I have received a reply to my email from Prof. Robert Fastiggi, Professor of Systematic theology at the Sacred Heart Major Seminary, in the Archdiocese of Detroit.The email was sent jointly to him and Prof. Ralph Martin, also a professor of theology at Sacred Heart.I sent them a copy of yesterday's blog post 'Ralph Martin and theologians at the Sacred Heart Major Seminary Detroit contradicted by Stefano Visintin osb, new Rector at St. Anselm Rome'.1
They both agree with Fr.Stefano Visintin osb the new Rector of the Pontifical Univesity of St.Anselm, Rome.He has said that invisible cases of the baptism of desire and blood and being saved in invincible ignorance cannot be explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. They too agree with the obvious. They have not denied it.
This is not a private opinion or a private theology of mine.It is something obvious to all rational human beings.
The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 in its second part,wrongly assumed that there were known exceptions to the dogma EENS.This objective error has not been corrected by the popes since Pius XII.
The popes have not asked ,'How can people in Heaven be living exceptions on earth to all needing to members of the Catholic Church for salvation'?
For Ralph Martin, Robert Fastiggi and the Chancery Offices in the Archdiocese of Detroit, invisible cases were visible exceptions to the dogma EENS as it was known over the centuries, for example, in the 16th century.Since, they accepted the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.So this is what they inferred whether they knew it or not.
Pope Benedict XVI also approved the Letter, and supported the New Theology based upon the error in the Letter. In 2012 'Dr. Martin was appointed by Pope Benedict XVI as an "expert" for the World Synod of Bishops on the New Evangelization'.Both use irrational Cushingite theology.Martin has written books unaware of traditionlal Feeneyite theology, without the irrational premise.
I also affirm the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 but only the first part. Since the second part contradicts the first part and the dogma EENS and Tradition( Syllabus of Errors etc).It cannot be the work of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit cannot make a factual mistake, a wrong observation of life, and then suggest that the inspired past magisteriums of the Church were wrong.Human error could do this.
The faculty at Detroit understand the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ( Cantate Domini, Council of Florence 1441), 'in the bad light' of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston.Professors Fastiggi and Martin have not denied that the Letter made an objective mistake when it assumed non existing people were relevant or concrete exceptions to the traditional exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church.They simply accept the Letter with the error since it is magisterial.
They also acknowledge indirectly that the New Theology approved by the magisterium and taught in the Archdiocese of Detroit, to even school children at Catechism and Religion Class,is based upon an irrational premise(invisible people are visible) and conclusion( invisible people allegedly saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church and with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance of the Gospel through no fault of their own,are visible exceptions to the centuries old interpretation of EENS).
Your private judgment that the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office is erroneous is your private judgment. If others (in their private judgments) agree with you that only shows that they agree with you. Such private judgments, however, have no magisterial authority. They remain private judgments
I am basically referring to a philosophical principle and not a new theology.It is the principle which determines the theology.The faculty agree with the philosophical principle that invisible people cannot be visible at the same time. They agree with me that invisible people cannot be visible exceptions to the dogma EENS. So we are all in agreement here.There has been no denial from any one in Detroit on this point not even from Fastiggi, Martin or the Vicar General in the Archdiocese.
So when I choose not to use this strange philosophy I am automatically back to the old theology, the old ecclesiology of the Catholic Church. I do not have to add anything new.I do not have to present a new theology or theory.I simply avoid the irrational premise and I am affirming Tradition.So I am not offering any new or private judgement.
Upon irrational reasoning; an irrational philosophy, a new theology was created which has been accepted by the popes.The error was included in Vatican Council II (LG 14, LG 16 etc).It is a rupture with the magisterium of the Church before 1949. It is a rupture with missionaries of the 16th century who did not use this irrational philosophical principle.It can be corrected now. It is not a permanent error.
A magisterium inspired with the Holy Spirit would be able to correct the error in 2017.
We simply remain aware of hypothetical cases just being hypothetical when reading Vatican Council II. Then there are no exceptions in the Council to the exclusivist ecclesiology of the past.Pre and post Vatican Council II salvation theology is in agreeement with Fr. Leonard Feeney and the St.Benedict Centers.
So like Fr.Stefano Visintin osb, Robert Fastiggi and Ralph Martin agree that the baptism of desire and blood and being saved in invincible ignorance with or without the baptism of water are not exceptions to the dogma EENS in 2017. They are not exceptions to EENS as it was known to the missionaries in the 16th century and the past magisterium of the Church.Lionel Andrades