The Church teaches through Vatican Council II (Ad Gentes 7) and the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus that all Muslims unless they convert into the Church are oriented to Hell.

Jim:

The heart of your deviation from Catholic teaching is your insistence that there are not and cannot be specific instances of non-Catholics being saved who are not formal and explicit members of the Catholic Church.

Lionel: Wrong. I repeat again that there can be people saved in invincible ignorance and with the baptism of desire and we accept this only in principle since we do not know specific cases. It is only known to God.

You yourself admit we do not know of specific cases.

So I repeat again that there can persons saved implicitly and you do not know a single case so please do not posit it against the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus or Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II. The Church has not retracted extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Jim:

On this principle

Lionel: I accept that there can be people saved implicitly, why don’t you finally accept it?

Jim:

you cannot explain

Lionel: I accept all the martyrs of the Catholic Church. I accept all those recognised as saints. This does not conflict with the dogma that everyone with no exception needs to enter the Church for salvation.

Similarly there can be persons saved in invincible ignorance etc and who are known only to God and this does not conflict with the dogma that everyone needs to be a formal member of the Church for salvation.

Jim:

the actual teaching and practice of the Catholic Church which

1) venerates as Saints the just patriarchs and prophets of the Old Testament (Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses. etc.) who had no explicit knowledge of the Incarnate Christ and the demands of His Church;

Lionel: They were all waiting in Abraham’s Bosom and after the Resurrection they could go to Heaven.

Jim:

2) venerates as Saints various Saints of the Russian Orthodox Church such as St. Sergius of Radonez (+1392), St. Nilus of Sorra (+1508), St. Dimitri of Rostov (+1709, etc,, who lived very holy lives, had no or little contact with the Catholic Church, and were certainly not visible members of the Catholic Church.

Lionel: If the Church officially venerates them fine. If they were not visible members of the Catholic Church and they are in Heaven fine. God decides.

The members of the Russian Orthodox Church need to enter the Catholic Church for salvation. The dogma specifically mentions ‘schismatics’ as needing to enter the Church for salvation.

Jim:

3) acknowledges as “martyrs” not only St. Charles Lwanga and 12 Catholic Companions In Uganda (1886) who were killed out of hatred for refusing to commit homosexual acts, but also some specific Anglicans who similarly refused to betray Christian morals.

Lionel: If the Catholic Church recognises someone as a martyr or a saint then we accept it. We believe they are in Heaven.

However in general Christians need to enter the Catholic Church for salvation and if someone is not recognised as a saint or martyr in the Church we cannot presume he or she is saved.

Jim:

You remain disingenuous in putting your own peculiar spin on Catholic doctrine in reducing the salvation of non-Catholics to a mere abstract “concept” or “principle” whereas the Church states unequivocally that there ARE in Heaven baptized souls who were not visible members of the Catholic Church

Lionel:

Jim, quite a few times I have mentioned that in principle we accept that a non Catholic can be saved ‘in certain circumstances’’ with the baptism of desire or invincible ignorance etc(Letter of the Holy Office 1949).

We can only accept it in principle since de facto (in reality) we do not know any specific case.

When the Church declares someone a martyr or saint then we accept this specific case.

Jim:

as well as the just who may never have heard of Christ and His Church but corresponded with a righteous conscience to the graces for salvation they received from Christ’s merciful love.

Lionel:

True they can be saved. Again please do not assume that you know any case of a person with a righteous conscience who is saved. We do not know any specific case.

So do not use the false assumption here to reject the dogma.

Jim:

The pagans who received justification and salvation certainly never had baptism by water.

Lionel:

Those who had justification and salvation without the baptism of water would be known only to God. Please do not assume to know a single case and then imply every body does not have to enter the Church as the dogma and Vatican Council II says.

Jim:

Then, whereas the Church refuses to state who is in Hell (even Judas)

Lionel:

Do not imply that the Church states that Judas is in Heaven. I have mentioned this before quite a few times, if the Church does not say that someone is in Hell neither does it say that someone is in Heaven.

If you accept the dogma Cantate Domino, Council of Florence then you know that the Church does indicate that there are millions of people in Hell.

Jim:

you in your rigorism (smacking of Jansenism) place Mohammed there, expressing some secret knowledge the Church does not claim.

Lionel: The Church teaches through Vatican Council II (Ad Gentes 7) and the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus that all Muslims unless they convert into the Church are oriented to Hell. Dominus Iesus 20 says the Church is needed for salvation. The Catechism of the Catholic Church 846 repeats the teachings of the Church Fathers and says everyone needs to enter the Church as through a door for salvation.

So this is not a personal teaching. It is the official teaching of the Catholic Magisterium before and after Vatican Council II.

Jim:

In your tortuous explanation of Nulla Salus Extra Ecclesiam, you perpetuate the confusion caused by Fr. Feeney’s own misunderstanding of the Church’s doctrine which led to the Church’s censure of his distortion.

Lionel:

The Letter of the Holy Office supported Fr. Leonard Feeney when it referred to the dogma. It is that dogma which you find difficult to accept like the Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Richard Cushing. It was the Archbishop who misused his office.

It is also convenient for American Catholics to say that Fr. Leonard Feeney was in heresy. It is convenient, otherwise they would have to say that the Church teaches the rigorist interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus. And if it is said in public, that Catholic could be considered anti Semitic. So it could be in your self interest to hold this political position.

In Christ

Lionel

APOLOGETICS

1.POST VATICAN COUNCIL II MAGISTERIUM TEXTS SUPPORT THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS

Here is Dominus Iesus.

This doctrine must not be set against the universal salvific will of God (cf. 1 Tim 2:4); “it is necessary to keep these two truths together, namely, the real possibility of salvation in Christ for all mankind and the necessity of the Church for this salvation”.-Dominus Iesus 20

So does Vatican Council II

Therefore, all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church's preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door.-Ad Gentes 7,Vatican Council II

Here is the 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.

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

2. LUMEN GENTIUM 16 OBJECTION

If there is an objection with reference to Lumen Gentium 16 it is a straw man. LG 16 does not say that we know any case of invincible ignorance in the present times.

Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience.-Lumen Gentium 16, Vatican Council II.

So Lumen Gentium 16 does not contradict extra ecclesiam nulla salus or Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II.

Apply the Three Common Sense Points.

1. There is no way that we can know of a particular person saved in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire because of its very nature. It is known only to God.

2. There is no text in Vatican Council II or the Catechism which claims we know of any such case. (Lumen Gentium 16 mentions the possibility of such people being saved, which we accept conceptually. De facto we do not know if there is even one single case in the present times, or the last 100 years)

3. So Vatican Council II and the Catechism do not contradict the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.-The Three Common Sense Points

3.FR. LEONARD FEENEY SUPPORTED BY HOLY OFFICE (1949)

If there is an objection that Fr. Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for affirming extra ecclesiam nulla salus, this is a falsehood. The 'dogma' referred to in the Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston 1949 indicates that all Jews in Boston need to convert into the Church to avoid Hell.

Now, among those things which the Church has always preached and will never cease to preach is contained also that infallible statement by which we are taught that there is no salvation outside the Church.

However, this dogma must be understood in that sense in which the Church herself understands it. For, it was not to private judgments that Our Savior gave for explanation those things that are contained in the deposit of faith, but to the teaching authority of the Church…-Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston (Emphasis added).

Here is the dogma again.

“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.)

So the Letter of the Holy Office supported Fr.Leonard Feeney on doctrine.The dogma (above) indicates all Jews in Boston need to convert into the Church to avoid Hell. This was exactly what Fr.Leonard Feeney taught.

WHY DO PRIESTS OFFERING THE TRIDENTINE RITE MASS HAVE TO ACCEPT THE NOVUS ORDO MASS ECCLESIOLOGY?

No where in Vatican Council II is it said that we know of specific cases of the baptism of desire or invincible ignorance. So its false to assume that Vatican Council II contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, which Venerable Pope Pius XII, called ‘infallible’.

The priests who have been given permission to offer the Latin Rite Mass according to the moto proprio Sunmmorum Pontificum are not affirming the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla slaus.Those who offered this ancient rite, the great Sacrificial Mass, in the past took the teaching extra ecclesiam nulla salus for granted.One cannot think of the Roman Catholic priest in the, past offering the Tridentine Rite Mass without reference to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.Priests need to appeal to Ecclesia Dei and the Congregation for the Doctrine for the Faith. Appeal for the right to affirm and preach extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Since

1) There is no text in Vatican Council II which states that we know of specific cases if implicit salvation in the present times.The secular media and many Catholics claim we do know of such cases in the present times and so it contradicts the dogma.

2) The Church has not retracted extra ecclesiam nulla salus through any Magisterial document. So it still is a Magisterial teaching.

3) The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston supported Fr. Leonard Feeney on doctrine.

It’s priests who offer the Novos Ordo Mass who will say 'everyone needs to enter the Church except for those in invincible ignorance or who have the baptism of desire’ Father! We don’t know of any such case. Neither do you know of any specific case of someone in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire.

So then they conclude that ‘the Church teaches’ that a non Catholic could be saved. Since, he could be in that exceptional category. So everyone does not need to enter the Church as states the dogma and Vatican Council II (Ad Gentes 7). Then they go one step further and assume  may be even no one needs to enter the Church.

Cardinal Walter Kaspar came to this conclusion about Vatican Council II and the Jews. He wrote in a front page article in the L'Osservatore Romano, which was approved by the Pope and Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, that Jews do not have to convert in the present times. He offers the Novos Ordo Mass.

So why do priests offering the Tridentine Rite Mass have to accept all this irrationality which contradicts the Bible and the Vatican Council II (Ad Gentes 7).

APOLOGETICS

1.POST VATICAN COUNCIL II MAGISTERIUM TEXTS SUPPORT THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS

This doctrine must not be set against the universal salvific will of God (cf. 1 Tim 2:4); “it is necessary to keep these two truths together, namely, the real possibility of salvation in Christ for all mankind and the necessity of the Church for this salvation”.-Dominus Iesus 20

So does Vatican Council II

Therefore, all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church's preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door.-Ad Gentes 7,Vatican Council II

Here is the 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.

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

2. LUMEN GENTIUM 16 OBJECTION

If there is an objection with reference to Lumen Gentium 16 it is a straw man. LG 16 does not say that we know any case of invincible ignorance in the present times.

Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience.-Lumen Gentium 16, Vatican Council II.

So Lumen Gentium 16 does not contradict extra ecclesiam nulla salus or Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II.

Apply the Three Common Sense Points.

1. There is no way that we can know of a particular person saved in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire because of its very nature. It is known only to God.

2. There is no text in Vatican Council II or the Catechism which claims we know of any such case. (Lumen Gentium 16 mentions the possibility of such people being saved, which we accept conceptually. De facto we do not know if there is even one single case in the present times, or the last 100 years)

3. So Vatican Council II and the Catechism do not contradict the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.-The Three Common Sense Points

3.FR. LEONARD FEENEY SUPPORTED BY HOLY OFFICE (1949)

If there is an objection that Fr. Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for affirming extra ecclesiam nulla salus, this is a falsehood. The 'dogma' referred to in the Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston 1949 indicates that all Jews in Boston need to convert into the Church to avoid Hell.

Now, among those things which the Church has always preached and will never cease to preach is contained also that infallible statement by which we are taught that there is no salvation outside the Church.

However, this dogma must be understood in that sense in which the Church herself understands it. For, it was not to private judgments that Our Savior gave for explanation those things that are contained in the deposit of faith, but to the teaching authority of the Church…-Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston (Emphasis added).

Here is the dogma again.

“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.)

So the Letter of the Holy Office supported Fr.Leonard Feeney on doctrine.The dogma(above) indicates all Jews in Boston need to convert into the Church to avoid Hell. This was exactly what Fr.Leonard Feeney taught.
So how can Novos Ordo priests claim  Vatican Council II contradicts the ex cathedra dogma when they cannot provide any specific text?
There is no Magisterial text to support the ecclesiology being used by Novos Ordo priests. Instead the Magisterium  texts support the rigorist interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

THE DOGMA SAYS EVERYONE WITH NO EXCEPTION NEEDS TO ENTER THE CHURCH

Jim says:

You admit that non-Catholics can be saved, even those who have never heard of Christ and His Church.

Lionel: Yes this is a possibility. Something we accept in principle only. It’s a concept.

De facto we do not know any case. In reality you admit that you do not know any particular case.

So do not mix the two be precise in your language please.

Jim says:

On the other hand, you insist that a non-Catholic must be a formal and explicit member of the Catholic Church to be saved.

Lionel: Again does not mix the two be precise in your language please.

De facto we do not know a single case of someone saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance in the present times. So it is irrational to claim it.

Secondly the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus says that every one with no exception needs to be a formal member of the Church for salvation. Invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are not mentioned. Obviously since they are known only to God.

Jim says:

How is it possible for someone who has never heard of Christ and His Church to KNOW he must be a formal and explicit member of the Church to be saved?????

Lionel: If someone who has not heard of Christ and His Church is saved it could be because God has sent someone to provide the helps he needs. This was what St.Thomas Aquinas taught.

Jim:

This makes no sense. It is simply false and a distortion of Nulla Salvus Extra Ecclesiam to insist, as you do, that “Everyone WITH NO EXCEPTION in the present times needs to formally enter the Church to be saved”.

Lionel:

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.

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 (Emphasis added)

The dogma says everyone with no exception needs to enter the Church.

Jim:

That is not what the Catholic Church teaches.

Lionel:

Please read the text of the dogma for yourself.

This has been the teaching for centuries until a change was made in the 1950’s when the Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Richard Cushing claimed that we can know cases of invincible ignorance etc in the present times and so this contradicted the dogma and Fr. Leonard Feeney.

Jim:

It does teach that some relation or being joined to the Church by grace may result in the salvation of souls who are not aware of the teaching of Christ on formal membership.

Lionel:

So we do not have a problem with this. If someone is saved in this exceptional way, fine. It does not contradict the dogma or Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II that every one needs Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation.

Jim:

It is not necessary to know what specific persons are in that category;

Lionel:

True. And we can never know.

Jim:

it is the truth that they CAN BE SAVED which is essential for the Church

Lionel:

True in principle we agree.

Jim:

to teach its faithful without denying that the salvation of non-Catholics is due to fullness of grace found in the Catholic Church to which they invisibly adhere.

Lionel:

True they are saved by Jesus and the Church. They are saved implicitly and are known only to God. They are saved ‘in certain circumstances’ (Letter of the Holy Office 1949). So please do not use this teaching to assume that every one on earth in the present times needs Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation (to avoid Hell).(Ad Gentes 7, Cantate Domino, Dominus Iesus 20 etc).Since they are implicit cases we do not know who they are.

Jim:

Moreover, how can you KNOW that a non-Catholic who has never heard of Christ is condemned to Hell? How can you KNOW that he will die in mortal sin?

Lionel:

If there is a non Catholic who has never heard of Christ who is saved then he is saved! If he is saved he will not go to Hell.

VATICAN-SSPX TALKS COLLAPSE: NONE OF THE TWO PARTIES WILLING TO ACCEPT VATICAN COUNCIL II

According to the Society of St. Pius X Jews, Muslims and other non Catholics need to convert into the Church to avoid Hell. According to the Vatican representatives they do not.

Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II supports the SSPX position but they will not cite the text. Ad Gentes 7 refutes the Vatican group’s position and they will ignore it.

Both came to the table without any text from Vatican Council II on this issue.

We need a third group, traditionalist-conservative Catholics who accept Vatican Council II according to Sacred Tradition. For years the Left has made Vatican Council II there political slogan. Now it is backfiring. It’s found that Vatican Council II is in accord with Sacred Tradition.

Here is Vatican Council II and an ex cathedra dogma that the Vatican group would have difficulty with.

Therefore, all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church's preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door.-Ad Gentes 7,Vatican Council II

 

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.

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

Here we see the confusion the SSPX have with doctrine.MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 27, 2010
ARCHBISHOP MARCEL LEFEBVRE CALLED "TO PREACH" THE RIGORIST INTERPRETATION OF "EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS"
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2010/09/archbishop-marcel-lefebvre-called-to.html#links


SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2010
ARCHBISHOP MARCEL LEFEBVRE HAD AFFIRMED THE RIGORIST INTERPRETATION OF THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2010/09/archbishop-marcel-lefebvre-had-affirmed.html#links

_______________________________________________

54 ANSWERS FROM BISHOP FELLAY
Doctrinal Discussions: Part 1


1. Your Excellency, you have decided to attempt doctrinal discussions with Rome. Could you remind us of the purpose?

You have to distinguish between Rome’s purpose and ours. Rome indicated that there were doctrinal problems with the Society [of St. Pius X] and that these problems would have to be cleared up before any canonical recognition, problems which obviously would be up to us to resolve, concerning our acceptance of the [Second Vatican] Council. But for us it is about something else: we hope to tell Rome what the Church has always taught and thereby to show the contradictions between this centuries-old teaching and what has been done in the Church since the Council. As we look at it, this is the only goal that we are pursuing.

2. What sort of talks are these: negotiations, discussions, or doctrinal explanation?

You can’t call them negotiations. That’s not what they’re about at all. There is on the one hand an explanation of doctrine, and on the other hand a discussion, because we have in fact a Roman interlocutor with whom we are discussing the documents and how to understand them. But you can’t call them negotiations, nor a search for a compromise, for it is a question of Faith.

3. Could you recall the method that is used in the work? What topics have already been addressed?

The working method is the written method; texts are composed which then become the basis for further theological discussion. Several topics have been addressed already. But for the moment I will leave that question up in the air. I can simply tell you that we are coming to the conclusion, because we have made the tour of the major questions raised by the Council.

4. Can you describe the Roman panelists?

They are experts, in other words, theology professors who are also consulting members of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. One can say that they are “professionals” in theology. One is Swiss, the Rector of the Angelicum, Fr. Morerod, O.P., another is a Jesuit who is somewhat older, Fr. Becker; another is a member of Opus Dei, the Vicar General, Msgr. Ocariz Braña; then Archbishop Ladaria Ferrer, Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and finally the moderator, Msgr. Guido Pozzo, Secretary of the Ecclesia Dei Commission.

5. Has there been a development in the thinking of our dialogue partners since they read the presentations by the SSPX theologians?

I don’t think that you can say that.
(Excerpt from the SSPX website)

NEW MOTO PROPRIO TO BE ANNOUNCED: NOVUS ORDO MASS ECCLESIOLOGY STILL COMPULSORY

According to the Vatican Press Office a new moto proprio is to be announced which would not restrict ‘the liturgical renewal desired by the Second Vatican Council’.

It needs to be mentioned that the  moto proprio Summorum Pontificum specified rules for offering Mass according to the Missal promulgated by John XXIII in 1962 ( the Tridentine Mass), and for administering most of the sacraments in the form they had before the Second Vatican Council. It allowed lbishops to establish places where Mass could be said using the 1962 Missal. It granted greater freedom to use the Tridentine liturgy in its 1962 form, stating that all priests may freely offer the Sacrificial Mass with the 1962 Missal privately, without having to ask for permission from anyone. It also permitted parish priests and rectors to willingly accept requests from groups who adhere to this liturgical tradition.

 Pope Benedict explained that he was providing the rituals that nourished the faithful for centuries. He hoped it would be an interior reconciliation in the heart of the Church, with Traditionalist Catholics  such as the members of the Society of St. Pius X.

However Pope Benedict XVI still expects all Catholics to attend the Tridentine Rite Mass using the Novos Ordo Mass ecclesiology which has no basis in Vatican Council II and is opposed to the Magisterial documents of Pope John Paul II. So the new moto proprio will continue the error, even demanding  priests to deny an ex cathedra dogma which was accepted by all priests in the past using the Tridentine Rite.

For instance there is no textual basis in Vatican Council II which would deny or change the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Yet priests are not allowed to affirm it citing Vatican Council II.

The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston clearly refers to ‘the dogma’, the ‘infallible’ teaching. The dogma indicates all Jews in Boston need to convert into the Catholic Church for salvation. This was exactly the teaching of Fr. Leonard Feeney. So the Letter of the Holy Office supported Fr.Leonard Feeney on doctrine. He was not excommunicated for heresy but for disobedience.

Yet priests offering the Great Sacrifice in the Tridentine Rite are told not to affirm the dogma in its rigorist interpretation since Fr.Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for doing so.

So the priests are allowed to offer Holy Mass according to Summorum Pontificum and now the new moto proprio if they are in mortal sin i.e. if they deny an ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus which is supported by Vatican Council II ( Ad Gentes 7) and Dominus Iesus 20.

The priests offering the Novus Ordo Mass in the vernacular languages any way do not accept extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

They claim that it is contradicted by Lumen Gentium 16 which says that a person in invincible ignorance can be saved even if he is not a formal member of the Church and so this contradicts the dogma.

The priests offering the Tridentine Rite Mass would agree that a person can be saved in invincible ignorance and it would be known only to God. Even the communities of Fr. Leonard Feeney agree in principle (de jure) that there can be the possibility that a person in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire can be saved. This is not an issue or problem for them.

However no where in Vatican Council II is it said that we know of specific cases in the present times of people saved in invincible ignorance. This is the false assumption made by Novos Ordo priests who any way are ‘celebrating’ a sacrilegious Mass i.e. to be in public manifest mortal sin and offering Mass without Confession or removing the scandal.

So the new moto proprio will continue to allow priests to offer Holy Mass if they remain in public mortal sin. This is a liturgical issue.

________________________________________

(Photos from the Latin Mass Society of England and Wales)

FRANCISCAN FRIARS AND SISTERS OF THE IMMACULATE TEACHING FALSE DOCTRINE

Fr.Ignacio, Rector, Church of the Annunziata,Rome  you cannot change church teachings just so that the Vatican and the Vicariate Rome will allow your community to keep  privileges granted to them

The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 referred to the dogma and the dogma indicates all Jews in Boston need to convert into the Church to avoid Hell. This was exactly what Fr. Leonard Feeney taught. So the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 supported Fr. Feeney on doctrine.

There is a controversial book in Italian being distributed in now what has become a controversial Church, The Church of the Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary (Chiesa di Santa Maria Annunziata in Borgo,Lungotevere,Roma).

They offer the Tridentine Rite Mass here daily and the priest cannot affirm the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, nor Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II, nor Dominus Iesus 20.They all indicate like Fr. Leonard Feeney and the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 that everyone needs to enter the Church for salvation. The Church is necessary with no exception.

It's important to note that Fr. Leonard Feeney was not excommunicated for heresy. He was excommunicated for disobedience. Over time we realize that he was disobedient to the heretical Archbishop Richard Cushing of Boston who taught that there could be people saved in invincible ignorance etc. He postulated this could be known to us in the present times, in specific cases and so it contradicted Fr. Leonard Feeney and the traditional interpretation of the dogma. Really ? How can we know of cases of people saved in invincible ignorance etc in the present times? Who among us knows of a single case of the baptism of desire? Yet this is said in the book being sold (with an offering of five euros) or distributed free at the Church of the Anunziata.

Through this book the founder of this community and all the priests and religious sisters are saying:-

1. Yes, there are people saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire in the present times and they are not known only to God but are also known to us in specific cases.

2.  Yes, the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 does refer to ‘the dogma’ the infallible teaching’ and the dogma, indicates all Jews, and other non Catholics, in Boston need to convert into he Church, with no exception, to avoid Hell, but they Franciscans of the Immaculate do not accept this.

Why? Since they want to maintain the lie like everyone else and avoid tension with the Jews and others. They also do not want to be suspended by the Vatican and the Vicariate, Rome who have closed down their magazine Christ to the World (English Edition) since it carried a report ‘Church not Retracted outside the Church No Salvation’.

Their weekly magazine Il Settimanale di Padre Pio had an article critical of Fr. Hans Kung. The community does not realize that it was Fr. Hans Kung who wrote that Vatican Council II (Lumen Gentium 16) indicates that a person can be saved in invincible ignorance etc, so this contradicted the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, implying, that one knew specific cases in the present times.

At the last Conference  organised recently by the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate in Rome on Vatican Council II one of the speakers Prof. Roberto Mattei said that Vatican Council II was often mentioned with no text cited from Vatican Council II.This is the error of the book being sold by the Franciscans. There is no text in Vatican Council II which indicates that we know of cases of invincible ignorance etc in the present times.

At the Conference it was said that Vatican Council II needed to be interpreted with a ‘hermeneutic of continuity’ and not a hermeneutic of  rupture.

For centuries the Church taught that everyone with no exception needed to enter the Church of salvation.This was a hermeneutic of continuity.

The hermeneutic of rupture expressed in the book says that those saved in invincible ignorance etc are known to us in the present times and so they do not have to convert into the church for salvation.

So through the book the Franciscan community is teaching people under the guise of good doctrine that

1. There is text in Vatican Council II which contradicts the dogma extra ecclesia nulla sales.

2. They interpret Vatican Council II with a hermeneutic of rupture.

All this is being taught out of ignorance or because they want to protest their interests?

WHAT DOES THE CATHOLIC CHURCH TEACH ABOUT ISLAM: VATICAN COUNCIL II INDICATES THE PROPHET AND MUSLIMS ARE LOST

The Church teaches in Magisterial documents that Islam has ‘good and holy ‘things but the religion is not a path to salvation. Muslims need to convert to avoid Hell.

According to Vatican Council II the Prophet was not saved. This is same the message of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, Dominus Iesus and other Church documents based on the Bible, Tradition and the Magisterium. So according to the official teaching of the Catholic Church the prophet was oriented to Inferno at the time of death.

According to Vatican Council II, Ad Gentes 7 all people need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation I have mentioned in an earlier post on this blog. This includes the Prophet.

Therefore, all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church's preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door.-AG 7

Ad Gentes 7 and Lumen Gentium 14 also state that those who know about the Church and its necessity for salvation and yet do not enter are on the way to Hell. The Quran shows that the prophet knew about Jesus and the Church.

Therefore those men cannot be saved, who though aware that God, through Jesus Christ founded the Church as something necessary, still do not wish to enter into it, or to persevere in it."-Ad Gentes 7

Therefore those men cannot be saved, who though aware that God, through Jesus Christ founded the Church as something necessary, still do not wish to enter into it, or to persevere in it."-Lumen Gentium 14, Vatican Council II.

The ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus says the same.

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.

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

The same message is repeated in Dominus Iesus.

This doctrine must not be set against the universal salvific will of God (cf. 1 Tim 2:4); “it is necessary to keep these two truths together, namely, the real possibility of salvation in Christ for all mankind and the necessity of the Church for this salvation”.-Dominus Iesus 20

If there is an objection with reference to Lumen Gentium 16 it is a straw man. LG 16 does not say that we know any case of invincible ignorance in the present times.

Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience.-Lumen Gentium 16, Vatican Council II.

So Lumen Gentium 16 does not contradict extra ecclesiam nulla salus or Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II.

If there is an objection that Fr. Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for affirming extra ecclesiam nulla salus, this is a falsehood. The dogma referred to in the Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston 1949 indicates that all Jews in Boston need to convert into the Church to avoid Hell.

Now, among those things which the Church has always preached and will never cease to preach is contained also that infallible statement by which we are taught that there is no salvation outside the Church.

However, this dogma must be understood in that sense in which the Church herself understands it. For, it was not to private judgments that Our Savior gave for explanation those things that are contained in the deposit of faith, but to the teaching authority of the Church…-Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston (Emphasis added)

So the Letter of the Holy Office supported Fr.Leonard Feeney on doctrine.The dogma(above) indicates all Jews in Boston need to convert into the Church to avoid Hell. This was exactly what Fr.Leonard Feeney taught.

It indicates also that all Muslims are on the path to Hell. According to the official teaching of the Catholic Church the prophet was oriented to Hell at the time of death. It is said that the Church does not say that any one is in Hell, not even Judas. However the Church does teach that there are some sins that orient a person to Hell at the time of death. It is a grave sin for a non Catholic to have had the Gospel preached to him, to know about Jesus and the Church and yet to reject the Holy Spirit guiding him in his heart. The Church also teaches that all of us know what is right and wrong deep within our heart Conscience can be good or bad. We need to follow our good conscience. Someone who follows his good conscience would be led to Jesus and the Church.’

This is not just a personal view but the official teaching of the Church before and after Vatican Council II.

The Church is saying that salvation is open to all Muslims and other non Catholics but if they do not respond they have chosen damnation. If there is anyone among them in invincible ignorance etc it will be known only to God.

A Muslim can be saved if he gives his life for Jesus and the Church (baptism of blood) . Similarly a Catholic who dies a martyr, goes straight to Heaven.

Some theologians say that the Church does not claim anyone is in Hell. They hold this illusion since they do not know or believe in the ex cathedra dogma Cantate Domino, Council of Florence(above). It says Hell has fire. It indicates millions of non-Catholics are there.

Others say that the Church does not say that Judas is in Hell. We know that the Church also does not say that Judas is in Heaven.

What about the ‘theology of religions’? The Church has rejected it in the Notification issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican (2001) to Fr. Jacques Dupuis S.j. It indicates that ‘there is no theology’ which can say that Islam is a path to salvation.

We accept the possibility of non Catholics in invincible ignorance etc, being saved (Lumen Gentium 16) and they are known to God only. However the Lumen Gentium 16 text does not say that we know of specific cases in the present times and so this contradicts the dogma.

So there is no text from Vatican Council II for supporting a heresy. It is heresy to reject or change an ex cathedra dogma even after being informed.

The hermeneutic of continuity, is that for centuries popes, Councils and saints taught that everyone with no exception needs to enter the Church formally to avoid Hell.

The hermeneutic of rupture was when the Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Richard Cushing, said that there could be people in invincible ignorance etc who are known to us in the present times and so this contradicted the dogma and Fr. Leonard Feeney. This is irrational. We can never know any such case. The Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Richard Cushing held the heretical belief that there were non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire in the present times and they were known to us. So for him this contradicted Fr. Leonard Feeney and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

The hermeneutic of rupture was when Fr. Hans Kung said that Lumen Gentium 16 indicates that people in invincible ignorance etc can be specifically known to us in the present times and so this contradicts extra ecclesiam nulla salus (and Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council 2).

We do not know who is joined to the Church in partial communion or invisible bonds. We do not know who has perfect contrition or a conscience Jesus will judge as good on the day of Judgement. No specific case can be known.

We know for sure that some sins lead to Hell. Some sins orient a person to Hell.

The Bible tells us that some sins will prevent people from seeing the Kingdom of God. There are also mortal sins of Faith.

'Being oriented to Hell' does not mean 'condemned to Hell'. Correct. Neither does it mean not being condemned.

If you think someone is an exception to the rule then again I would ask you how would you know? How would you know specific cases?

If you believe the exception makes the rule (as says Fr. Charles Curran etc) then this is not the teaching of the Church.

Every non-Catholic who achieves salvation it is said is nevertheless saved because of the graces radiating from the Catholic Church as the “sacrament of universal salvation”. True and this does not conflict with the teaching that everyone with no exception in the present times needs to formally enter the Church to be saved.

Liberal theologians affirm that the necessity of the Catholic Church for salvation is absolute. Correct. However they need to mention that it is necessary to be a formal member. Many liberal theologians leave this issue vague.

Liberal theologians say this union is not confined to the status of actual and explicit visible membership in the Catholic Church. It’s here where they go off the track since they assume that we know  cases in the present times who are saved with invincible ignorance etc and so every one does not have to be a formal member of the Church to be saved.

We cannot name a specific individual person as being in Hell, not with our human abilities. However the Church does tell us that there are some sins whixh  orient a person to Hell. If one dies with mortal sin and without absolution in the Confessional, your on the way to Hell. The Catechism indicates all it takes is just one mortal sin for a soul to go to Hell. One mortal sin without Confession. To reject an ex cathedra dogma is a mortal sin according to the Church. Your on the way to Hell.Pope John Paul II  excommunicated Fr.Tissa Balasuriya, OMI, the Sri Lankan priest, for rejecting the dogma of the Immaculate Conception of Our Lady. 

If you die without the Sacraments I would assume that you were oriented to Hell, gone to Hell and are there still. If there was an exceptional reason for not being damned it would be known to God only.

Muslims are lost unless they accept Jesus’ great Sacrifice and respond.

We love all Muslims in Jesus, who also, in charity asks to tell them about the condition of their soul. In John 3:5 we are reminded of the necessity of the baptism of water for salvation, in John 6 we are told about the importance of the Eucharist for salvation. In Mark 16:16 we know that those who do not believe will be condemned.

In October this year there will be an inter faith meeting at Assisi,Italy the birth place of St.Francis of Assisi who believed it was necessary for all Muslims and the Sultan to convert for salvation. He taught the rigorist interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus and believed that all Muslims like other non Catholics were damned unless they enter the Church. This was the will of God. God wants all people to be united in the Catholic Church (Catechism of the Catholic Church CCC 845), the Church is like the Ark of Noah that saves in the Flood (CCC 845), all people need to enter the Church as entering through a door (CCC 846).

'There is the possibility of a non Catholic being saved. We accept this in principle(as a concept). We do not know any such case since it is known only to God.'

Jim says

 

See Lumen Gentium, #15, #16 where obviously many non-Catholics are referred to as joined or related to the Church and thus in a position to be saved.

 

Lionel: We do not know any specific case in the present times.

Jim : If you would like a specific individual non-Catholic to be named, remember that it is similarly impossible to name a living Catholic who is assured of the Beatific Vision (heaven).

Lionel: We cannot name a specific individual person as being in Hell, you and I cannot, not with our human abilities. However the Church does tell us that there are some sins that orient a person to Hell. If one dies with mortal sin and without absolution in the Confessional your on the way to Hell. The Catechism indicates all it takes is just one mortal sin. You are still rejecting an ex cathedra dogma according to the Church your on the way to Hell.

If you die without the Sacraments I would assume that you were oriented to Hell, gone to Hell and are there still. If there was an exceptional reason for you being saved it would be known to God only.

 

Jim : However, the truth that non-Catholics can be SAVED certainly proves the truth that it is not NECESSARY TO BE A VISIBLE MEMBER OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

Lionel: Please be specific and precise.

There is the possibility of a non Catholic being saved. We accept this in principle(as a concept). We do not know any such case since it is known only to God.

De facto everyone with no exception needs to enter the Church for salvation.

 

Jim :

to arrive at salvation. As a number of pre-Vatican II theologians wrote (with their teaching CONFIRMED by Vatican II’s “Dogmatic Constitution on the Church” Lumen Gentium),

(1) The necessity of the Catholic Church for salvation is absolute;

Lionel: Correct. However they need to mention that it is necessary to be a formal member.

Many liberal theologians leave this issue vague.

 

Jim:

(2) Some union with the Church is absolutely necessary for the salvation of each individual;

Lionel : They leave this vague too implying those who are saved implicitly are in some union with the Church.

Jim:

(3) This union is not confined to the status of actual and explicit visible membership in the Catholic Church;

Lionel: It’s here where they go off the track since they assume that we know of cases in the present times who are saved with invincible ignorance etc and so every one does not have to be a formal member of the Church to be saved.

 

Jim :

(4) Every non-Catholic who achieves salvation nevertheless is saved because of the graces radiating from the Catholic Church as the “sacrament of universal salvation”.

Lionel: True, and this does not conflict with the teaching that everyone with no exception in the present times needs to formally enter the Church to be saved .

 

Lionel: The Church tells us that there are some sins which are mortal sins and that a person who is in this condition in public is not to receive the Eucharist(Canon 915). So we know there are some grave sins and the Church repeats this teaching of the Bible.

'Being oriented to Hell' does not mean 'condemned to Hell'. Correct. Neither does it mean not being condemned. But here again, you presumptuously jump the gun and appear to know more than the Church in excluding specific persons (ex. Mohammed) from salvation.

 

Lionel

 

“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

Also see Dominus Iesus 20 .

In Christ

Lionel