Tuesday, December 13, 2016

PHILOSOPHICAL QUESTIONS FOR A PROFESSOR OF PHILOSOPHY : ASK HIM ABOUT MISTAKES IN VATICAN COUNCIL II

PHILOSOPHICAL QUESTIONS FOR A PROFESSOR OF PHILOSOPHY
1.From the philosophical point of view a catechumen desires to receive the baptism of water but he dies before he can receive it and is allegedly saved.Is this a hypothetical case for you?




My answer is YES.It is a hypothetical case.
It would be hypothetical for us and known only to God.
2.
So is this case of a catechumen who is saved with the 'baptism of desire' known or unknown for you ?
He is always unknown for me. He can only be known to God if he existed.
3.
So if someone says that this case of the catechumen is physically visible in 2016 and personally known to us then this would be false reasoning.? My answer is YES.
4.
Would it violate the Principle of Non Contradiction if someone said this case was visible in the present times, and was personally known?
My answer is Yes since it is being assumed that someone invisible is visible.It is being inferred that someone who does not exist is there on earth and is known.Someone who is not concrete and tangible is assumed to be defacto and real in present time and space.
5.
Similarly this case of an un-seen and known catechumen who is saved with the desire for the baptism of water,in the past too, would be hypothetical for the people of that time, since it cannot be physically visible and known in personal cases? Yes.It cannot be known. It is always an invisible case for us human beings.

FINAL  QUESTIONS
A. Do we personally know people saved  in invincible ignorance, a good conscience (LG 16) etc,can we see them, are they physically visible to us in 2016 ?
My answer is that we cannot see them. They are not physically visible .They are not personally known to us in our time and space.

B. Since we do not know any of these cases, in real life, they are not visible to us, there cannot be any known exception to the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, nor to Ad Gentes 7 which states 'all' need 'faith and baptism' for salvation  My answer is that they are not exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. They were never exceptions.The Holy Office 1949 and the Archbishop of Boston made an objective error.

C.So when Vatican Council II mentions this catechumen (LG 14) and being saved in invincible ignorance(LG 16),along with orthodox passages, which support the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, was it a mistake?
It was a mistake for me. Since these are 'zero cases' in our reality, they are not 'practical exceptions' to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the old ecclesiology of the Catholic Church.I can read Vatican Council II while noting that these cases are hypothetical and theoretical only.
-Lionel Andrades

http://www.upra.org/offerta-formativa/facolta/filosofia/


Traditionalists too unaware of major philosophical mistake : many errors in Vatican Council II

Image result for Photo of Chris Ferrara
1.From the philosophical point of view a catechumen desires to receive the baptism of water but he dies before he can receive it and is allegedly saved.Is this a hypothetical case for you?
My answer is YES.It is a hypothetical case.
It would be hypothetical for us and known only to God.
Image result for Photo of John Vennari
2.So is this case of a catechumen who is saved with the 'baptism of desire' known or unknown for you ?
He is always unknown for me. He can only be known to God if he existed.
3.So if someone says that this case of the catechumen is physically visible in 2016 and personally known to us then this would be false reasoning.? My answer is YES.
Image result for Photo of John Vennari
4.Would it violate the Principle of Non Contradiction if someone said this case was visible in the present times, and was personally known?
My answer is Yes since it is being assumed that someone invisible is visible.It is being inferred that someone who does not exist is there on earth and is known.Someone who is not concrete and tangible is assumed to be defacto and real in present time and space.
Image result for Photo of John Vennari
5.Similarly this case of an un-seen and known catechumen who is saved with the desire for the baptism of water,in the past too, would be hypothetical for the people of that time, since it cannot be physically visible and known in personal cases? Yes.It cannot be known. It is always an invisible case for us human beings.


FINAL TWO QUESTIONS

A. Do we personally know people saved  in invincible ignorance, a good conscience (LG 16) etc,can we see them, are they physically visible to us in 2016 ?
My answer is that we cannot see them. They are not physically visible .They are not personally known to us in our time and space.
Image result for Photo of John Vennari
B. Since we do not know any of these cases, in real life, they are not visible to us, there cannot be any known exception to the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, nor to Ad Gentes 7 which states 'all' need 'faith and baptism' for salvation  My answer is that they are not exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. They were never exceptions.The Holy Office 1949 and the Archbishop of Boston made an objective error.
Image result for Photo of Italian traditionalists SSPXImage result for Photo of Italian traditionalists SSPXImage result for Photo of SSPX Mass in Germany
C.So when Vatican Council II mentions this catechumen (LG 14) and being saved in invincible ignorance(LG 16),along with orthodox passages, which support the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, was it a mistake?
It was a mistake for me. Since these are 'zero cases' in our reality, they are not 'practical exceptions' to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the old ecclesiology of the Catholic Church.I can read Vatican Council II while noting that these cases are hypothetical and theoretical only.This is not how the traditionalists read Vatican Council II.
-Lionel Andrades

Troppi errori nel Concilio Vaticano II

Vatican to house two Popes for first time as Benedict returns

Troppi errori nel Concilio Vaticano II

Questo è senza precedenti.Questa è la prima volta che viene menzionato.Troppi errori obbietivi nel Concilio Vaticano II
Errori obiettivo sono stati scoperti nel Concilio Vaticano II.Mi riferisco non solo a teologia.
Irazionale ragionamento ha creato una nuova teologia.Ci sono errori in principio.Come una norma si insinua in tutto il testo di Concilio.
In principio i Padri del Concilio Vaticano II assume casi ipotetici non erano ipotetiche ma oggettivamente visibile.
In principio hanno assunto persone in Cielo sono oggettivamente visibile sulla terra.
In principio si presume che possiamo sapere non cattolici sulla terra salvati senza il battesimo di acqua nella Chiesa cattolica.
In generale, come norma, il principio di non contraddizione è stata violata.
Il battesimo di desiderio; il caso del catecumeno sconosciuto che ha desiderato il battesimo di acqua, ma morì prima che fosse dato a lui, è sempre un caso invisibile. Non è stato così per i Padri nel Concilio Vaticano II.Loro hanno assunto questo catecumeno era un'eccezione per il dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.Era un caso visibile per loro.Doveva essere visibile per essere un'eccezione alla secoli interpretazione del dogma EENS. La loro logica(premessa) era sbagliato. Come ci può un caso visibile di questa catecumeno che e salvato?
Questo è stato magistrale nel 1949 e 1965.La scomunica di p.Leonard Feeney non è stato ancora revocato.Neanche Roma o Boston hanno affermato l'interpretazione tradizionale del dogma come era conosciuto nel 16 ° secolo.
Così il Concilio Vaticano fino ad oggi e interpretata come una rottura con la Tradizione.Allora una premessa errata deve produrre una conclusione non tradizionale e irrazionale.
I Padri conciliari hanno violato i fondamenti della logica e ragionamento filosofico.
Stavano seguendo la Lettera 1949 del Sant'Uffizio, che ha eliminato l'interpretazione secoli di EENS.La semplice Lettera da un cardinale ha eliminato il dogma EENS che ha  definito da tre Concili della Chiesa.Hanno eliminato il dogma assumendo il battesimo di desiderio e di essere salvati nell'ignoranza invincibile erano visibile invece di invisibili.
Questo era un nuovo precedente nella Chiesa. Una novità in teologia.Ha creato una nuova dottrina che è stato messo in Lumen Gentium 14, Concilio Vaticano II.
Lumen Gentium 14 dice che coloro che conoscono Gesù e della Chiesa, eppure non entrano non può essere salva.Questo è affermato in la Lettera nel 1949 che suggerisce che essere salvati nell'ignoranza invincibile si riferisce a un caso noto.
Per gli ecclesiastici si riferiva a qualcuno conosciuto, salvati senza il battesimo di acqua nella Chiesa.Ognuno in generale non deve farlo.Non tutti, in generale, senza eccezione,hanno la necessità di entrare nella Chiesa cattolica.
Tutti bisogna entrare.Fu così che il dogma era noto ai missionari 16 ° secolo, i quali Benedetto ha refirisci in un'intervista ad Avvenire.
Questa è la nuova teologia approvato da Papa Benedetto XVI.Era basata sula premessa irrazionale .Dice che noi conosciamo persone salvate senza il battesimo di acqua nella Chiesa.Poi si concluso che questi 'casi visibili-invisibile' 'sono eccezioni alla interpretazione Feeneyite di dogma EENS.
Ora posso scegliere a caso,casualmente  i passaggi nel Concilio Vaticano II, che non dovrebbero essere di la.Loro non avrebbero dovuto essere inserita nel testo.
Si riferiscono a casi invisibili e quindi non sono eccezioni o rilevanti per i passaggi ortodossi che accompagnano.
Coloro infatti che credono in Cristo ed hanno ricevuto validamente il battesimo, sono costituiti in una certa comunione, sebbene imperfetta, con la Chiesa cattolica.-Unitatis Redintigratio 3
Questo passaggio sopra è privo di significato con riferimento al dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Allora perché è stato menzionato qui?
Perché?
Perche i Padri conciliari assunto questo era un riferimento ad un caso noto.
Casi ipotetici sono stati in principio assunta non essere ipotetici.In questo modo loro rifiutano un ecumenismo di ritorno che era basato sul dogma EENS.
Casi ipotetici sono stati in principio assunta non essere ipotetici.In questo modo loro rifiutano un ecumenismo di ritorno basata sul dogma EENS.
___________________

 Nondimeno, giustificati nel battesimo dalla fede, sono incorporati a Cristo (17) e perciò sono a ragione insigniti del nome di cristiani, e dai figli della Chiesa cattolica sono giustamente riconosciuti quali fratelli nel Signore-UR 3
A chi sappiamo tra i protestanti, pentecostali, cristiani ortodossi e altri cristiani denominazione chi e nei cielo battezzati con acqua, ma senza la fede cattolica?.Senza i Sacramenti e gli insegnamenti morali e fede della Chiesa cattolica?
A chi lo sappiamo?
Nessuno.
___________________

Perciò queste Chiese (19) e comunità separate, quantunque crediamo abbiano delle carenze, nel mistero della salvezza non son affatto spoglie di significato e di valore.-UR 3
Questo passaggio è stato messo qui perchè i Padri della Chiesa assunto c'era salvezza al di fuori della Chiesa secondo l'errore nella Lettera di Sant'Ufffico nel 1949. Il caso sconosciuto del catecumeno è stata assunta ad essere un caso noto di salvezza al di fuori della Chiesa. Quindi, con questa premessa hanno messo questo passaggio in Unitatis Redintigratio.
____________________

 Lo Spirito di Cristo infatti non ricusa di servirsi di esse come di strumenti di salvezza, la cui forza deriva dalla stessa pienezza della grazia e della verità, che è stata affidata alla Chiesa cattolica.-UR 3
Lo Spirito di Cristo non frenarsi usare qualcuno conosciuto nel protestanti o Chiesa ortodossa che era salvato senza la fede cattolica? Ci può essere ad esempio una persona fisicamente visto e conosciuto?
No. Tuttavia i Padri conciliari di principio assumendo casi invisibili non erano invisibili nel tempo e nello spazio.
Allo stesso modo Nostra Aetate 2 deduce persone sconosciute sono noti eccezioni alla tradizionale teologia di salvezza e ecclesiologia.Ad Gentes 11 assume ci sono noti casi di non cattolici salvati senza 'fede e il battesimo', ma con "semi del Verbo".
Così il Credo di Nicea è stato modificato. E sempre riferito al battesimo di acqua come il battesimo noto,battesimo conosciuto visibilmente  (' Credo in un solo battesimo per il perdono dei peccati '). Ora abbiamo conosciuto casi di essere salvati con i "semi del Verbo ','la comunione imperfetta, con la Chiesa '(UR 3),' le cose buone e sante in altre religioni" (NA 2) ecc.Allora  il concetto di un solo battesimo nel Credo di Nicea non e più tradizionale.

Nel Credo Niceno,la maggior parte dei cattolici pregano 'Credo in una, santa, cattolica e apostolica Chiesa' e dire, in cui ci sono molte forme di 'battesimi noti' che escludono il battesimo di acqua nela Chiesa.Questa e una nuova dottrina .

Così, mescolando ciò che è invisibile come visibile diventa una interpretazione non tradizionale del Concilio Vaticano II nel 2016.Il Credo di Nicea e il dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus non più è come era per il 16 ° secolo missionarie.Per Papa Benedetto XVI, che ha protetto la Nuova Teologia, questo è solo 'uno sviluppo'.

Quindi, con la Nuova Teologia tutti questi documenti della Chiesa sono state interpretate come una rottura con Tradizione.E stato fatto con un semplice colpo.
Ora, con un colpo semplice possiamo annullare la Nuova Teologia e tornare al vecchio ecclesiologia. È semplice. Interpretare tutti questi Documenti della Chiesa senza la premessa irrazionale e conclusione.

Il Concilio Vaticano II, per esempio sarà in armonia con extra ecclesiam null salus secondo i missionari 16 ° secolo. Non sarebbe una rottura con il Sillabo di Errori di Papa Pio IX.
Quando siamo tornati al vecchio ecclesiologia c'è solo un ecumenismo di ritorno.
L'insegnamento sul Regno Sociale di Cristo Re su tutta la legislazione politica si basa sul vecchio ecclesiologia.E una priorità. Significa in questo modo siamo in grado di salvare la maggior parte di anime sulla terra. Quindi il Credo di Nicea sarebbe fare riferimento solo a un battesimo nota e conosciuto visibilmente, il battesimo di acqua.
-Lionel Andrades

DECEMBER 13, 2016



Too many mistakes in Vatican Council II

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/12/too-many-mistakes-in-vatican-council-ii.html

Theologically Ann Barnhardt rejects the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus

There Is No Salvation Outside The Catholic Church (Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus) -by Ann Barnhardt


I have been meaning to write this up for months, as it is a regular question that lands in the ol’ inbox. 
Lionel:
Theologically she rejects the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) so people could be reminding her about it.
______________________
 
It is on people’s minds, both inside and outside the Church, especially with the imbecilic, contra-educated words and deeds coming out of the Bishop of Rome in these dark, dark days. It is time to explain this clearly and forthrightly, because it is actually one of the truths that was most persuasive and attractive in my conversion process. Why? Because the explanation is logical, coherent, and satisfyingly beautiful.
This statement is TRUE:
There is no salvation outside of the Catholic Church.
Lionel: Yes.
However she assumes that the Feeneyite position is wrong and that Cardinal Cushing was correct i.e the baptism of desire etc is an exception. She accepts the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 like the traditionalists.
_______________________
 False Premise
The reason why almost everyone in post-Christian western culture today blanches at this is because we have been taught to deny that there is, in fact, any such thing as “truth”. ONE TRUTH. We have been savagely propagandized and manipulated to accept that 2+2 equals 4, AND 7, and 8,349,085 – if that is what someone else wants. Because there is “my truth” and “your truth” and “we each have our own truth”, and “life is a journey of discovering our own truth”. The infiltrators have not only torn down the entire notion of truth via soft, cultural means, but also through the hardest of the hard sciences – MATHEMATICS. Were you taught logic at any point within the context of mathematics? Do you know what a “truth table” is? If you are under the age of 45, almost certainly not. Logic is the use and study of valid reasoning, that is, truth and falsity.
Lionel: She uses a false premise to reach a non traditional conclusion and so contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was known to the 16th century missionaries.Pope Benedict XVI has said in public that EENS is no more like it was for the 16th century missionaries.
She extends this false premise and faulty logic to her interpretation of Vatican Council II which is different from mine.
_______________________
 download False Premises book

  Thus, it was totally scrubbed from math curricula in the western world by the infiltrators by necessity, because logic is the hammer that instantly smashes the vast majority of the staggering, staggering bullshit that we are all, as we speak, drowning in. The reason why even functionally intelligent people today simply cannot parse current events and get their heads around what should be extremely simple-to-grasp dynamics is because people have been conditioned to view as normal – if not virtuous – the simultaneous holding of utterly contradictory positions.
Lionel: Precisely.With the new theology which she uses, unknowingly, she says every one needs to defacto enter the Church for salvation in 2016 but some people do not.There are those who are saved in invincible ignorance or with  the baptism of desire.
Every one needs to enter but some do not!!?
__________________________
 
So, there is exactly, precisely ONE TRUTH, and thus, there must be by mathematical definition, be exactly, precisely ONE CHURCH. There CANNOT be multiple “churches”, which, by definition, hold contradictory positions (hence their distinctiveness one from another), because two contradictory things CANNOT BOTH BE TRUE.
Lionel: Every one needs to defacto enter the Church in 2016 but some do not.The baptism of desire is an exception. This was also Cardinal Cushing and the Jesuits view in 1949 and then again in 1960-65.
_________________________
 
  And we know that there is a CHURCH, because Our Lord Himself in the Gospels made repeated mention of it, not the least of which was this hard-to-get-around statement:
“Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I WILL BUILD MY CHURCH.”
So we know, just from that, that Our Lord does have, in fact, a Church, and that He has ONE Church, because he used the singular form of the noun. This doesn’t even take into consideration the Holy Spirit’s extensive discussion of the Church as the Body and Bride of Christ through the pen of St. Paul in his epistles. Look, when God Almighty, Incarnate, says, “I WILL BUILD MY CHURCH”, all debates about whether or not there even is a Church ends. If a person is so far gone that they can’t grind their way through that gearbox, then there’s nothing I or anyone else can do.
Now let’s discuss what the Church is. The Church consists of THREE PARTS:
1. The Church Militant – this is the Church on Earth, this is what we the living see.
2. The Church Suffering – this is Purgatory, where the souls of the saved go to be purged of all attachment to sin so that they might enter into the presence of God – the Beatific Vision.
3. The Church Triumphant – this is the Beatific Vision, The Most Holy Trinity, the angels and saints dwelling inside, pondering, adoring and worshipping God from the inside.
Some day, both the Church Militant and the Church Suffering will cease to exist. The earth, the physical universe, will someday cease to exist, and there will be no additional human beings made. The reason God has not yet brought about what we call “The end of the world” is because there are not yet enough human beings. God wants more people for heaven. Including the babies conceived by the poor, in violent or disordered circumstances, and by women who have already had multiple c-sections. GOD, not Pope Francis, determines how many humans there should be, and God is very, very clear on this question. He. Wants. More. People. To. Love.
Since the domain of the Church Militant is the physical universe, when there is no longer a physical universe or living human beings, there will be no Church Militant. Some day, the last saved soul will be fully purged of all attachment to sin and will enter heaven, and on that day the Church Suffering will cease to exist.
The Church Triumphant, however, will always exist, because the domain of the Church Triumphant is the Triune Godhead Himself, Who Is Existence Itself. Ever pray the Gloria Patri? Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost. As it was in the beginning, is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
So let’s get our LOGIC jam on now, shall we? The Church, of which there is only one, is the Body and Bride of Christ, and all of the saved either are now or eventually will be in the Church Triumphant, which indwells, now and forever, inside the Triune Godhead.
Now grind through this, and fight the contra-education you have received as a child of the post-Christian, post-Modern west. How, EXACTLY, could a person be “saved” and be OUTSIDE of the Church?
Let’s attack this from the angle of the Judgment. What happens to every person when they die? They are judged by Jesus Christ.
Stop.
Do you believe this? No, seriously. Do you believe that EVERY SINGLE HUMAN BEING, regardless of race, religious confession, time, place, or any other variable, is judged by Jesus Christ? If you do not believe this, then I really don’t see how you can possibly claim to be a Christian. Now, if you don’t like hearing this, you can go listen to Pope Francis spew some irrational, illogical, Modernist, faux-ecumenical garbage, but understand that his priority is very different from mine. I am interested in the eternal fate of your soul. Pope Francis, it seems, just wants to be popular. Let’s go through a list:
What happens to Christians when they die?
They are judged by Jesus Christ, and will either attain the Beatific Vision in the Church Triumphant, or be damned to hell.
What happens to Jews when they die?
They are judged by Jesus Christ, and will either attain the Beatific Vision in the Church Triumphant, or be damned to hell.
What happens to Hindus when they die?
They are judged by Jesus Christ, and will either attain the Beatific Vision in the Church Triumphant, or be damned to hell.
What happens to atheists when they die?
They are judged by Jesus Christ, and will either attain the Beatific Vision in the Church Triumphant, or be damned to hell.
What happens to musloids when they die?
They are judged by Jesus Christ, and will either attain the Beatific Vision in the Church Triumphant, or be damned to hell.
What happens to animists when they die?
They are judged by Jesus Christ, and will either attain the Beatific Vision in the Church Triumphant, or be damned to hell.
Noticing a pattern? Mmmmmm?
I have an anecdote. If you recall, a few years ago I attempted to take a course on Aristotelian and Thomistic Ethics through the Archdiocese of Denver. That’s the one that the Novus Ordo Kathys asked the instructor (who was great) to throw me out of, because I didn’t respect “their truth” or whatever. Well, besides myself and the Kathys, there was one man in the class – a guy in his 60s who did nothing but sleep and talk on his cell phone. I don’t think he ever actually heard a single word the instructor said. Behavior like that REALLY chaps me. Anyway, at the last session I attended there was a discussion at the end of the class, and this guy woke up and said the following, at which I was CLIMBING THE WALLS:
“I’m a catechism teacher for the teens over at St. Xxxx’s and have been for years. The kids ask about reincarnation for the Hindus, and I tell them, “SURE, THAT’S POSSIBLE. IF THAT IS WHAT THOSE PEOPLE BELIEVE, WHY NOT? WHO’S TO SAY THAT THERE ISN’T REINCARNATION? WE DON’T KNOW.”
So, lesson one here is: DO NOT SEND YOUR KIDS TO ANY SORT OF CATECHISM CLASSES IN A NOVUS ORDO PARISH.
Lionel: At all the Novus Ordo and TLM parishes they say every one needs to enter the Church but some do not.
It is there in the Catechism of the Catholic Church N.1257 when it is interpreted with the new theology.
With the new theology it means every one needs the baptism of water for salvation and some do not since God is not limited to the Sacraments, and  there could be non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire etc.
Without the new theology CCC 1257 would be saying every one needs the baptism of water in the Catholic Church and there are no known exceptions. There are no known cases of the baptism of desire etc. We do not know of any case in which God chose not to be limited to the Sacraments.
____________________________
 
  I’m sorry, but it is just that simple. They will let ANYONE who volunteers teach, and most of these people, whether we like it or not and whether it is malicious or not, are full-blown heretics if not outright apostates. Ah, the New Pentecost (TM). Not QUITE as awesome as the original.
The second lesson is, as we discussed above, people today are so far gone that they can recite the Creed at Mass every Sunday, to wit the parts about “He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead” and “we look for the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come”, and then stand in front of a CATHOLIC CATECHISM CLASS and tell a bunch of kids that, sure, if Hindus believe in reincarnation, who’s to say they aren’t reincarnated? AND THEN BRAG ABOUT IT IN A CATHOLIC ADULT ED CLASS. There is zero sensation of cognitive dissonance or even tension in holding two utterly, completely contradictory positions. 2+2 equals 4. But also 762, and aren’t I just one of the cool kids because I don’t actually believe in the concept of “truth”, because I’m tolerant, and frankly, a little self-loathing, too. The mind simply reels.
Let’s focus in on the so-called Christian denominations now. Do we honestly believe that there are multiple “heavens”? Do we honestly believe that there is a Presbyterian heaven, and a Methodist heaven, and a Baptist heaven? Do we honestly believe that there is a heaven where sodomy, for example, is NOT a sin, where all of the people who believe that sodomy is great will get to go? Is there a heaven where contraception is not a sin – because ALL of the protesting sects today deny the sinfulness of contraception? Again, let’s get our logic groove rolling again. How can the Triune Godhead hold contradictory positions as both being true? Either sodomy is a sin or it isn’t. Either the Eucharist is the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ physically, substantially present, or it isn’t. Either the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is the eternal liturgy of heaven, or it isn’t. A house divided cannot stand. If God holds contradictory positions as both “true”, then there is no truth, and thus there is no God. THIS is the inevitable logical consequence of the Protestant revolt – atheism.
Now this is the part that was so compelling for me in my conversion process. What of people who cannot, through no fault of their own, either know about or enter the Church? Can these people be saved? The answer is: yes. It is possible.
Lionel:
Yes it is possible only because with God all things are possible.
So with God it is also possible that these very people would be saved with the baptism of water in a manner known only to God.
It is possible that all baptism of desire cases in future could be followed by the baptism of water given by an angel or by the person being sent back to earth to hear a preacher or receive the baptism of water.Since with God all things are possible
__________________________
 
  Let’s take all of the people, for example, who lived their lives on the North American continent in the 1450 years between the establishment of the Church by Christ in the Upper Room in ARSH 33, and the landing of Columbus in North America in ARSH 1492. 
Lionel:They were all on the way to Hell according to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus( Cantate Dominio, Council of Florence 1441).
They could avoid going to Hell, because of Original Sin and mortal sins committed in that state of sin, by converting into the Catholic Church and living the teachings of the Church.
__________________________
 
How could a man born on the Great Plains in the 5th century, living his entire life 1000 years before any Christian steps foot on the same continent, making it a physical impossibility that he could have known of Christ, much less His Church, much less received baptism in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, be saved? How could such a man, and billions of others like him over the centuries, possibly be not only saved, but saved IN THE CHURCH, outside of which there is no salvation according to the axiom? The answer is: The Natural Law.
Lionel:The dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was known for centuries does not state that mankind, informed or uninformed, will be judged according to the Natural Law.This is like Pope Francis saying that one only needs to follow ones conscience and there is no objective reality out there.
_________________________
 
  Christ judged the 5th century Plains Indian according to the Natural Law, which is indelibly inscribed on the heart of every human being by God. Is it more difficult for those outside The Church? Of course. That is why the Church is a Gift from God, and the most obvious manifestation of His love for us, even above and beyond nature and the stars. The 5th century Plains Indian could not go to the sacrament of confession and hear the words:
God, the Father of mercies, through the death and resurrection of His Son has reconciled the world to Himself and sent the Holy Spirit among us for the forgiveness of sins; through the ministry of the Church may God give you pardon and peace, and I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.
But we CAN go to confession and we CAN hear those words, and our sins, venial and mortal, can be forgiven AT ANY TIME. The Catholic Church is a Gift from God.
And so that 5th century Plains Indian, if he lived his life in accord with the Natural Law, coupled with genuine invincible ignorance (due to physical location), made it through his Particular Judgment before Our Lord, is now far, far, far more Catholic than any of us.
Lionel:Even if there was such a case it would be hypothetical for us. So it would not be relevant to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
In general the American Indians were oriented to Hell with Original Sin.
______________________________
  He knows the Mass better than the greatest liturgist alive today, because he is right there at the Altar, worshiping God in the perpetual sacrifice and immolation of the Lamb. He isn’t in some separate animist-pagan heaven for red skinned Injuns (HAD to throw that in). He is in the one and only heaven that there is, which is indwelling in the only God there is, which is His Mystical Body and Bride, Church Triumphant, which is most certainly CATHOLIC, because what the word “catholic” means is “universal” or, perhaps more accurately, “on the whole”.
And so it follows from this that Our Good God has not created one single human being “damned”. 
Lionel:
He has not created any one damned.He died for every one.However to receive this salvation every one needs to enter the Church as  a member (Council of Florence 1441), every one needs faith and baptism for salvation( Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II), the Church knows of no means to eternal beatutude other than the baptism of water( CCC 1257) and even though universal salvation is available in potential for all, all need to enter the Church, all need to respond for salvation(Dominus Iesus 20).
_________________________________
 
Every one of us – and scientists today speculate that there have been roughly 110 billion human beings ever – and every person who ever will be, has been knit together, atom by atom, cell by cell, personally by God who provided and provides a means and path and grace sufficient for every one of us to make it to heaven. Including the eighth consecutive child delivered by c-section. Many, many did not and will not make it, but that is our own fault.
Now, isn’t that satisfying? Doesn’t it make sense? Doesn’t it just drip with integrity and logical coherence? AND LOVE?
The big obstacle for post-Christian culture is to shake the pathological need to deny that there is, in fact, ONE TRUTH, and thus ONE CHURCH, and thus ONE TRUE RELIGION, as the world, ruled as it is by satan and his minions, calls us “intolerant”, “rigid”, “fundamentalist”, “haters”, “Nazis” and “Taliban”.
I BELIEVE that the Catholic Church is the ONE, TRUE CHURCH of Christ, instituted by Him in the Upper Room, and is now and always will be His Body and His Bride. There is only ONE Church. There is only ONE True Religion. There is only one heaven, and there is only one God, who is the One and Only Judge of every human being.
Which is why I will scream from the rooftops without the least hesitation or shame:
EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS!
OUTSIDE OF THE CHURCH THERE IS NO SALVATION!
Because I actually believe it.
______________________
 
-Lionel Andrades

http://www.barnhardt.biz/2015/02/06/there-is-no-salvation-outside-the-catholic-church-extra-ecclesiam-nulla-salus/