Wednesday, April 5, 2023
Michael Voris, Bradley Eli and Christine Niles have theologically not made an impact in the Church, they somehow ‘have not connected’, they are ‘not coherent’. They fall back on the liberal theology of Pope Benedict and call it ‘magisterial’. They confuse what is invisible as being visible and then conclude that there is known salvation outside the Catholic Church.
Michael Voris,
Bradley Eli and Christine Niles have theologically not made an impact in the
Church, they somehow ‘have not connected’, they are ‘not coherent’. They fall
back on the liberal theology of Pope Benedict and call it ‘magisterial’. They
confuse what is invisible as being visible and then conclude that there is
known salvation outside the Catholic Church.
They
criticize the SSPX who also follow the liberal progressivist theology of Pope
Benedict and still consider themselves, traditionalists, as if the Latin Mass
makes you conservative.
In this
sense and swirl of theological and liturgical confusion Church Militant TV
(CMTV) floats and does not have an identity of its own.
Dr. Jules
Gomes the other day on Simon Rafe’s Hardline, spoke about preaching Jesus as
an Anglican, and thinks it is the same today, as a Catholic. This is the New
Ecumenism based upon Vatican Council II interpreted, irrationally and not
rationally. This is the same theology of the Cardinal Archbishop of Goa, India
whose liberalism Gomes criticizes.
Michael
Voris, Bradley Eli and Simon Rafe interpret Vatican Council II just like Bishop
Barron and then CMTV criticizes the bishop’s liberal conclusions. Their concept
of Vatican Council II is the same.
Mis-steps,
double standards and confusion mark CMTV’s theology. They do not affirm extra ecclesiam nulla salus like Brother
Peter and Michael Dimond and pray for the dead Jewish member of the US Supreme
Court.
Then they approved
Jim Russell’s, ‘Fr. Feeney’s strange doctrines’. Russell used the false premise of
the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston to reject
exclusive salvation in the Church. He re-interpreted Vatican Council II irrationally and projected the non traditional conclusion as a rupture with Feeneyite EENS. This is New Theology of the Archdiocese of
Detroit. This is liberalism.
Cardinal
Raymond Burke, Archbishop Carlo Vigano, Bishop Athanasius Schneider, John Henry
Weston and Taylor Marshall, among others, like CMTV, reject Catholic Tradition
when they interpret Vatican Council II publically like the SSPX, FSSP. The
common false premise creates the new theology with new doctrines. It creates heresy and schism, irrespective of who uses it.
The popes
from Paul VI to Francis made this mistake. Their interpretation of Vatican Council
II is political left. It is unethical and dishonest.
Church Militant
cannot have it both ways. There are times when they affirm exclusive salvation in
the Catholic Church and at other times they do not. They accept Vatican Council
II interpreted irrationally and so will negate exclusive salvation in the Catholic
Church. The liberals and Masons do the same. - Lionel Andrades
SALVATION AND THE CHURCH
Luke 13:23: 'Lord, are they few that are saved?'
The Catholic Church infallibly teaches the truth that "Outside the Church, there is no salvation." The Church isn't saying here that only Catholics go to Heaven but that all graces needed for salvation originate in Christ and pass through His Mystical Body, the Church.
Lionel: The Catholic Church is saying here that there are only Catholics in Heaven. If there are non Catholics who are going to Heaven, in Heaven they will only be Catholic.
_____________________
Section 846 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church affirms that this dogma does mean "All salvation comes from Christ the head through the Church, which is His body."
Lionel: Yes all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church, which is His Body and all need to enter the Catholic Church with faith and the baptism of water for salvaton ( Ad Gentes 7, Lumen Gentium 14, Catechism of the Catholic Church 845, 846, Fourth Lateran Council (1215) etc).
____________________
Those unable to know this truth have what's called invincible ignorance. A little Jewish girl who dies at the age of 6 might be such a person.
Lionel : Yes there could be someone in invincible ignorance and these cases would only be known to God. For us humans they are theoretical and speculative cases. They are invisible in our reality. So they are not practical exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ( Council of Florence 1442).
_______________________
Of these, Pope Pius IX in his 1863 encyclical, Quanto Conficiamur Moerore, wrote:
It is known to Us and to you that they who labor in invincible ignorance of our most holy religion and who, zealously keeping the natural law and its precepts engraved in the hearts of all by God, and being ready to obey God, live an honest and upright life, can, by the operating power of divine light and grace, attain eternal life, since God ... will by no means suffer anyone to be punished with eternal torment who has not the guilt of deliberate sin.
Lionel: Yes and we cannot project this case of invincible ignorance as an exception for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS). It was known to Pope Pius IX that these are theoretical cases and not objective exceptions for the dogma EENS.That these are hypothetical cases is common sense. It was known through the centuries.
It was only in 1949 in the Letter of the Holy Office (CDF) that a mistake was made. It was assumed that invincible ignorance was a visible case.Bradley Eli makes this mistake. This is the common formation- error in the seminaries and universities all over the world.
___________________________
As cited in Denzinger §1677, Pius IX adds:
But, the Catholic dogma that no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church is well known; and also that those who are obstinate toward the authority and definitions of the same Church, and who persistently separate themselves from the unity of the Church, and from the Roman Pontiff, the successor of Peter, to whom "the guardianship of the vine has been entrusted by the Savior," cannot obtain eternal salvation.
Lionel : The 1949 Letter of the Holy Office was placed in the Denzinger by the liberals. It was put there along with its objective mistake.
_______________________________
Vatican II repeats this admonition in Lumen Gentium §14: "Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved. ... Not only shall they not be saved but they will be the more severely judged."
Lionel : Yes whoever knows and does not enter is oriented to Hell. But it does not mean that we know of any one in particular who will go to Heaven outside the Church, with invincible ignorance. All people in general need Catholic faith and the baptism of water for salvation (AG 7). All. Those who know and know who do not know need to accept Jesus in only the Catholic Church for salvation ( to avoid Hell ).
____________________________
JANUARY 1, 2020
Michael Voris was allowed to study at the Angelicum University, Rome since he interpreted Vatican Council II and extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) irrationallyhttp://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2020_01_01_archive.html
DECEMBER 31, 2019
Liberals, traditionalists and sedevacantists make a mistake. Vatican Council II is a rupture with Tradition for them ( Graphics )
DECEMBER 31, 2019
Michelt, Stancati, Weimann, Ellul, Rossi, Destivelle, Keramidas, Buckles, Bonino, Sullivan, Blankenhorn, Giordano and other professors at the University of St. Thomas Aquinas Rome, the whole group, are interpreting Lumen Gentium 8 etc as being exceptions to 16th century extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS)- when they are not.
Catholic traditionalists in Rome associated with the SSPX need to set up an office for traditional mission, which will share the Catholic Faith in a non proselytizing way. It has to be based upon Vatican Council II interpreted rationally and not irrationally. We share our Faith based upon rational and traditional doctrine and leave conversion to God. There can now even be street mission.
Catholic traditionalists in Rome associated with the
SSPX need to set up an office for traditional mission, which will share the
Catholic Faith in a non proselytizing way. It has to be based upon Vatican
Council II interpreted rationally and not irrationally. We share our Faith
based upon rational and traditional doctrine and leave conversion to God. There
can now even be street mission. Since we are back to affirming exclusive
salvation in the Catholic Church with Vatican Council II not having any
exceptions.
The Jehovah Witnesses (JW) present general articles on
different subjects at the Bible Book Stands on the streets of Rome. Then at
their church they talks on the Bible as interpreted by their founder Russell.
Their Bible is different from the Catholic Bible. They reject the concept of
Hell and their understanding of Jesus is different.
Those who attend these courses are told that there is exclusive
salvation in their sect.
The participants are then encouraged to purches some
standard booklets issued by the Watchtower Bible Society in the USA which is
available in many languages.
They are encouraged to go immediately on the streets
and talks about the Bible information they were given and to encourage others
come to their church. At some point they have a common baptism with water for
the new members of their sect. - Lionel Andrades
APRIL 5, 2023
SSPX Street Mission: take back the streets from the JWS
SSPX Street Mission: take back the streets in Rome from the JWS
I go for the SSPX Mass in Latin even though I do not interpret Vatican Council II like Bishop Bernard Fellay and Fr. Davide Pagliarani. I am not a liberal. I accept the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX and the Catechism of Pope Pius X as do the SSPX priests. But I interpret Vatican Council II rationally unlike the SSPX priests. So I can also accept the Catechism of the Catholic Church. They cannot do so. Since they choose the irrational premise and inference to interpret Vatican Council II. The Catechism of the Catholic Church would then have to contradict Tradition.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church, for me, does not contradict the Syllabus of Errors and the rest of Tradition. There are no practical exceptions mentioned in the Catechism of Pope John Paul II, for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
So I can attend Mass in Latin or Italian and still accept Vatican Council II and all Magisterial Documents which I will interpret only rationally.
Mission will be easier for the SSPX since they already accept Tradition which affirms exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. Now we have only got Vatican Council II, irrational, out of the way.-Lionel Andrades
__________________________________________________
All these books of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre confuse what is invisible as being visible.
All these books
of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre confuse what is invisible as being visible. It is
the same with the books written by Pope Benedict on Vatican Council II,
ecclesiology etc.
The error is based upon the heresy of the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston related to Fr. Leonard Feeney. It says that it is not necessary to be a member of the Catholic Church for salvation.
When Lumen
Gentium 14 ( BOD) and Lumen Gentium 16 ( I.I) are seen as only hypothetical
cases then Vatican Council II no more contradicts 12 the century EENS. There is
a hermeneutic of continuity with the past ecclesiocentrism of the Catholic
Church.
This was not
known to Archbishop Lefebvre, Cardinal Ratzinger, Pope Paul VI and the
cardinals today who have written books on Vatican Council II, like Cardinal
Kasper, Cardinal Semeraro, Archbishop Bruno Forte etc.
The books
used at the pontifical universities on ecclesiology, Vatican Council II etc are
now obsolete. New books have to be written in which Vatican Council II is interpreted
rationally and supporting Tradition.
The book, ‘Is Feeneyism Catholic?’ by Fr. Francois Laisney, an SSPX priest, and published by the Angelus Press of the SSPX, is based upon the confusion in the 1949 LOHO.
The
SSPX needs to pull back that book and also update their website on ‘Feeneyism’.
Also the
entries on ‘Feeneyism’, ‘extra ecclesiam nulla salus’, ‘Vatican Council II’, ‘Fr.
Leonard Feeney’ etc. on Wikipedia need to be updated.
The CDF not
only made a mistake in the 1949 LOHO but also in its communication with Brother
Andre Marie micm. Archbishops Augustine di Noia and Archbishop Giacomo Morandi’s
letters can be read on the website of the Diocese of Manchester in New
Hampshire, USA. They confused CCC 847-848 ( invincible ignorance) as being
exceptions for Feneeyite EENS.I have mentioned this over the last few years and
there is no comment or correction from anyone in the SSPX . - Lionel Andrades
APRIL 4, 2023
There is no comment or denial from the SSPX Albano Lazio headquarters, over the last eight years or more. This is a political issue. Albano is interpreting Vatican Council II irrationally to please the Jewish Left. This has been the policy of Bishop Bernard Fellay
Muller collects straw
Cardinal Gerhard Muller has the
collected writings of Pope Benedict, which he updates, it was reported during
the life time of the last pope. But most of that is straw now. Since Pope Benedict
interpreted Vatican Council II irrationally and not rationally. He made a
mistake. His work is obsolete. It is there are as a reference but it has a
limitation. It is something like Vatican Council II. There are good things in
it inspired by the Holy Spirit , but 'the exceptions' of the 1949 Letter of the
Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston, was an error made by Rahner,
Ratzinger, Kung, Congar and Murray. They erred. The result is there is so much
of superfluous material in the Council-text. Why had they to interpret LG 8, 14,
16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc with reference to the past exclusive ecclesiology? They
are not objective exceptions for extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS). When the 1949 LOHO mentioned the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance, they were not objective exceptions for Feeneyite EENS, for EENS in the 12th to 16th century, which did not mention any exceptions.- Lionel Andrades
Mary Ann Kreitzer
I had been communicating with Mary Ann Kreitzer for many years, now and then, on and off and she would refer to me as ‘Lionel’. Now that I am interpreting Vatican Council II rationally, unlike her SSPX, and I affirm the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), she refers to me as ‘Mr. Andrades’. She is unable to affirm the Fourth Lateran Council on extra ecclesiam nulla salus and interpret LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc rationally in harmony with 12th century EENS, for some reason.Oh, the fickleness of the trads.-Lionel Andrades
APRIL 4, 2023
Could you ask someone at the SSPX Headquarters to let us know what is their official position on this issue ? The priests here in Rome have conflicting or no views. They are afraid. Since this is a political subject. The SSPX interpretation of Vatican Council II is political. You know it.
Post a Comment On: LES FEMMES - THE TRUTH
Dear Mary Ann Kreitzer,
Praised be Jesus.
When Bishop Schneider was interviewed by Dr. Taylor Marshall he said that there were no literal cases of the baptism of desire. Marshall confirmed it. He said that there were no explicit cases of St. Thomas Aquinas' implicit baptism of desire.
This is reality. We cannot meet any one saved with the baptism of desire.
Could you let us know what do you think ? Is Lumen Gentium 14 ( baptism of desire) referring to only a hypothetical and theoretical case for you? In our 'exchanges' before you did not answer this question.
Then could you ask someone at the SSPX Headquarters to let us know what is their official position on this issue ? The priests here in Rome have conflicting or no views. They are afraid. Since this is a political subject. The SSPX interpretation of Vatican Council II is political. You know it.
The SSPX is following the Vatican and the Left on Vatican Council II.The Council is not a rupture with Tradition.
Is it possible for you to send this comment to someone responsible in the SSPX. Plese ask him simply : Does LG 8,LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II refer to a subjective or objective case, someone invisible or visible in 1965-2023, someone unseen or seen, someone unknown or known.
John Martignoni the apologist says they refer to invisible cases.
Fr. Stefano Visintin osb the former Rector and Dean of Theology at the University of St.Anselm says the same.
Archbishop Thomas Gullickson in a reply to my question, has also answered in the affirmative on his blog.
In Christ
Lionel Andrades
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=8568419039847692717&postID=5695333203705705855&page=1&token=1680601484833
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/04/could-you-ask-someone-at-sspx.html
_______________________________________________________________
JANUARY 28, 2011
MARY ANN KREITZER EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS IS LINKED TO ABORTION AND PAEDOPHILE PRIESTS
I wish Mary Ann Kreizer could affirm the ex cathedra dogma which is directly linked to these two issues , abortion and funding for persons who do not affirm Catholic teachings.
Could she begin by saying publicly that the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (outside the church there is no salvation) means everyone with no exception needs to be a formal member of the Catholic Church for salvation ?
2. If someone objects that Lumen Gentium 14, indicates a person can be saved in invincible ignorance, who is not formally a member of the Church then respond: Lumen Gentium 14 only mentions the possibility of someone being saved in invincible ignorance or a good conscience. We accept this in principle as a concept. De jure.
There is so much disinformation on this subject (extra ecclesiam nulla salus) on Wikipedia. I wish Mary Ann Kreitzer could clarify for them the actual church teaching.
The Roman Catholic Church also teaches that the doctrine does not mean that everyone who is not visibly within the Church is necessarily damned -Wikipedia
Catholic interpretation
The Church's understanding of the significance of the phrase: "Outside the Church there is no salvation" is expressed in its Catechism of the Catholic Church, 846-848, 851 as follows- Wikipedia
Here is that ex cathedra dogma,
1. “There is but one universal Church of the faithful, outside which no one at all is saved.” (Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, 1215). Ex cathedra.The three Councils assumed that if there was anyone in invincible ignorance etc it would be known only to God.
2.“We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” (Pope Boniface VIII, the Bull Unam Sanctam, 1302.).Ex cathedra.
3.“The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.” (Pope Eugene IV, the Bull Cantate Domino, 1441.) Ex cathedra – from the website Catholicism.org
Yet in Mary Ann Kreitzers archdiocese, Cardinal Donald Wuerl was on the USCCB Doctrine Committee which issued a Notification on Fr. Peter Phan. It said everyone needs to enter the Church except for those in invincible ignorance, the baptism of desire etc.
The USCCB’s ‘Except for …’ is a straw man, a decoy, it’s the denial of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
If Catholics can be excused for not believing in an ex cathedra dogma then why should they be expected to affirm Church teachings on abortion, homosexuality, paedophile…?
If Jeffrey Mirus will not affirm the ex cathedra dogma in public, with its ‘rigorist interpretation’ of outside the church there is no salvation, is he not in mortal sin?
Fr.Tissa Balasuriya OMI was excommunicated for denying the dogma of the Immaculate Conception of Our Lady are not Mirus and the pope automatically excommunicated?
If we can make exceptions for Mirus and the pope, can we not do so also for pedophile priests, for abortion....?
Should Catholics end donations to Jeffrey Mirus or to Peter’s pence? - Lionel Andrades
__________________________________________
Mary Ann Kreitzer has a bachelor's degree in English from Trinity College in Washington, D.C., and a master's degree in Public Administration from George Washington University. As a certified instructor of Natural Family Planning, she taught NFP for 15 years at Providence Hospital in Washington, D.C. She is the president of both Les Femmes and The Catholic Media Coalition organizations dedicated to promoting and defending authentic Catholic faith and culture.Mrs. Kreitzer is active in Church and community affairs and promotes full-time motherhood as an essential and irreplaceable vocation. She especially values time spent with her five children, their spouses, and her 18 grandchildren. She writes from the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia on pro-life, pro-family, and Church issues.All columns are copyrighted, but may be published in print or Internet media if the copyright notice, including the author's name and a link to www.fgfBooks.com, is printed along with the column. If possible, please notify the Fitzgerald Griffin Foundation when you have used one of the columns, and send a link if available.
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/01/mary-ann-kreitzer-extra-ecclesiam-nulla.html
Posts
