Too bad these is so much confusion on the necessity of the Church for salvation, these days, and the Abbot does not have it in him to speak the truth.

Dom Jean Pateau,Abbot of Our Lady of Fontgombault is a typical Cushingite, probably a Lefebvrist too, since his little report has been posted on Rorate Caeili.

He does not say that the Church is necessary for all for salvation and all need to convert to avoid Hell. He could be looking after his status or whatever.He does not say that all need to convert into the Catholic Church to avoid Hell and that in Heaven there are only Catholics.

The Abbot assumes the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance refer to physically known, visible in the flesh objective non Catholics, may be in France, who are saved outside the Church. So they are not just theoretical cases but physically visible people saved outside the Church. 

He cannot state that the Church is necessary for salvation and all need to be members with faith and the baptism of water.( Ad Gentes7 ).

Centuries back in the monasteries of France the abbot held the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).

This was changed with the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 which assumed unknown cases of the BOD and I.I were known exceptions to Feeneyite EENs. This was approved by the Masons. This is also the reasoning of Dom Jean Pateau.

This mistake was repeated at Vatican Council II. They assumed that there were known non Catholics saved outside the Catholic Church in invincible ignorance. So Lumen Gentium 14 refers  to those who know and do not enter the Church being  oriented to Hell.

Yes to those who know but also to all people in general, including those to whom the Gospel has not been preached through no fault of their own.

All need faith and baptism for salvation says Ad Gentes 7 and not just only those who know, as the Abbot would have it.

He is repeating the Lefebvrist error which is common in France. This is not Catholic traditionalism instead it is heresy and scandal.

Since with visiblle- for- the- abbot BOD, BOB and I.I the Catechisms and Creeds are changed. BOD, BOB and I.I have to be visible for the Abbot, otherwise how could they be exceptions to Feeneyite EENS ? And he is definitely not affirming Feeneyite EENS.

For me BOD, BOB and I.I are not exceptions to EENS so I imply that they are not physically visible.

Similarly there are no visible cases of LG 14 ( baptism of desire) etc for me so there is nothing in Vatican Council II to contradict the strict interpretation of EENS for me. We do not know any one saved outside the Church in invincible ignorance. So there is nothing in LG to contradict AG 7 and the 16th century interpretation of EENs.

For me Vatican Council II is not a rupture with the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church, an ecumenism of return, the Athanasius Creed on EENS, the old ecumenism of the Syllabus of Errors and the proclamation of the Social Reign of Christ the King based upon Ad Gentes 7.Entering the Catholic Church is a priority for salvation for all people -and not just those who know. This is why the Church is important. All those who are not in it are on the way to Hell. The norm is faith and baptism. The norm is not BOD, BOB and I.I.
This is why the priest is so important in the Catholic Church. Through the Sacraments he can help many people not go to Hell.

Any way those who know or do not know will only be known to God with reference to salvation. The ordinary way of salvation  for all is faith and the baptism of water and we do not know any extraordinary means of salvation.

Too bad these is so much confusion on the necessity of the Church for salvation, these days, and the Abbot does not have it in him to speak the truth.-Lionel Andrades