Then would you say that Fr. Leonard Feeney was correct and the Holy Office 1949 was wrong in the Letter of the Holy Office (LOHO), since LOHO assumed BOD, BOB and I.I were exceptions to Feeneyite EENS and criticized Fr. Leonard Feeney and the St.Benedict Center in the text of the Letter?

 E-mail correspondence

 Lionel:

...we agree here though this is not the real issue.

Since we agree that we cannot identify any exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) and there are no visible cases of the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I),outside or within the Church, are you saying that in general, all non Catholics on earth in 2019 are oriented to Hell without 'faith and baptism'(AG 7) and they need to accept Jesus in the Catholic Church for salvation?

Since for me there are no exceptions to Ad Gentes 7 which says all need faith and baptism for salvation, Vatican Council II is saying that ll need to formally enter the Catholic Church with faith and baptism to avoid Hell ( for salvation). Would it be the same for you ?

Similarly since LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2, GS 2 etc in Vatican Council II refer to only hypothetical cases, we cannot identify such cases on earth; they are not real people in the present times, there is nothing in Vatican Council II to contradict the Feeneyite interpretation of EENS ?

Then would you say that Fr. Leonard Feeney was correct and the Holy Office 1949 was wrong in the Letter of the Holy Office (LOHO), since LOHO assumed BOD, BOB and I.I were exceptions to Feeneyite EENS and criticized Fr. Leonard Feeney and the St.Benedict Center in the text of the Letter?

-Lionel Andrades

This error was also overlooked by good apologists like Fr. William Most, Mons. Joseph Clifford Fenton, Fr. John Hardon and others.

 E-mail correspondence

Thank you for your comments. I think we both agree with the teaching that "outside the Church there is no salvation." I think we also agree that those that there can only be hypothetical cases of those not in visible communion with the  Catholic Church being saved. I think I take a more benign view of the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office than you do. I only see it as laying out the conditions for the hypothetical cases of people being saved who are not in actual, visible communion the Catholic Church. Some people, though, might belong or be directed (ordinantur; LG, 16) to the Catholic Church  by desire and longing rather than actual, visible communion. Only God knows who these people since the interior state of souls is not visible to us. 

I hope these comments explain my position more clearly. Perhaps we don't diagree as much as you think.

 Lionel:

Thank you for responding.

The issue is the Letter of the Holy Office (LOHO ) and Vatican Council II.

LOHO projected the baptism of desire(BOD),invincible ignorance(I.I) etc  as being exceptions to Feeneyite EENS. In other words it implied that there were known non Catholics saved outside the Church. So the dogma EENS ( Feeneyite) was made obsolete.

The Letter states :

Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that  he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member...-Letter of the Holy Office 1949

This is heresy.The dogma EENS according to the three Church Councils says it is  always required that one be incorporated into the Church as a member for salvation.

From the Catechism of Pope Pius X

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."

The Church in Particular

9 Q. State distinctly what is necessary to be a member of the Church?

A. To be a member of the Church it is necessary to be baptised, to believe and 

profess the teaching of Jesus Christ, to participate in the same Sacraments, and

 to acknowledge the Pope and the other lawful pastors of the Church.

24 Q. To be saved, is it enough to be any sort of member of the Catholic Church?

A. No, to be saved it is not enough to be any sort of member of the Catholic 

Church; it is necessary to be a living member.

27 Q. Can one be saved outside the Catholic, Apostolic and Roman Church?

A. No, no one can be saved outside the Catholic, Apostolic Roman Church, 

just as no one could be saved from the flood outside the Ark of Noah, 

which was a figure of the Church.

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/09/the-letter-1949-can-be-accepted-in-its.html

So LOHO assumed hypothetical cases were objective examples of salvation outside the Church and then concluded they were exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.

This wrong reasoning, an error, which I call Cushingite, was repeated in Vatican Council II. Hypothetical cases were assumed to be objective exceptions to EENS as it was known over the centuries.So AG 7 says all need to enter the Church and also mentions exceptions, LG 14 says the Church is necessary for salvation but also mentions exceptions. UR 3 is mentioned perhaps since some of the Church Fathers thought it was an exception to an ecumenism of return.

So if the hypothetical cases are marked in red and the orthodox passages which suppport EENS are marked in blue then for most people in the Catholic Church the red passages contradict the blue ones.This comes from the reasoning in LOHO.

For me the red does not contradict the blue. So there is another interpretation of Vatican Council II. This is rational and traditional and it is different.

So now we have two interpretation of Vatican Council II, one rational and the other irrational.

The LOHO error ( red is an exception to the blue) was a major error in the Catholic Church.

You and ..., the USCCB, CDF , SSPX and sedevacantists, interpret Vatican Council II irrationally. If you choose to interpret the Council like me then you would also be affirming Feeneyite EENS, the past exclusivist ecclesiology and an ecumenism of return. You would no more be contradicting the Syllabus of Errors and the Athanasius Creed. Even the understanding of the Nicene and Apostles Creed is changed for someone who says 'the red is an exception to the blue'.This is first class heresy. But it is also official with the present two popes and the CDF.

You would be affirming other magisterial documents also with the same heretical irrationality, in innocence.

So for me the LOHO was heretical and most Catholics affirm it.The first part of LOHO is orthodox but the second part is heretical and contradicts the first part.It means now you and .... have to teach students that invisible cases of LG 16 etc are visible exceptions to EENS as it was known to the Magisterium in the 16th century.This error was also overlooked by good apologists like Fr. William Most, Mons. Joseph Clifford, Fr. John Hardon and others.

-Lionel Andrades

In Spirit and Truth

It was a long walk and it was hot yesterday  afternoon. I paused by a beautiful community- home of religious sisters.I was n front of the Vatican Museum.These days it is extra-hot in Rome.

The chapel door was open.In  my tired-state it was sa relief and pleasure  to hear the Sisters sing at Vespers in that all-white beautiful chapel.I went in and sat down among them.I joined in their prayers.

The Mother Superior came to me.She said Mass would follow.This was a Franciscan community. A Franciscan priest,came a little late, and then he offered Holy Mass in Italian.

 

I asked myself,what  if these Sisters  proclaimed the Faith in spirit and truth, would they still be able to stay in this beautiful house ?

For these Sisters it is important that their founderess be canonized.They are working for it.But she must have had the Faith, in spirit and truth,  and then probably lost it.This was  when she was told to interpret Vatican Council II with irrational Cushingism.

The same usually happens at Pontifical Universities and seminaries.Students can come with the Faith only to lose it with the false interpretation of the Council.

I received much of my faith from my grandmother and her times.It was about 10 years  before Vatican Council II.I lost the true faith with Vatican Council II Cushingite.Though the faith  remained dormant in me in some way.

Now my personal confusion with extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Vatican Council II has ended.The loose ends have been tied. This is no more a complex and confusing subject, especially when you have discovered that the ecclesiastics and the popes are in objective heresy.

But when religious and lay people understand what I am saying , that is the difference between Cushingism and Feeneyism, for many of them it is scary.

They would like to pray as a community, in peace, in a beautiful chapel.-Lionel Andrades