Prof. Roberto dei Mattei has responded to comments by Don Curzio Nitoglia on the Una Vox website has not denied reports on my blog EucharistandMission.
1. I repeat Roberto dei Mattei interprets Vatican Council II, the Creeds and Catechisms with a false premise. So there is a false rupture with Tradition (EENS, Syllabus of Errors of Pius IX, Athanasius Creed etc). There is an artificial rupture with the past.It is calculated and can be avoided.
2.He does not accept Vatican Council II interpreted without the false premise. The Council interpreted without the false premise would be in harmony with the Catechism of Pope Pius X( 24Q, 27Q).
The false premise is to assume that unknown and physically non visible cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc are known and visible examples of salvation outside the Catholic Church, in 2021( without the baptism of water and Catholic faith).
The false premise is to assume that hypothetical and speculative cases of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance are objective examples of salvation outside the Church and so contradict Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus( the strict interpretation of EENS).
The false premise is to assume that invisible cases of the BOD, BOB and I.I in 1965-2021 were/are objective exceptions to EENS according to the Jesuits St. Robert Bellarmine, St. Ignatius of Loyola and St. Francis Xavier.
Prof. Mattei like the Lefebvrists and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,Vatican affirms the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 which uses the false premise to contradict Feeneyite EENS.
Prof. Mattei is affirming Vatican Council II, like Pope Francis, interpreted with a false premise.This is Vatican Council II which a break with Tradition and not a Vatican Council II in harmony with Tradition. -Lionel Andrades
Posts
