I have sent Monsignor Antonio Livi these questions in Italian and English and he still cannot answer them. Over the years I have been e-mailing these blog posts to him.
Recently in an interview with Gloria TV has criticized the theology of Pope Benedict as being heretical but has not said that Vatican Council II is not a rupture with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).
Whatever is his opinion on Fr. Leonard Feeney and Pope Pius XII he has to agree that LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc refer to hypothetical cases only. So they cannot be objective exceptions to the dogma EENS. We cannot meet or see any one saved as such outside the Church.So Vatican Council II does not contradict EENS as it was known to the missionaries in the 16th century.
Also the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance are theoretical cases for us, speculation. We cannot meet any one saved as such with or without the baptism of water. They would only be in Heaven.
For there to be an exception to EENS the person must be there on earth.
In a box of apples if there is one orange in the middle then that orange is an exception since it is different from the other fruit but also - because it exists there in that box. If it was not there it would not be an exception.
Similarly there are no known cases of BOD,BOB and I.I in our reality so the Magisterium made a mistake in the Fr.Leonard Feeney case. This gave birth to a new theology, based on this irratiional premise, which was used at Vatican Council II and then supported by Cardinal Ratzinger in the Catechism of the Catholic Church 1994.
QUESTIONS ANSWERED BY MONSGR. ANTONIO LIVI
4. Mons.Livi interprets Vatican Council II as a rupture with EENS since LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc refer to known people, saved outside the Catholic Church, even when there cannot be any such known people, agreed?
5.This is also the official irrational reasoning among liberals to eliminate the Syllabus of Errors on the Old Ecumenism of Return, the Old Theology based on invisible for us BOD, BOB and I.I and the Old Ecclesiology which was exclusivist and ecclesiocentric.This was the theology of Mons. Livi when he was a professor at the St.John Lateran University, Rome.?
6. Mons. Livi doctrinally has rejected the dogma EENS and so also in practise( pastorally) at interfaith meetings, catechesis for adults, Religion classes at school etc, this would be his understanding of Vatican Council II, a rupture with EENS?
7. For Mons.Livi Vatican Council II does not support the Syllabus of Errors on ecumenism, other religions,exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church etc but on Lionel's Blog it does.Why the difference? Both are reading the same Vatican Council II text and the interpretations are different?
8.Mons. Livi does interpret BOD, BOB and I.I (which common sense indicates are hypothetical cases) as referring to visible people, saved outside the Church, in the present times and so in this way is like Fr. Hans Kung s.j, Fr. Karl Rahner s.j , Fr.Jacques Dupuis s.j and Fr. Joseph Ratzinger ? This is assumed since for him there are objective exceptions to traditional extra ecclesiam nulla salus and so the dogma defined by three Church Councils is rejected by Vatican Council II ? There would have to be visible people for them to be exceptions to EENS ? But this is not the interpretation of Lionel ?
9.So on salvation theology it is clear that doctrine has been rejected and changed officially and this is not being denied by the cardinals and yet Mons. Livi does not comment on this ? Since he makes the same mistake? -Lionel Andrades
MAY 3, 2018