with Scott’s opinion, but that doesn’t make him a bigot,” said Islam….


UK: Christian appeals suspension for inviting Muslim to church

UK: Christian appeals suspension for inviting Muslim to church

PX*4203641Inviting Enya Nawaz to church was “bullying” her, you see. Meanwhile, in shattered, staggering, dying, dhimmi Britain, Muslims invite Christians to go to mosque and convert to Islam all the time. How many of them do you think have been suspended from their jobs and hounded in this way? Zero? Exactly.
That Enya Nawaz brought this to authorities was a gesture of Islamic supremacist contempt for Victoria Wasteney’s acts of kindness. That authorities took the case and suspended Wasteney was a manifestation of how afraid British officials are of offending their Muslim overlords.
“Devout Christian NHS worker launches appeal after being suspended for inviting a Muslim colleague to church,” by Elaine O’flynn, Mailonline, April 5, 2015:
A devout Christian has launched an appeal against an employment tribunal which found she had ‘bullied’ a Muslim colleague by praying for her and inviting her to church.
Victoria Wasteney, 38, says she was branded a ‘religious nutcase’ when she was suspended from her job as a senior occupational therapist, after her colleague Enya Nawaz, then aged 25, accused her of trying to convert her to Christianity.
Her lawyers have now submitted a challenge to an employment tribunal, arguing that they broke the law by restricting her freedom of conscience and religion – enshrined in article nine of the European Convention of Human Rights.
Miss Wasteney, a born-again Christian, was working at the St John Howard Centre in Homerton, east London, when she became friendly with a junior colleague Miss Nawaz.
The two women had discussed Islam and Christianity, as well as the work done by her church at the Christian Revival Church in the O2 Arena in Greenwich against human trafficking.
When Miss Nawaz was upset about health problems, Miss Wasteney said she offered to pray for her – putting her hand on her knee and asking God for ‘peace and healing’.
She also invited her to church events and gave her colleague a book, I Dared To Call Him Father, about a Muslim woman who converts to Christianity, but denied she was trying to make Miss Nawaz convert.
Miss Nawaz went onto make a formal complaint, and the East London NHS Foundation Trust suspended Ms Wasteney on full pay from her £50,000-a-year job for nine months while they investigated in June 2013.
A disciplinary hearing upheld three complaints about the book, the invitation to attend church and Miss Wasteney’s offer to pray for Miss Nawaz, and gave her a written warning for misconduct.
She continues to work for the Trust, but not in her specialist field.
She launched her own employment tribunal against the NHS in January, saying she wanted to raise awareness about the increasing difficulties experienced by religious people in the workplace and claiming the organisation had failed to clear her of wrong doing because it would be ‘politically incorrect’ to find a Christian innocent.
Speaking in January to the Daily Mail Miss Wasteney said: ‘I’m not anti-Muslim and I’m always very mindful to be sensitive to other people’s beliefs.
‘We discussed our beliefs but I certainly didn’t tell her that my way was the only way. I don’t even believe it’s possible to force someone to convert.
‘But the way it was all handled left me looking like a religious nutcase and I would like an acknowledgement that there is a negative attitude towards Christianity in some areas of the public sector.’…
‘We are letting go of what has given us our freedom.’


Pope condemns “complicit silence” on jihad attacks on Christians


The Pope is upset about the “complicit silence” of Christians about the persecution of Christians by Muslims, but did he himself name the perpetrator and explain why this persecution is happening? If he did, there is no hint of it in this AFP story.
Pope Francis has said, “authentic Islam and the proper reading of the Koran are opposed to every form of violence.” Could that have had anything to do with this “complicit silence”? Catholics in particular saw that the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome, was saying that Islam was a Religion of Peace, and there is no doubt whatsoever that it had a chilling effect: given the creeping papalolatry that besets the Roman Catholic Church, people were afraid to discuss the motives, goals, and identity of the persecutors, for fear of going against the Pope’s statement and the Vatican’s policy of “dialogue.”
If the Pope is upset about this “complicit silence,” maybe he should call in the American bishops — and McManus is by no means the only one — who thinks complicit silence is the way to go when it comes to the Muslim persecution of Christians: “Talk about extreme, militant Islamists and the atrocities that they have perpetrated globally might undercut the positive achievements that we Catholics have attained in our inter-religious dialogue with devout Muslims.” — Robert McManus, Roman Catholic Bishop of Worcester, Massachusetts, February 8, 2013 (continued)

Pope condemns “complicit silence” on jihad attacks on Christians

Fr.John Zuhlsdorf repeats Marchetti's error on the baptism of blood

ASK FATHER: Miscarried babies and heaven

From a reader…
Does a miscarriage baby go to heaven if not baptized?
One of God’s greatest attributes is His mercy. We read in the letter of James 2:13, that mercy triumphs over judgment. Mercy is a reflection of His being Almighty.
We know that, in justice, none of us deserves heaven. The sin of Adam and Eve broke our friendship with God. In justice, we stand condemned.
But God, in His mercy, sent His Son to suffer and die for us and to pay the price of Adam’s sin. Jesus Christ unlocked the gate to heaven and showed us the way to ascend to the destiny that our first parents lost. He told us that the way we follow Him, the narrow path set out for our salvation, includes baptism. In baptism we become members of His divine family and of His Body. Through baptism, we once again gain the opportunity to go to heaven.
We know with firm faith in what He has revealed that we know that baptism is necessary for salvation.
Fr.Zuhlsdorf does not mean this in the dogmatic sense.Since he rejects the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. The dogma is also rejected by the contemporary magisterium.It would also be rejected in the diocese in which Fr.Z  is incardinated.
So for him being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are exceptions to the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma. This is the politically correct, 'developed' version of the dogma.It comes from Cardinal Francesco Marchetti Selvaggiani's objective mistake in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.The confusion has been adopted by the Catechism of the Catholic Church in 1257 and Fr.Z is trying to adapt to it.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church 1257 states:
“The Lord himself affirms that baptism is necessary for salvation [John 3:5]. . . . Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament (Mark 16:16)”.
The baptism of water is necessary for salvation and it must be received in the Catholic Church. Formal entry into the Church is necessary for salvation.This was the teaching of three Church Councils.Ad Gentes 7 repeats it when it says all need faith and baptism for salvation. However CCC 1257 also contradicts the dogma when it says 'God is not limited to the Sacraments.' Cardinal Marchetti did not know any one who was saved outside the Church i.e without faith and baptism. Neither did any pre-1949 Church document state that there were exceptions to the dogma or that there were known cases of persons saved without faith and baptism. This was all wrongly inferred by cardinals Marchetti and Cushing(1949).Mystici Corporis, Council of Trent etc do not mention any exceptions.

This is a normative necessity. It is not absolute in the sense that exceptions are not possible. We can’t place limitations on what God can do.
There are no known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Since we humans cannot know of any exception. Even if an exception was possible, as Fr. Z says, it would be known only to God and so would not be an exception to all needing to formally enter the Church this April 2015, to avoid Hell.
And so we also know, with the same firm faith in revelation, that God is also merciful.
What happens to those who are not baptized, including infants and all those who never even had a chance to be baptized? We don’t know.
We do not know if Limbo is more like Heaven and less Hell. We can only hope. We don't know.

International Theological Commission lie http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/01/international-theological-commission-lie.html

The International Theological Commission's position paper Christianity and the World Religions 1997 has an objective factual error and is approved by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger : invincible ignorance is not an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus



Former Secretary of the International Theological Commission holds that those saved with the baptism of desire and in invincible ignorance are known to us and so an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/02/secretary-of-international-theological.html#links 

This fact can cause us some discomfort, especially in families grieving the loss of an unbaptized child. This discomfort also felt by converts who were the first in their family to hear and accept the love of Christ into their hearts. They think back to deceased loved ones who never had a chance to hear the Gospel.
But we know that God is merciful.
Can he bring to heaven someone who is unbaptized? YES, no question about that. On the Cross, Christ said to the unbaptized Good Thief, “this day you will be with Me in paradise.” Can he bring to heaven our beloved children – born and unborn – who are not baptized? Yes.
How does He do this without baptism? We don’t know, but He most certainly can.
He tells us clearly that baptism is essential. We should have no doubt of that fact. This knowledge should make us strive to bring all those we love to the grace of the baptismal font.
God is merciful.
Again, the Catechism of the Catholic Church states (cf. CCC 1260–1, 1283):
“Those who die for the faith, those who are catechumens, and all those who, without knowing of the Church but acting under the inspiration of grace, seek God sincerely and strive to fulfill his will, are saved even if they have not been baptized.”
This is Cardinal Marchetti's error. He assumed that those saved with the baptism of blood ( martrydom) referred to known cases in 1949.In other words:-
1)He knew someone who was a martyr and was saved without the baptism of water.
2)He could see someone on earth who was a martyr in Heaven and so was there without the baptism of water in 1949.
3) He knew someone in 1949 who would die as a martyr and without the baptism of water and he would be in Heaven.
 Someone like the Good Thief on the Cross was an exception to all needing faith and baptism for salvation in the present times. Even though this was an event that happened centuries back.
 So with this typical and common irrational reason, for Cardinal Marchetti, there were known exceptions to the traditional interpretation of the dogma.
Cardinal Marchetti used an irrational premise/proposition ( i.e those saved with the baptism of blood are personally known, and seen in Heaven) to reach a non traditional inference ( these visible cases on earth of the deceased martyrs, are explicit exceptions to the Feeneyite version of the dogma.The visible-dead exceptions! So for him, all did  not need to formally enter the Church as it was taught in the past.
Fr.John Zuhlsdorf makes the same irrational inference here.He infers that 'those who die for the faith' are personally known on earth and so are exceptions to all needing to formally enter the Church for salvation. He infers ' those who are catechumens, and all those who, without knowing of the Church but acting under the inspiration of grace, seek God sincerely and strive to fulfill his will'  are personally known to him in the USA.He could meet them on the streets and shake their hands. For him they 'are saved even if they have not been baptized.' So when John 3: 5 says all need the baptism of water for salvation Fr.Z says "No .There are known exceptions. Not all."

The salvation of unbaptized infants is also possible, in God’s great mercy.
Even as we thank God for all the gifts He gives us, give Him also your cares and questions, always gratefully and with tear-tinged joy asking for mercy and graces for all your loved ones. We look forward to our joyous reunion in the life to come.
-Lionel Andrades 
Fr.John Zuhlsdorf interprets Vatican Council II with Marchetti's theory so the Council for him is ambigous and a break with extra ecclesiam nulla salus http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/02/frjohn-zuhlsdorf-interprets-vatican.html

 February 3, 2015
Rorate Caeili and Fr.Zuhlsdorf's interpretations are politically correct

Divine Mercy Novena today : prayers for 'heretics and schismatics"

DAY 5 (Easter Tuesday) - The souls of separated brethren
Fifth Day
"Today bring to Me the Souls of those who have separated themselves from My Church*,
and immerse them in the ocean of My mercy. During My bitter Passion they tore at My Body and Heart, that is, My Church. As they return to unity with the Church My wounds heal and in this way they alleviate My Passion."
Most Merciful Jesus, Goodness Itself, You do not refuse light to those who seek it of You. Receive into the abode of Your Most Compassionate Heart the souls of those who have separated themselves from Your Church. Draw them by Your light into the unity of the Church, and do not let them escape from the abode of Your Most Compassionate Heart; but bring it about that they, too, come to glorify the generosity of Your mercy.

Eternal Father, turn Your merciful gaze upon the souls of those who have separated themselves from Your Son's Church, who have squandered Your blessings and misused Your graces by obstinately persisting in their errors. Do not look upon their errors, but upon the love of Your own Son and upon His bitter Passion, which He underwent for their sake, since they, too, are enclosed in His Most Compassionate Heart. Bring it about that they also may glorify Your great mercy for endless ages. Amen.

*Our Lord's original words here were "heretics and schismatics," since He spoke to Saint Faustina within the context of her times. As of the Second Vatican Council, Church authorities have seen fit not to use those designations in accordance with the explanation given in the Council's Decree on Ecumenism (n.3). Every pope since the Council has reaffirmed that usage. Saint Faustina herself, her heart always in harmony with the mind of the Church, most certainly would have agreed. When at one time, because of the decisions of her superiors and father confessor, she was not able to execute Our Lord's inspirations and orders, she declared: "I will follow Your will insofar as You will permit me to do so through Your representative. O my Jesus " I give priority to the voice of the Church over the voice with which You speak to me" (497). The Lord confirmed her action and praised her for it.


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.

  • “There is but one universal Church of the faithful, outside which no one at all is saved.” (Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, 1215.)
  • “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.)
  • “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.) http://catholicism.org/category/outside-the-church-there-is-no-salvation


    Next Sunday is Divine Mercy Sunday

    What is Divine Mercy Sunday?

    Among all of the elements of devotion to The Divine Mercy requested by our Lord through St. Maria Faustina Kowalska, the Feast of Mercy holds first place. The Lord's will with regard to its establishment was already made known in His first revelation to the saint, as recorded in her Diary. In all, there were 14 revelations concerning the desired feast.
    Our Lord's explicit desire is that this feast be celebrated on the first Sunday after Easter. This Sunday is designated in "The Liturgy of the Hours and the Celebration of the Eucharist" as the "Octave Day of Easter." It was officially called the Second Sunday of Easter after the liturgical reform of Vatican II. Now, by the Decree of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, the name of this liturgical day has been changed to: "Second Sunday of Easter, or Divine Mercy Sunday." http://thedivinemercy.org/mercysunday/dms.php
    Concerning the Feast of Mercy Jesus said:
    Whoever approaches the Fountain of Life on this day will be granted complete forgiveness of sins and punishment. (Diary 300)
    I want the image solemnly blessed on the first Sunday after Easter, and I want it to be venerated publicly so that every soul may know about it. (Diary 341)
    This Feast emerged from the very depths of My mercy, and it is confirmed in the vast depths of my tender mercies. (Diary 420)
    On one occasion, I heard these words: My daughter, tell the whole world about My Inconceivable mercy. I desire that the Feast of Mercy be a refuge and shelter for all souls, and especially for poor sinners. On that day the very depths of My tender mercy are open. I pour out a whole ocean of graces upon those souls who approach the fount of My mercy. The soul that will go to Confession and receive Holy Communion shall obtain complete forgiveness of sins and punishment.* [our emphasis] On that day all the divine floodgates through which grace flow are opened. Let no soul fear to draw near to Me, even though its sins be as scarlet. My mercy is so great that no mind, be it of man or of angel, will be able to fathom it throughout all eternity. Everything that exists has come forth from the very depths of My most tender mercy. Every soul in its relation to Me will contemplate My love and mercy throughout eternity. The Feast of Mercy emerged from My very depths of tenderness. It is My desire that it be solemnly celebrated on the first Sunday after Easter. Mankind will not have peace until it turns to the Fount of My Mercy. (Diary 699)
    Yes, the first Sunday after Easter is the Feast of Mercy, but there must also be deeds of mercy, which are to arise out of love for Me. You are to show mercy to our neighbors always and everywhere. You must not shrink from this or try to absolve yourself from it. (Diary 742)
    I want to grant complete pardon to the souls that will go to Confession and receive Holy Communion on the Feast of My mercy. (Diary 1109)
    As you can see the Lord's desire for the Feast includes the solemn, public veneration of the Image of Divine Mercy by the Church, as well as personal acts of veneration and mercy. The great promise for the individual soul is that a devotional act of sacramental penance and Communion will obtain for that soul the plenitude of the divine mercy on the Feast.
    *The Cardinal of Krakow, Cardinal Macharski, whose diocese is the center of the spread of the devotion and the sponsor of the Cause of Sr. Faustina, has written that we should use Lent as preparation for the Feast and confess even before Holy Week! So, it is clear that the confessional requirement does not have to be met on the Feast itself. That would be an impossible burden for the clergy if it did. The Communion requirement is easily met that day, however, since it is a day of obligation, being Sunday. We would only need confession again, if received earlier in Lenten or Easter Season, if we were in the state of mortal sin on the Feast.

    April 12,2015: Divine Mercy Sunday
     When I entered the chapel for a moment, the Lord said to me. My daughter, help Me to save a certain dying sinner.Say the chaplet that I have taught you for him. When I began to say the chaplet, I saw the man dying in the midst of terrible torment and struggle. His Guardian Angel was defending him, but he was, as it were,powerless against the enormity of the soul's misery. A multitude of devils was waiting for the soul. But while I was saying the chaplet, I saw Jesus just as He is depicted in the image.The rays which issued from Jesus' Heart enveloped the sick man, and the powers of darkness fled in panic.The sick man peacefully breathed his last. When I came to myself, I understod how very important the chaplet was for the dying. It appeases the anger of God.
    -N. 1565, Notebook 5,p555. Diary of Saint Maria Faustina Kowalska-Divine Mercy in My Soul ( Marian Press, Stockbridge MA 2011)


    Contemporary Magisterium is in doctrinal error : Rome Vicariate, Ecclesia Dei, SSPX,FSSP,CMRI agree

    The contemporary Magisterium is in doctrinal error.It is teaching error.The contemporary Magisterium's position cannot be defended.Since the present Magisterium is saying there are known exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.This is its standard position. No one has challenged it specifically.
    Now the Rome Vicariate, Ecclesia Dei, SSPX,FSSP,CMRI cannot deny the truth.1 They cannot deny what I write here. They cannot deny that today (April  7, 2015) there is no known case of someone saved without 'faith and baptism'. There is no one known saved outside the Church this Tuesday. Today there can never be known any one saved without faith and baptism.
    So they agree with me.
    I am not presenting a new theology or another concept of Feeneyism.Instead I am saying that we human beings cannot see persons in Heaven with the naked eye.We cannot meet them personally today morning or afternoon.The Rome Vicariate, Ecclesia Dei, SSPX,FSSP and CMRI agree with me.I have been sending them these blog posts.
    The contemporary Magisterium ( Pope Benedict, Pope Francis, Cardinal Gerhard Muller) infer that we can see the dead today!
    So Vatican Council II is a break with Tradition and they want Catholics in general and the SSPX, Franciscans of the Immaculate, CMRI and other sedevacantists in particular, to accept this error.
    I am making a philosophical observation, "We cannot see the dead". The Rome Vicariate, Ecclesia Dei, SSPX, FSSP,CMRI  agree with me.
    So what's left? What are we left with is the old theology, the old ecclesiology.
    The new theology is based on being able to see the dead. Remove the premise, which is, "I can see the dead on earth".We then have the old ecclesiology, the exclusivist ecclesiology.
    -Lionel Andrades

    April 4, 2015
    Rome Vicariate, Ecclesia Dei, SSPX, FSSP, CMRI indicate Cardinal Ratzinger made an objective mistake in the Catechism http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/04/rome-vicariate-ecclesia-dei-sspx-fssp_4.html
    In what I believe
    what premise ?
    The irrational premise is "The dead are visible to us on earth".

    what inference/ conclusion ?
    The inference is since the dead are visible to us on earth, those who are saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance being explicit ( visible in the flesh) become exceptions to the traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
    So it is concluded that Vatican Council II (LG 16 etc) contradict the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So it is concluded that Vatican Council II is a break with Tradition, it has the hermeneutic of rupture.
    what theology,
    The post -1949 theology says every one needs to enter the Catholic Church except for those in invincible ignorance or with the baptism of desire.Since it assumes that defacto( in fact in the present times,explicitly) there are known exceptions to the interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney of Boston.So it is a theology which assumes there is salvation outside the Church even though we cannot know of any one saved without 'faith and baptism'.

    what Tradition.
    Pre- 1949 Catholic Tradition, on salvation ( soteriology) says there is exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. The three dogmas on extra ecclesiam nulla salus ,defined by three Church Councils, do not mention any exception. The text also does not mention the baptism of desire or being saved in invincible ignorance.I am referring to Cantate Dominio, Council of Florence 1441 etc.
    Also Mystici Corporis and the Council of Trent mention implicit desire etc but do not state that these cases are known to us, to be exceptions to the dogma.Neither do they state that there are exceptions to the dogma.
    Yet with the false premise and inference is how the Council of Trent, the Catechism of Pope Pius X etc are interpreted.
    Do you accept the baptism of desire?
    Yes. I believe a Catechuman who has an implicit desire for the baptism of water and dies before he receives it can be saved. Since God will provide the means for him to receive the baptism of water. It has been the experience of saints, including St. Francis Xavier that some people returned from the dead only to be baptised by them with the baptism of water.
    Irrational premise, Irrational inference, Non traditional conclusion
    The secular media uses an irrational premise which is "We can see the dead who are now in Heaven, we can physically see them in Heaven and on earth".
    They then make an
    irrational inference
    which is " Since we can see people in Heaven saved without the baptism of water and formal entry into the Church, there is known salvation outside the Church and these cases are an explicit exception to the traditional interpretation of EENS."
    conclusion is : Vatican Council II is a break with EENS.

    I accept the Magisterium

     'For me the magisterial teaching of the Church documents (and not the contemporary magisterium i.e the persons in power) support the rigorist interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ( AG 7,LG 14, CCC 1257,845,846, Redemptoris Missio 55, Dominus Iesus 20 etc).

    I accept the Magisterium ( Vatican Council II (AG 7,LG 14), CCC 1257, 845,846, Redemptoris Missio 55, Dominus Iesus 20, Council of Trent,Syllabus of Errors, Catechism of Pope Pius X, Cantate Dominio Council of Florence 1441 etc).

    Magisterium, Scripture and Tradition, before and after Vatican Council II support Fr.Leonard Feeney and the four Catholic professors of theology, who were expelled by Boston College. http://www.creativeminorityreport.com/2015/03/dont-blame-vatican-ii.html#comment-1943178630

    Exclusivist ecclesiology?
    The new theology is based on being able to see the dead. Remove the premise, which is, "I can see the dead on earth".We then have the old ecclesiology, the exclusivist ecclesiology. The ecclesiology of Vatican Council II is exclusivist. Since it affirms the rigorist interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus in Ad Gentes 7, which says all need faith and baptism for salvation.LG 16,LG 8,UR 3,NA 2 etc are not known exceptions to Ad Gentes 7 or the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. We are left with the old ecclesiology.

    Who agrees with you?
    Archbishop Thomas E.Gullickson says Vatican Council II does not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors


     Implicit intention, invincible ignorance and a good conscience (LG 16) in Vatican Council II do not contradict extra ecclesiam nulla salus –John Martigioni  http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/11/implicit-intention-invincible-ignorance.html#links