The baptism of desire was always invisible and it could only be known to God. This is a given, it is a constant in the Church over the centuries. Taylor Marshall confirmed that there are no explicit cases of St. Thomas Aquinas’s implicit baptism of desire. This is common sense.

 

APRIL 5, 2024

If a non Catholic goes or does not go to Heaven in any particular case it can only be known to God, the norm for salvation is faith and baptism (AG 7), the norm is the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS), the Catechism of the Catholic Church says ‘the Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude’. – Catechism of the Catholic Church, The Necessity of Baptism, 1257

If a non Catholic goes or does not go to Heaven in any particular case it can only be known to God, the norm for salvation is faith and baptism (AG 7), the norm is the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS), the Catechism of the Catholic Church says ‘the Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude’. – Catechism of the Catholic Church, The Necessity of Baptism, 1257

We do not know of any non Catholic in 2024 who is an exception for the dogma EENS defined by the Fourth Lateran Council of Pope Honorius III (1215) etc, which did not mention any exception. Since, the baptism of desire was always invisible and it could only be known to God. This is a given, it is a constant in the Church over the centuries.

We do not know of a St.Emerentiana, a Dismas or  an Emperor Valentianan II in 1965-2024 who will be an exception for the Athanasius Creed, which says all need to be Catholic for salvation. If someone is saved in invincible ignorance, again, it would not be known to us on earth. 

We cannot name a particular person who will go to Heaven with the baptism of desire or blood  and without the baptism of water and Catholic Faith.

‘Whosoever will be saved before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic Faith. Which Faith except everyone do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly.-Athanasius Creed

 There are no literal cases of the baptism of desire said Bishop Athanasius Schneider in an interview with Dr. Taylor Marshall. Marshall confirmed that there are no explicit cases of St. Thomas Aquinas’s implicit baptism of desire. This is common sense.

Where is the particular case of a baptism of desire in 2024 for Fr. Robinson? Does he know of someone saved outside the Church in invincible ignorance since 1965? The baptism of desire is not the norm for salvation.

St.Thomas Aquinas held the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS.

The Holy Spirit has taught the Church over the centuries, that outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation. This is a de fide teaching. It is supported by Vatican Council II ( Ad Gentes 7) and the Catechism of the Catholic Church 845,846, the Catechism of Pope Pius X ( 24 Q,27Q) etc.

When I meet a non Catholic I know that the person is oriented to Hell unless he or she is baptised in the Church and has Catholic faith at the time of death and is living the Catholic faith, without mortal sin on his or her soul.

When I see a non Catholic I know he or she is oriented to Hell not because I can judge personally but because the Catholic Church teaches this in the dogma EENS, Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church and other Magisterial Documents, when they are interpreted rationally i.e when these Documents are interpreted without confusing what is invisible as being visible in the present times.-Lionel Andrades

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2024/04/if-non-catholic-goes-or-does-not-go-to.html

APRIL 4, 2024

For Brother Andre Marie micm, prior, at the St. Benedict Cener in New Hampshire, there is nothing in Vatican Council II to contradict CCC 845,846 ( Outside the Church there is no salvation) or Ad Gentes 7, which says all need faith and baptism for salvation.He does not confuse invisible cases as being visible. This is the mistake of Fr. Robinson and the SSPX bishops today.

 

At the time 18:21 on this video Fr. Robinson says that one of the signatories of the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr. Leonard Feeney was Cardinal Ottaviani.

Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani was the secretary of the Holy Office (Congregation for the Doctrine of the faith) from 1959 to 1966. He was made a cardinal by Pope Pius XII, in 1953 during whose pontificate the 1949 LOHO was issued, according to Wikipedia..

Cardinal Ottaviani, like the popes from Pius XII and Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre accepted the 1949 LOHO with no correction. They all assumed that invisible cases of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance were visible exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. This was an objective and public mistake .

The same false reasoning was brought to Vatican Council II by Fr. Karl Rahner sj, Fr.Joseph Ratzinger sj, and other Council Fathers. They projected LG 8, 14, 15, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II as being physically visible examples of salvation outside the Catholic Church and so practical exceptions for the past ecclesiocentrism of the Church, which had become obsolete for them.

The SSPX bishops followed this false reasoning and so for them even today, Vatican Council II is a rupture with the dogma EENS, the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors and the rest of Tradition.

But for the St. Benedict Center in Richmond, New Hampshire, LG 8,14,15,16 etc refer to invisible and hypothetical cases only in 2024. So they are not exceptions for the dogma EENS, the Feeneyite version, the traditional version. The Council has a continuity with Tradition. Similarly the Catechism of the Catholic Church 846 says outside the Church there is no salvation. For Brother Andre Marie micm, prior, at the St. Benedict Cener in New Hampshire, there is nothing in Vatican Council II to contradict CCC 845,846 Outside the Church there is no salvation) or Ad Gentes 7, which says all need faith and baptism for salvation.He does not confuse invisible cases as being visible. This is the mistake of Fr. Robinson and the SSPX bishops today.-Lionel Andrades

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2024/04/for-brother-andre-marie-micm-prior-at.html

APRIL 4, 2024

SSPX's Fr. Robinson is still saying invisible cases of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance are visible exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, which he calls de fide

At the time 17:11 on this video Fr. Robinson cites the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston  which tells us that physically invisible cases of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance are physically visible examples of salvation outside the Catholic Church and so are practical exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus of the Church Councils (1215,1442 etc) , which did not mention any exceptions. This was supposed to be 'the nuanced' new teaching of the Church which contradicted the traditional Feeneyite, dogmatic version, which Fr. Robinson also says is de fide.

Why should Fr. Leonard Feeney and the St. Benedict Centers have said that invisible cases of the baptism of desire and being saved invincible ignorance were visible exceptions for the traditional strict interpretation of EENS, that of the Council of Florence and the Fourth Lateran Council ?

Why should they accept a new doctrine on salvation which is also irrational, heretical, non traditional and dishonest ?

-Lionel Andrades

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2024/04/sspx-fr-robinson-is-still-saying.html

____________________________