So Daniela Saeta, a lay woman, expressed this new theology in her talks as do the other speakers of the lay community Fraternita della Communita Magnificat, I wrote yesterday.
She would have been influenced by this error in Dominus Iesus and Redemptoris Missio which mentions 'the unicity and universal salvicity of Jesus Christ', which could also be there among the Lutherans or Orthodox Christians and excludes being a member of the Catholic Church.
This error, this new theology, is expressed in the catechesis of Catholics all over the world.
This was posted along with her video on Gloria TV.There is no response from any of the catechists. This is typical in the Catholic Church.
This would also be the no-response from traditionalists.They cannot accuse me of not accepting Vatican Council II or being a sedevacantist.They do not know what to do.So they do not respond.
I mentioned in the report on Daniela Saetta that the issue is complicated. Since the traditionalists like the SSPX and the sedevacantists assume that the old ecclesiology has exceptions. This was accepted by Archbishop Lefebvre at Vatican Council II. It is the basis of the new theology which is promoted by the traditionalists, liberals and Italian lay catechists like Saeta.
So when Daniela Saeta presents salvation without accepting Jesus Christ in the Catholic Church she is expressing a magisterial heresy supported by traditionalist and lay Catholics.
How can Daniela Saeta and her community admit to magisterial heresy when they need the support of the Parish Priest, who himself has to support this magisterial heresy to remain in his position. The bishop too has to maintain the magisterial irrationality.He cannot refute the official truth.
Then in another report yesterday I mentioned that an Italian priest on Gloria TV criticizes the false church and false theology in the Catholic Church and says that the Catholic Church is presently in a diabetic coma but he himself will not affirm the traditional teachings with the traditional theology (in harmony with Vatican Council II (Feeneyite)) since he will lose his position in the 'false church'.
He will not say that all need to formally enter the Church for salvation since this would be the old theology and old ecclesiology of the Church. To remain a priest in Sicily he has to affirm the new ecclesiology in a false Church which he criticizes.So officially he supports Vatican Council II (Cushingite).
I posted this report on Gloria TV.
As expected there is no response from Fr.Alessandro M. Minutella.He will not say that Vatican Council II indicates Mohammad and all Muslims are on the way to Hell since they die without 'faith and baptism'(AG 7) in the Catholic Church. Mohammad knew about Jesus and the Church, the Quran shows, and yet he did not enter.According to Vatican Council II he is lost(LG 14).The priest will not affirm or deny this point when asked on Gloria TV.
Unlike Daniela Saeta, Fr.Alessandro Minutella knows that Vatican Council II can be interpreted with LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc referring to invisible or visible cases in 2017.He can interpret them rationally as invisible for us cases.However he will not do so.
The Vatican is now asking the Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate to interpret Vatican Council II as a break with Tradition.In other words they have to assume like the two popes, that hypothetical cases(LG 16 etc) are not hypothetical. In this way it will appear that LG 16 etc,being explicit and objective cases in 2017,contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (Feeneyite).Fr.Alessandro will not highlight this point when asked to,on Gloria TV.
He will speak in general of a false church and a false theology, and he is correct, while he himself uses a false premise in theology just like Pope Francis and Cardinal Braz de Avez. He criticizes the Lefebvrists and the 'integralists' since they will not accept Vatican Council II (Cushingite) like him, in the false church with a new and false theology.He himself will affirm Vatican Council II(Cushingite) which they criticize and then criticize the Lefebvrists.
He does not explain to them that Vatican Council II can be interpreted also without the false premise.Similarly there is no bishop or priest in Italy to explain to Daniela Saeta that there can be an ecclesiology focused only on Jesus as the Saviour without the necessity of the Church and there can be one in which membership in the Church is necessary for salvation.
But who is going to do this? Every one needs to protect their career.
The SSPX has remained silent and has condoned this error in the two popes and the Vatican Curia. The present magisterium is interpreting Vatican Council II with the irrational premise and the SSPX does not object. Neither does Bishop Fellay interpret Vatican Council II without the premise.He has his reasons and interests I suppose.
Now we are left with Bishops Faure, Aquinas and Williamson.They at least do not have to protect ' a career' in the Church.Can they say what is un-sayable for most Catholics?
Bp. Faure, Bishop Thomas Aquinas & Bishop Williamson
February 10, 2017
An Italian priest criticizes the false church and theology but will not affirm the traditional doctrine and theology since he could lose his position in the 'false church'
Daniela Saetta and catechists at Fraternita di Cortona Italy influenced by ecclesiological error in Vatican Council II: separate Jesus from the Catholic Church
There is a wrong inference as a theme in Vatican Council II , and the Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate have to accept it : Catholic media silent