CDF must clarify that Brother Andre Marie MICM is correct

All the popes before Pope Pius XII affirmed the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) with BOD, BOB and I.I not referring to personally known people but only hypothetical cases.They are only possibilities of salvation, hoped for.Possibilities are not real people in 2019.

So the Secretaries of the Congregation for the Doctrine(CDF)must clarify that Brother Andre Marie MICM, is correct. He will not say that the Catechism of the Catholic Church(n.847-848) and Lumen Gentium 16 (invincible ignorance), are exceptions to EENS.The CDF must clarify that the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I) do not refer to personally known non Catholics saved outside the Church in 2019.

 Fr. Leonard Feeney  was correct when he said there are no literal cases of the BOD.There are no literal cases of the BOD, for the CDF Secretaries.

The Holy Office (CDF) made a mistake in the Letter to the Archbishop of Boston(1949). It assumed there have been known exceptions to EENS.It projected BOD and I.I as exceptions to EENS. This was a break with reason.It was a  rupture with Tradition.This was not how the popes over the centuries, reasoned  on EENS.

A possibility of salvation outside the Church only exists in the imagination of the Secretaries of the CDF, it is not a real person.-Lionel Andrades

BOD (the unknown case of someone saved with the Baptism of Desire).

BOB (the unknown case of someone saved with the  Baptism of Blood(Martrydom) and without the baptism of water) .

I.I ( the unknown case of someone saved outside the Church in Invincible Ignorance).

JUNE 14, 2019

All the popes and saints over the centuries, before Pius XII,held the strict interpretation of EENS without assuming BOD,BOB and I.I were exceptions   https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/06/all-popes-and-saints-over-centuries.html

 

All the popes before Pius XII supported the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) with BOD, BOB and I.I not referring to personally known non Catholics. So they were not exceptions to EENS. The popes could affirm EENS and BOD,BOB and I.I it was not either-or. They did not have to choose.Vatican Council II can be interpreted in the same way-in harmony with the popes and saints over the centuries on EENS.

All the popes before Pius XII supported the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) with BOD, BOB and I.I not referring to personally known non Catholics. So they were not exceptions to EENS. The popes could affirm EENS and BOD,BOB and I.I it was not either-or. They did not have to choose.Vatican Council II can be interpreted in the same way-in harmony with the popes and saints over the centuries on EENS.

But the popes from Pius XII to Francis have allowed the Church to interpret Baptism of desire (BOD), Baptism of blood(BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I) as being exceptions  to EENS.This is how they also interpreted Vatican Council II.

So the present two popes have made a mistake and need to correct the error.A simple announcement would end the confusion.

The Secretaries of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF) must clarify that BOD, BOB and I.I do not refer to personally known non Catholics saved outside the Church in 2019 i.e they cannot meet and see someone saved outside the Church. So there are no concrete real people who are actual exceptions to EENS.

A  possibility known to God is not an actual case on earth.If someone is declared a saint, we cannot say that he or she is Heaven , without baptism of water.No one can claim that St. Emerentiana,  recognized as a saint, is in Heaven  without the baptism of water. Nor can someone in the Church say that St. Anselm's friend the Emperor Valentianian is Heaven, without the baptism of water. 

St. Francis Xavier 's experience  was that there were people released from the dead only to be baptized with water.

The CDF Secretaries also need to correct the error of Cardinal Luiz Ladaria at the Plaquet Deo Press Conference. LG 8 is not an exception to EENS.

All the Lutherans and Methodists  whom Pope Francis has met are on the way to Hell.Since the norm for salvation is Catholic faith and the baptism of water(AG 7, LG 14). The Lutherans,     die outside the Catholic Church,without the Sacraments the traditional interpretation of the Bible and the faith and moral teachings of the Catholic Church.

Jews and Muslims do not have faith and baptism at the time of death. So the Church says they they are on Hell. Since the ordinary means of salvation is faith and baptism. An alleged exception is not the normal means of salvation for them.

Pope Pius XII's Mystici Corporis can be interpreted in harmony with the popes over the centuries.It can be interpreted with Feeneyism i.e BOD, BOB and I.I are always hypothetical only and never objective in the present times.
The traditionalists and Lefebvrists interpret Mystici Corporis with Cushingism. BOD, BOB and I.I refer to known people saved outside the Church. So they become objective exceptions to traditional EENS.
Pius XII did not support Fr. Leonard Feeney in public even though Mystici Corporis can be interpreted with rational Feeneyism.
 Cardinal Cushing, the Archbishop of Boston, did not correct the Boston media when it stated that the Church had changed its stance on EENS. At Vatican Council  he projected possibilities of  salvation outside the Church, as being exceptions to EENS.He also did not lift the excommunication of Fr.Leonard Feeney during Vatican Council II.
Pope Francis and the followers of Archbiship Marcel Lefebvre are in a rupture with the popes over the centuries. Theyviolate the Principle of Non Contradiction. How can someone saved BOD; BOB and I.I and now is in Heaven also be seen on earth? How can a person saved outside the Church with BOD, BOB and I.I be in two places at the same time ?
-Lionel Andrades

JUNE 17, 2019

The error was accepted by Archbishop Lefebvre, Cardinal Ottaviani, Michael Davies and the traditionalists of their time,for whom BOD, BOB and I.I were exceptions to EENS. Then they made the same mistake in their interpretation of Vatican Council II. LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc were exceptions to EENS for them. The error can be read on line in one of the Letters to Friends and Benefactors written by Bishop Bernard Fellay.For him UR 3 was an exception to EENS

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/06/the-error-was-accepted-by-archbishop.html

JUNE 15, 2019

If a pope uses an irrational premise and comes to an irrational conclusion it still is an objective error, even if he is the pope

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/06/if-pope-uses-irrational-premise-and.html

The error was accepted by Archbishop Lefebvre, Cardinal Ottaviani, Michael Davies and the traditionalists of their time,for whom BOD, BOB and I.I were exceptions to EENS. Then they made the same mistake in their interpretation of Vatican Council II. LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc were exceptions to EENS for them. The error can be read on line in one of the Letters to Friends and Benefactors written by Bishop Bernard Fellay.For him UR 3 was an exception to EENS

 I do know that for all the popes, saints , Doctors of the Church, Catechisms and Church Councils before Pius XII the baptism of desire referred to only a hypothetical case.It was a precept. It was imaginary.It was hoped for with good will. It was not a personally known person saved outside the Church. This was common sense. They did not have to elaborate on it.

 

 Comments
You are not precise with words.

I did not say there were no literal cases.(Lionel: So are you saying there are literal cases in 2019 or the last 50 years, which you know of ?) The Church says there are literal cases (the liberals in the Church say it and so do the Lefebvrists) with St Emerentiana and the early martyrs (the liberals and Lefbvrists say it. No one on earth could have seen someone in Heaven saved without the baptism of water). You will say they got the water somehow, mysteriously, and I concede that only God could know that.(Agreed every one who is in Heaven is there with Catholic faith and the baptism of water. St. Francis Xavier says that there were un-baptised people who died and God sent them back to earth, to him, only to be baptized with water). But I do not say it happened that way because the Church honors them as catechumens and Trent anathematizes any one who says one cannot be saved by a desire for baptism(No one on earth can say that a particular person has been saved with the baptism of desire.Since by its very nature a baptism of desire case can only be known to God. It is invisible for us. We cannot give someone the baptism of desire.The Council of Trent only refers to 'the desire theorof'. It could only be hypothetical.The liberal theologians and the Lefbrists inferred that it was not hypothetical and then supported the New Theology ,which says outside the Church there is salvation.)

Your err once again as you hold the character is an absolute necessity for salvation,(I do not know what you mean by character. However I do know it is a hypothesis. It is something theoretical in your mind. It is not a practical exception to EENS in the present times.Necessity of means etc according to the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 is a decoy. When there are no known cases of BOD, BOB and I.I how can we decide if there is a necessity of means or precept.) but cannot point to a single teaching from any Pope, saint, Doctor, catechism or council which teaches this novelty.(I do not know what you mean by character. But I do know that for all the popes, saints , Doctors of the Church, Catechisms and Church Councils before Pius XII the baptism of desire referred to only a hypothetical case.It was a precept.

 

 

 It was imaginary.It was hoped for with good will. It was not a personally known person saved outside the Church. This was common sense. They did not have to elaborate on it. ) And you erroneously invoke EENS as your defense, and this reveals your second error which holds that a hypothetical case of salvation by BOD would be an exception to EENS.( I am affirming EENS according to the popes, saints ,Doctors of the Church, Catechisms and Church Councils before Pope Pius XII.This was the dogma defined by three Church Councils. It does not mention any personally known cases of BOD, BOB and I.I. So I am not saying any thing new.) This goes back to your root error that the baptismal character is an absolute necessity for salvation, even though it is not a necessity at all, relative or absolute, for salvation.(I have mentioned before, that if the 'baptismal charachter' is necessary or not necessary, it is still a theoretical construct, in our minds.It is a precept and precepts cannot be living examples of salvation outside the Church. The precept, either way, cannot be a practical and objective exception to EENS for example in 2019. It is not an actual person saved as such. So either way it makes no difference with reference to EENS.) That is why you cannot reconcile in your mind the nearly 2000 years of teaching on BOD.(You agreed with me when I said BOD, BOB and I.I refer to hypothetical cases only.Now you are having doubts? You could not have met someone saved outside the Church with BOD, near where you live? Of course not. Then you are also saying still, I assume, that  all need faith and baptism for salvation(AG 7, LG 14). So we agree. Welcome to the Feeneyite camp.All the popes, saints, Doctors of the Church, Catechisms and Church Councils before Pius XII were Feeneyite-they did not project BOD, BOB and I.I as referring to personally known non Catholics saved outside the Church.They affirmed the dogma EENS and hypothetical only BOD,BOB and I.I. There were no literal exceptions to EENS for them.

So there were no exceptions to EENS for them.This was the mistake during the pontificate of Pope Pius XII. The error was perhaps there earlier. Indications are that the mistake was there are at the time of the Baltimore Catechism. 

 

The error was accepted by Archbishop Lefebvre, Cardinal Ottaviani, Michael Davies and the traditionalists of  their time,for whom BOD, BOB and I.I were exceptions to EENS. Then they made the same mistake in their interpretation of Vatican Council II. LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc are exceptions to EENS for them. 

 

The error can be read on line in one of the Letters to Friends and Benefactors written by Bishop Bernard Fellay.For him UR 3 was an exception to EENS.You do agree that UR 3 refers to a hypothetical case only ?)

Unless you can show us where the Church teaches that the baptismal character is an absolute necessity for salvation (without regard to EENS which is not relevant to that particular question), you will have proven me right once again. (Why do you say without reference to EENS, which was defined by three Church Councils and says that the baptism of water and Catholic faith within the Catholic Church is necessary for all for salvation?

Where does the Church teach that the baptism of water  is necessary for salvation ?

Let us begin with the Catechism of the Catholic Church n.1257. The Necessity of Baptism.

1257 The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation. He also commands his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all nations and to baptize them. Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament. The Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude; this is why she takes care not to neglect the mission she has received from the Lord to see that all who can be baptized are "reborn of water and the Spirit." God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments.

The Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude; this is why she takes care not to neglect the mission she has received from the Lord to see that all who can be baptized are "reborn of water and the Spirit."

The same message is there in the Catechism of Pope Pius X.

The Catechism of Pope St. Pius X, The Sacraments, “Baptism,” Q. 16: “Q. Is Baptism necessary to salvation? A. Baptism is absolutely necessary to salvation, for Our Lord has expressly said: ‘Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God.’”

So the two Catechism are saying de facto, practically, in real life all need the baptism of water for salvation. There are no known exceptions since the baptism of desire etc refer to an invisible case in real life and so cannot be an exception.

If someone is saved without the baptism of water and with the baptism of desire because 'God is not limited to the Sacraments' or because of 'the necessity of means',invincible ignorance or martrydom without the baptism of water- or some other factor,they would only be known to God if they were exceptions. The norm for salvation is the baptism of water. The norm is not the baptism of desire etc.There are also no practical exceptions known of the baptism of desire etc.

So the Catechisms are saying that the baptism of water is necessary for salvation.Vatican Council II also says that all need faith and baptism for salvation(AG 7) and we do not know any one who could be an exception since he could have been saved in invincible ignorance etc.You cannot say that a particular person whom you know today will be saved outside the Church. Neither can you say that someone outside the Church, whom you know, and who has died recently or in the past, is in Heaven without faith and baptism.

The Church tells us that all non Catholics who have died without the baptism of water and Catholic faith are oriented to Hell.(CCC 1257, Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II, Cantate Domino Council of Florence 1441 etc).-Lionel Andrades

BOD(the unknown case of someone saved with the Baptism of Desire).

BOB(the unknown case of someone saved with the  Baptism of Blood(Martrydom) and without the baptism of water) .

I.I( the unknown case of someone saved outside the Church in Invincible Ignorance). 

June 14, 2019

All the popes and saints over the centuries, before Pius XII,held the strict interpretation of EENS without assuming BOD,BOB and I.I were exceptions   https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/06/all-popes-and-saints-over-centuries.html