Roberto de Mattei wants the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate( F.I) to be faithful to Tradition while he is not affirming the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS)

Roberto de Mattei wants the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate( F.I)  to be faithful to Tradition while he is not affirming the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) for whatever personal reason.

Like the rest of the SSPX he wants to be faithful to the magisterium of Pope Pius XII, which has made a factual error.He does not criticize Pius XII but corrects Pope Francis whom he suggests (correctly) is in heresy.

If he corrected the magisterium of Pius XII he would be in opposition  to the rest of the SSPX and there will be penalties imposed by the political Left, on this professor of Church history at the Legionaries of Christ, European University in Rome(EUR).

He would like Pope Francis  to issue a correction but he will not say clearly that he affirms the rigorist interpretation of the dogma EENS. Instead he will say that the baptism of desire refers to cases without the baptism of water,who are personally known in 2016 or in past history.

Someone on earth, the Italian professor will say, saw these persons in Heaven saved without the baptism of water.Personally, he and many in the SSPX know that we humans cannot see any one in Heaven without the baptism of water.Yet he must proclaim this irrationality.In public he cannot affirm the Feeneyite version of the dogma EENS.Since the Freemasons in the Church will accuse him of being in heresy as he now suggests in his article that Pope Francis  is in heresy.

Mattei has to get on his knees on this issue and say falsely to his employer and opponents in the Church, that not every one needs to enter the Church and the baptism of desire is an exception to the dogma.

In this way he assures  the liberal cardinals that he also has accepted this heresy and should be given permission to retain his professorship at the Legionaries of Christ university  and maintain his media ownership  and professional interests.He will not be harassed.

In the meantime the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate must pretend that Vatican Council II is a beak with the dogma EENS. He of course is not going to tell them that they must interpret Lumen Gentium 16  as being invisible instead of visible, hypothetical instead of objective and explicit.
He himself inteprets LG 16 as referring to seen in the flesh cases, of people in Rome or elsewhere, saved without the baptism of water.So he remains politically correct with the heretics in the Vatican.
The good professor is not going to tell the Franciscans of the Immaculate, who offer the Traditional Latin Mass, that they must affirm the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma,  since, upon this dogma depends the old ecclesiology.Instead he will keep quiet when the Traditional Latin Mass is permitted only with the new ecclesiology.The new ecclesiology is  based on the objective error in the Fr.Leonard Feeney case, during the pontificate of Pius XII.
Why should he do so, he may ask himself? Others in the SSPX keep silent. Fr.Francois Laisney, John Salza, Rorate Caeili correspondents, the SSPX bishops,the SSPX Resistance priests and bishop and lay theologians and bloggers associated with the SSPX keep quiet on this issue.It's controversial.It would be a criticism of Archbishop Lefebvre's religious formaltion long before Vatican Council II.
When Prof. Roberto de Mattei  wrote his report on 'The Pope's Video'  he could have clearly said that every one needs to formerly enter the Church ( with faith and baptism -AG 7, LG 14)  and there are no known exceptions in the present times or in the past.He could have pointed our to the video not mentioning this. Instead he was vague just like Dominus Iesus, which he quoted in the article.
Dominus Iesus was written with the magisterium assuming that there were known cases of the baptism of desire without the baptism of water.It assumes there people saved who were not formal members of the Church. This shows Dominius Iesus has accepted the heretical and irrationalchoseCushingite theology.It has rejected traditional Feeneyism in the interpretation of the dogma EENS and Vatican Council II.
-Lionel Andrades

Roberto de Matteo wrote a piece on the Pope's Video and heresy and he could not affirm the Feeneyite version of the dogma EENS nor could he state that the video contradicts the Feeneyite version of the dogma

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/01/roberto-de-matteo-wrote-piece-on-popes.html


Roberto Mattei accepts this invisible-visible distinction made by the contemporary magisterium. It is not irrational for him.It is not heretical. Since he uses this same reasoning to interpret Vatican Council II
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/01/roberto-mattei-accepts-this-invisible.html

http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2016/01/de-mattei-on-popes-pronouncements-and.html

___________________