Sunday, October 9, 2011

Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus




In case you missed the excitement, a lively discussion took place last week at TTC with respect to Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus ~ Outside of the Church, there is no salvation.


Pope Eugene IV's text from the Council of Florence was the source of some confusion:



"[The sacrosanct Roman Church] firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart “into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels” [Matt. 25:41], unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fastings, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church."

I thought we could use a refresher course Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus, the Baptism of Blood and of Desire (both Doctrines of Holy Church) and on ExCathedra and infallible teaching.

There is much to digest. For today, I wanted to point you to the teaching of infallibility from the Catechism with astute comments from our resident Catechist, along with a valuable lesson on the Baptism of Blood and of Desire from a holy and faithful priest.

Here’s the bottom line: There are dozens of Saints who were initiated into the Catholic Church through the Baptism of Blood and Desire, which puts an end to the thesis of Pope Boniface.

Tomorrow, I’ll post a more in-depth treatise on the teaching of infallibility.

I’ll also talk about the many souls coming to Catholic Churches for the Sacred Liturgy, to Catholic schools, apostolates, lectures – etc., being hijacked by those willfully preserving ignorance. Those who know the Teachings of the Church, have rejected Them and are looking for affirmation in these gatherings, others who alienate the flock from the teachings and Sacrament that cultivates repentance and Grace to turn The Father’s House into a fundraising facility for the Bishop, will find no fig leaf in the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church on their day of judgment.

First, commentary from the holy priest (Please pray for his intentions.):
There are dozens upon dozens of non-baptized saints in holy Church listed in the Roman Martyrology Baptism of Blood and Desire are Dogmatic...so says St. Alphonus. Also, the Council of Trent clearly points to Baptism of Desireare part of our Holy Faith as well.

St. Augustine (and others) lamented the fact that individual catechumens died before receiving Baptism. This is only natural. Lacking the omniscience of God, we are always more certain of a person's salvation when he has received the outward sign of the sacrament.

Yet St. Augustine, continuing the passage quoted above, says: For what is more precious than a death by which a man's sins are forgiven, and his merits increased a hundredfold? For those who have been baptized when they could no longer escape death, and have departed this life with all their sins blotted out, have not equal merit with those who did not defer death, though it was in their power to do so, but preferred to end their life by confessing Christ, rather than by denying Him to secure an opportunity of Baptism (emphasis added).

St. Augustine's view was not uncommon. St. Cyril of Jerusalem wrote "If anyone does not receive Baptism, he shall not be saved, except the martyrs, who even without the water shall receive the kingdom."

Perhaps even more impressive is the statement of St. Cyprian who coined the great axiom, "Outside the church there is no salvation."

It was this same saint who wrote that the catechumens who were caught and killed confessing the Name [of Christ] before they were baptized in the Church... holding the integral Faith and truth of the Church... were not deprived of the sacrament of Baptism, being baptized by the most glorious and excellent Baptism, by which the Lord Himself said he had to be baptized [Lk. 12:50].

That those who are baptized in their own blood and sanctified by their passion were glorified and received the Divine promise, is taught to us by the Lord Himself in the Gospel, when He promised to the thief who believed and confessed [the Faith] that he would be with Him in paradise.

Rigorists may claim, by rather devious logic, that "somehow" these men and women must have obtained Baptism of water in their last moments on earth. If not, then these catechumens went to Hell.

Yet to deny Baptism of blood is to impugn the honor of countless holy men and women who are included in the Roman Martyrology. For example, St. Emerentiana (d.304), was still an unbaptized catechumen when, while praying at the tomb of her foster sister, St. Agnes, she was stoned to death by the pagans.

The most famous early statement in favor of Baptism of desire is found in St. Ambrose's De obitue Valentiniani consolatio (funeral oration for Valentinian). Valentinian II (371-392) was the Roman emperor who had previously supported the Arian heretics. Having abandoned his erroneous beliefs, he invited St. Ambrose to Vienne to baptize him, but was assassinated there by one of his generals before this could be accomplished.  But I hear that you grieve since he [Valentinian] did not receive the sacrament of Baptism. Tell me, what else is in your power but the desire, the petition? But even for a long time he had this desire, that when he came into Italy, he should be baptized, and recently he\ made known that he wanted to be baptized by me, and so he thought I should be summoned for this reason, before other reasons. Surely because he asked, he received, and hence there is the Scripture: "The just man by whatsoever death he may be overtaken, his soul shall be at rest" If [martyrs] are washed in their own blood, his devotednessand intention washed him.


On the teachings of infallibility in the Roman Catholic Church with commentary from Kevin:
 
CCC 891 "The Roman Pontiff, head of the college of bishops, enjoys this 
infallibility in virtue of his office, when, as supreme pastor and teacher of 
all the faithful - who confirms his brethren in the faith he proclaims by a 
definitive act a doctrine pertaining to faith or morals. . . . The infallibility promised to the Church is also present in the body of bishops when, together with Peter's successor, they exercise the supreme Magisterium," above all in an Ecumenical Council. When the Church through its supreme Magisterium proposes a doctrine "for belief as being divinely revealed," and as the teaching of Christ, the definitions "must be adhered to with the obedience of faith." This infallibility extends as far as the deposit of divine Revelation itself.
 
 
-----------------------------------
 
Kevin: Get that? Infallibility extends to the "deposit of divine Revelation 
itself"!
 
----------------------------------- 
CCC 892 Divine assistance is also given to the successors of the apostles, 
teaching in communion with the successor of Peter, and, in a particular way, to the bishop of Rome, pastor of the whole Church, when, without arriving at an infallible definition and without pronouncing in a "definitive manner," they propose in the exercise of the ordinary Magisterium a teaching that leads to better understanding of Revelation in matters of faith and morals. To this ordinary teaching the faithful "are to adhere to it with religious assent" which, though distinct from the assent of faith, is nonetheless an extension of it.
 
----------------------------------- 
Kevin: What is this saying? Even when a pope proposes for us (the faithful) 
"without arriving at an infallible definition and without pronouncing in a 
'definitive manner,'" - the faithful are to adhere to it (i.e. a Papal 
encyclical, apostolic letter, Wednesday audiences, etc.). If he expounds for us on an issue of faith and morals he is exercising his ordinary Papal magisterium - which is infallible.
 
He has been given the guarantee of the Holy Spirit to guide him in these two 
issues (faith and morals). (see John 14:26, 15:26, 16:13, Acts 15:28, Mt. 16:17, 
Mt. 10:40, Lk. 10:16)
 
 
Infallibility extends to moral issues, too!
 
-----------------------------------
 
CCC 2035 The supreme degree of participation in the authority of Christ is 
ensured by the charism of infallibility. This infallibility extends as far as 
does the deposit of divine Revelation; it also extends to all those elements of doctrine, including morals, without which the saving truths of the faith cannot be preserved, explained, or observed.
 
-----------------------------------
 
To sum it up: Infallibility is *not* limited to Papal ex-Cathdera statements and Conciliar documents.
 
The Universal Ordinary Magisterium (the Pope and the bishops in union with him) protects, upholds, teaches the deposit of divine Revelation infallibly (see CCC 891 above, also see 1 Tim 3:15, Eph. 3:10, and CCC 85).
 
The Universal extra-Ordinary Magisterium further defines/clarifies the faith via Church Councils infallibly (there have been 21). (see Mt. 18:18)
 
The Universal Ordinary Papal Magisterium is infallible, too, via, again, when 
the pope expounds (teaches)upon issues of faith and morals using Papal 
encyclicals, apostolic letters, Wednesday audiences, etc. (also, canonization of saints are infallible declarations of the Ordinary Papal Magisterium).
 
Finally, the Universal extra-Ordinary Papal Magisterium is infallible - further defining and clarifying a teaching of the faith - and has only been used twice: The declaration of Mary's Immaculate Conception by Pius IX's "Ineffabilis Deus," (1854) and the declaration of Mary's Assumption into heaven by Pius XII's "Munificentissimus Deus" (1950).


68 comments:

Anonymous said...

Thanks to you and Kevin for this too. Invaluable information.

Veronica

Anonymous said...

Ooops! Prayers for the anonymous priest as well and his intentions!!

Veronica

TheLastCatholicinBoston said...

What's up Carol,
Your blog is like a box of Oreo's on the shelf...I just can't help it!
Sorry this is so long but the Baptism of Desire question is significant...
Canon IV is probably the most misunderstood decree from the
Council of Trent. The entire Canon follows:
“If anyone saith that the sacraments of the New Law are not
necessary unto salvation, but superfluous; and that without them,
or without the desire thereof men obtain of God through faith
alone the grace of justification; though all (the sacraments) are
not indeed necessary for every individual; let him be anathema.”
Note that the first part of this Canon addresses salvation and the
second part addresses justification:

“If anyone saith that the sacraments of the New Law are not
necessary unto salvation, but superfluous; and that without them
. . .”
This clearly says that there is no salvation without the sacraments.
Baptism of Desire(BoD) makes the sacraments superfluous (unnecessary). Anathema
follows at the end.
Here is the second part of that Canon:
“. . . or without the desire thereof men obtain of God through
faith alone the grace of justification; though all (the
sacraments) are not indeed necessary for every individual; let
him be anathema.”
The Canon clearly says justification is unobtainable without a desire
for the sacraments. Protestants say that faith alone gives justification.
Trent is saying that it is not faith alone, but a desire for the
sacraments which will or can give justification. Trent does not say
that desire will give a soul salvation.
Trent says no salvation without the sacraments, but justification is
possible by desire. The anathema makes this infallible.
The Canon makes a distinction between justification and salvation.
Justification alone does not equal salvation.
The answer to the question, “Where does a person go if he dies in a
state of justification without having received a sacrament?” has not
been answered by the Church.
Here is the highest authority in the Church, a pope, stating the
following:
“The holy Roman Church believes, professes, and preaches that
no one remaining outside the Catholic Church, not just pagans,
but also Jews or heretics or schismatics, can become partakers of
eternal life; but they will go to the “everlasting fire which was
prepared for the Devil and his angels” (Matt. 25:41), unless before
the end of life they are joined to the Church. For the union with
the body of the Church is of such importance that the sacraments
of the Church are helpful to salvation only for those remaining in it; and fasts, almsgiving, other works of piety, and the exercise of
Christian warfare bear eternal rewards for them alone. And no
one can be saved, no matter how much alms he has given, even if
he sheds his blood for the name of Christ, unless he remains in
the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.” (Pope Eugene IV,
speaking infallibly, in 1441)

TheLastCatholicinBoston said...

Part 2

Martyrology
If it is argued that the early catechumens were not baptized, that
contradicts an infallible pronouncement. It is probable and logical
that the early catechumens were indeed baptized while still
remaining catechumens, which was the practice during times of
persecution.
If it is argued against this and allegedly “proved” to be untrue, that
would make the Popes fallible! The Martyrology as written about the
saints in the early Church consisted of only sketches written by
unknown authors over 1,700 years ago. Certainly no basis for dogma.
Why would the authors think it important to state that the martyr
was baptized with water? Regarding the martyrdom of St.
Emerantiana, wherein the phrase “Baptized in her blood” is used, it
can be compared to what Our Lord said before His passion: “I have a
baptism wherewith I am to be baptized.” Meaning, his death on the
Cross. He had already been baptized with water. Because He said that,
it does not deny His water baptism.
It is an act of heresy to try to prove an infallible pronouncement
false! It is an act of heresy to say an infallible pronouncement does
not mean what it says.

1917 Code of Canon Law – Meaningless and Dishonest Application:
The 1917 Code of Canon Law has dishonestly been used to argue that
the Magisterium teaches BoD. The argument says that Canon Law is
part of the Magisterium and is based upon dogma. Then they quote
only half of the law, which changes its meaning! Here is the first half
of the law.
Canon 737:
“Baptism, which is the door and foundation for all other
Sacraments, and which, either actually received or at least
desired, is necessary for salvation to all, . .”
Following is the second half of the sentence and the law, usually
omitted by those arguing for BoD:
“. . . is given validly only by ablution with truly natural water and
pronouncing the prescribed form of words. . .”
Note: This law constitutes one sentence. It therefore contradicts itself
in the same sentence. It says Baptism can be received by desire (i. e.,
without water), and then it says it is valid only with water. A blatant
contradiction. This “law” is both dishonest and meaningless.
Yet, many quote the first part about desire and leave out the second
part about water and then say, “See, the Church teaches BoD in its
Canon Law.”
Christ speaks
Our Lord Jesus Christ, taught clearly and without deceit:
“. . . Amen, amen, I say to thee, unless a man be born again of
water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of
God.”
Some say this is a law and that God can make exceptions to His law
when He wishes. However, this is not a law. It is a statement of fact. A statement of fact is either true or false. A fact can be stated as such
when a person says, “The sky is blue.” That is not a law, but a
statement which is either true or false. The sky is blue or it is not. So
it would follow, if Jesus Christ states a fact regarding the necessity of
water, then water is absolutely necessary. To say otherwise is to make
Our Lord a liar.
Christ says you cannot enter Heaven without water. Who dares to
modify His words and say there are some men who can enter Heaven
without water?
Usually, at this point, rather than assenting to the necessity of water,
BoD propagandists quote saints who allegedly believed in BoD. So,
again, they go to sources outside of the Magisterium to deny infallible teaching. However, here is what Trent says about these words of Our
Lord.
Baptism — Ex Cathedra (Infallible)
“If anyone shall say that real and natural water is not necessary
for Baptism, and on that account those words of Our Lord Jesus
Christ: “Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost”
[John 3:5], are distorted into some sort of metaphor: let him be
anathema.” (Pope Paul III, Council of Trent, Can. 2 on the Sacrament of
Baptism, Sess. 7, 1547.)
BoD advocates distort these words of Christ and make them
meaningless.

TheLastCatholicinBoston said...

Part 3

God will often punish or damn a soul as an example for others. Many
in the Old Testament were killed directly by God immediately after just
one sin. The priests who used the unconsecrated matches at the altar,
and the one who tried to stop the Ark of the Covenant from tilting
over, and the act of Schism by Core and his followers. And then we
read this from Scripture about Sodom and Gomorrah.
“And reducing the cities of the Sodomites and of the Gomorrhites
into ashes, condemned them to be overthrown, making them an
example to those that should after act wickedly.” (2 Peter 2:6)
So, it would not seem out of the realm of possibility that God would
let a soul perish on the way to being baptized, if only to warn others
not to procrastinate with their Baptism; or, perhaps, to warn others
not to be guilty of the same sins that person had committed. God’s
judgments are unfathomable.
In this context, we often hear it said that you cannot shorten the
hand of God. Well, it is God that has shortened His own hand, not we,
His creatures. He is the one who said, “Unless a man be born of
water and the Holy Ghost he shall not enter the kingdom of
Heaven.”
It is for us to humbly accept His words as absolutely true, no matter
how hard they may be. Recall that many walked away when Our Lord
said to them, “Eat my flesh and drink my blood.” But, as for God’s
hand being shortened, there are examples of Him “shortening His
own hand.” When Jesus said to Peter,
‘Whatsoever thou shalt bind upon Earth, it shall be bound also in
Heaven, and whatsoever . . . ” (Matthew 18:19)
“Our infinite God placed Himself under subjugation, strict
obedience, to lowly man, having to obey every command of Joseph
and Mary.” (Luke 2:51)
Our loving Savior shortened His own hand again when He gave
His priests the power to consecrate bread and wine. Is not He,
the Creator of the universe, then subject to the words of man?
Any priest, no matter how evil, no matter the unholy state of his
soul, nor the surroundings he may be in, such as a bar, will
validly consecrate a host with proper matter and form and
intention!

A problem with BoD is that it fosters the new Church which
teaches the same on this question. Universal salvation is being
promoted in place of water Baptism, encouraging heretic
Protestants who say “All you need do is take Jesus into your
heart and you are saved.”
That is an example of BoD

We must not forget that the agenda of the Modernist is to have a oneworld
dogma-less Church. Dogmas separate, and they can and have
caused wars, such as the Protestant revolt did in its day. To have a
religion for the whole world, that religion cannot have any strong
beliefs, nor can it exclude anyone from Heaven for his belief if he
even acknowledges that there is a Heaven.
BoD is a perfect solution for them to push onto Catholics the concept
of an “implicit desire to do some good if they knew what it was” as a
most universal catch-all which brings everyone into Heaven, not only
the ignorant, but also the evil, who would do good, they say, if they
knew what it was.
Note that BoD advocates all say that the desire for a sacrament is not
a sacrament. If you cannot be saved without at least one sacrament,
then it is a contradiction to say that you can be saved by only the
desire for it.
Another point often ignored by BoD advocates is that Scripture
is very clear and says that “without faith it is impossible to
please God.” (Hebrews 11:6) They will put many into Heaven
who have only implicit BoD and without any faith at all. It’s as
though ignorance supplies for not having the faith.


The term “BoD” is not to be found in the Magisterium. That, in itself,
should tell us something.

Carol said...

LCIB, You missed all of the excitement..this month's theme on TTC is that misinformation on the Catholic religion can't be posted here! Baptism of Desire is indeed very much a part of the Magisterium and in fact is explained and affirmed in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1259). Further, the Catholic Church knows who is baptized and who isn't, so a supposition that the saints who were not baptized may have been baptized and this is your license to believe the Roman Catholic Church headed by the Vicar of Christ a counterfeit church, falls into the category of a conspiracy theory.

Rome has spoken on the matter and has saints that trump the suppositions you rely upon. She excommunicated a priest who cooked up the conspiracy. Though he thankfully reunited with Rome before his death and but many are still driving the car off of the same cliff from his errors.

I don't know how else to say this - but those who assent to the Vicar of Christ and His Catechism are the people in union with Christ's One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

Peace.

Carol said...

n.b. So many more of us would have brought our families into the Latin Rite community if it would lose these cockammammy conspiracies against the Pope and Christ's Church and His valid Sacraments. It is every bit as dangerous as the crackpots dividing the flock with dissent. When you add this to the dynamic that can't go to Church with your hat on crooked or the community has you going to hell in the handbasket, it is less than glorious service to the Universal Church.

Catholic Mission said...

LEGIONARY OF CHRIST PRIEST FR.RAFAEL PASCUAL AFFIRMS CANTATE DOMINO, COUNCIL OF FLORENCE
Dean of the Faculty of Philosophy, University Pontifical Regina Apostolorum, Rome in his office today morning said he was familiar with the text of the dogma Cantate Domino and he would endorse it in public.

Fr. Rafael Pascual said he and other Legionaries of Christ priests took an oath in Church to be faithful to the Magisterium of the Church and he showed me on his computer the text of this oath.


He took exception to a report (1) I e-mailed him which indicated that the Legionaries of Christ priests have not affirmed the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.


Fr. Pascual who is the Director of the Master of Science and Faith Institute knew that the dogma on extra ecclesiam nulla salus, Cantate Domino (2) was in accord with Vatican Council II (LG 14,AG 7) (3), Dominus Iesus 20 (4) and other Magisterial text.

CONTINUED

Catholic Mission said...

CONTINUED
The Church also affirms it may be mentioned that non Catholics can be saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire. However the Church Fathers, popes and Councils always new that these cases were implicit and so did not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. They are only known to God and we would not meet any such case in person. Also no Magisterial text claims that they are explicitly known to us. -Lionel Andrades

1.


LEGIONARIES OF CHRIST PRIESTS IN ROME DO NOT DENY THAT THEY AFFIRM AND TEACH THE SECULAR, LIBERAL INTERPRETATION OF EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA
SALUS
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2010/12/legionaries-of-christ-priests-in-rome.html#links

2.


Pope Eugene IV, Cantate Domino (1441): "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" (Matthew 25:41), 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."-, Wikipedia, extra ecclesiam nulla salus


3.


Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism(124) and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church.-Lumen Gentium 14

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


4.


Above all else, it must be firmly believed that “the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mk 16:16; Jn 3:5), and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through baptism as through a door”. 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
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/legionary-of-christ-priest-frrafael.html

Catholic Mission said...

CONTINUED
The Church also affirms it may be mentioned that non Catholics can be saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire. However the Church Fathers, popes and Councils always new that these cases were implicit and so did not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. They are only known to God and we would not meet any such case in person. Also no Magisterial text claims that they are explicitly known to us. -Lionel Andrades

1.


LEGIONARIES OF CHRIST PRIESTS IN ROME DO NOT DENY THAT THEY AFFIRM AND TEACH THE SECULAR, LIBERAL INTERPRETATION OF EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA
SALUS
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2010/12/legionaries-of-christ-priests-in-rome.html#links

2.


Pope Eugene IV, Cantate Domino (1441): "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" (Matthew 25:41), 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."-, Wikipedia, extra ecclesiam nulla salus


3.


Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism(124) and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church.-Lumen Gentium 14

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


4.


Above all else, it must be firmly believed that “the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mk 16:16; Jn 3:5), and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through baptism as through a door”. 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
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/legionary-of-christ-priest-frrafael.html

Catholic Mission said...

CATHOLIC CULTURE PROVIDES A DEFINITION OF EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS

Catholic Culture has a definition of extra ecclesiam nulla salus which says ‘no one who culpably refuses to become and remain a member of the Catholic Church can be saved’. However a glance at the text of the dogma shows that there is no such reference. Catholic Culture then says ‘all who reach their eternal destiny are saved through the Catholic Church’-the dogma does not say this. ' Even though they may not have lived as professed Roman Catholics’, the dogma does not make this claim.


EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS

Outside the Church there is no salvation. Solemnly defined doctrine that says that no one who culpably refuses to become and remain a member of the Catholic Church can be saved. Positively this means that all who reach their eternal destiny are saved through the Catholic Church, of which Christ is the visible head. This is true even though they nay not have lived as professed Roman Catholics (Fourth Lateran Council, A,D, 1215, Denzinger 802). -Catholic Culture


Here is the ‘solemn’ dogma defined by three Councils on Outside the Church there is no Salvation (Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus)


• “There is but one universal Church of the faithful, outside which no one at all is saved.” (Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, 1215.)


• “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.)


• “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.) – Catholicism.org
-Lionel Andrades
_______________________________________________


Catholic Culture suggests those who know about the Church and yet do not enter is the only ordinary means of salvation and these cases are known to us
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/catholic-culture-suggests-those-who.html

CATHOLIC CULTURE SUGGESTS THOSE SAVED IN INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE OR THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE ARE EXPLICITLY KNOWN
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/catholic-culture-suggests-that-those.html


LEGIONARY OF CHRIST PRIEST FR.RAFAEL PASCUAL AFFIRMS CANTATE DOMINO, COUNCIL OF FLORENCE
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/legionary-of-christ-priest-frrafael.html

Catholic Mission said...

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/catholic-culture-suggests-those-who.html#links

Catholic Culture suggests those who know about the Church and yet do not enter is the only ordinary means of salvation and these cases are known to us


According to Vatican Council II the ordinary means of salvation is Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for all. This is the defacto and explicit means.
False Ecumenism is based on irrational non Catholic interpretations contrary to Vatican Council II, the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the statements of popes and saints. It suggests those who know about the Catholic Church and do not enter is the only ordinary means of salvation.It also assumes that these cases are known to us.


Is 'Ecumenism' a Bad Word? by Matt C. Abbott in Catholic Culture suggests ‘they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ’ do not enter it ’(LG 16) is the ordinary means of salvation and the only means of salvation. Catholic Culture also implies that these cases are explicit and we can personally know such cases.


The Catechism quotes Vatican II’s Lumen Gentium on this subject: “Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation…. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or remain in it. This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and His Church” (nn. 846-847).-Abbot,Catholic Culture.
Let us analyse Lumen Gentium 14, Vatican Council II.(1)The passages emphasized in yellow tells us that Catholic faith and the baptism of water are the ordinary means of salvation for all. The passages in red mention those who are lost and are known only to God. The passage in green mentions those who can be saved and are known only to God and this passage does not claim that these non Catholics are de facto known to us or that they are exceptions to the passage in yellow or the dogma.The passage in yellow is defacto and that in green is de jure. When we read magisterial texts like the one above we have to use the defacto-dejure distinction otherwise there will be confusion. If you consider the passage in green as defacto it would contradict the passage in yellow.


Here is Ad Gentes 7,Vatican Council II analysed in the same way (2).The text emphasized in yellow tells us that Catholic faith and the baptism of water are the ordinary means of salvation for all. The passage in red mentions those who are lost and are known only to God. The passage in green mentions those who can be saved and are known only to God and this passage does not claim that these non Catholics are de facto known to us or that they are exceptions to the passage in yellow or the dogma.
The passage in yellow is defacto and that in green is de jure. When we read magisterial texts like the one above we have to use the defacto-dejure distinction otherwise there will be confusion. If you consider the passage in green as defacto it would contradict the passage in yellow.
Catholics seminarians who study Philosophy for two years are taught the Principle of Non Contradiction and are familiar with the defacto-dejure logic. If the passage in green is defacto and explicitly known to us as Catholic Culture,Trinity Communications and EWTN suggest, it would contradict the Principle of Non Contradiction. Even a Catholic layman would know that this is irrational. -Lionel Andrades
_________________________________
CONTINUED

Catholic Mission said...

CONTINUED
_______________________________________

1.

14. This Sacred Council wishes to turn its attention firstly to the Catholic faithful. Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church. 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.They are fully incorporated in the society of the Church who, possessing the Spirit of Christ accept her entire system and all the means of salvation given to her, and are united with her as part of her visible bodily structure and through her with Christ, who rules her through the Supreme Pontiff and the bishops. The bonds which bind men to the Church in a visible way are profession of faith, the sacraments, and ecclesiastical government and communion. He is not saved, however, who, though part of the body of the Church, does not persevere in charity. He remains indeed in the bosom of the Church, but, as it were, only in a "bodily" manner and not "in his heart… Catechumens who, moved by the Holy Spirit, seek with explicit intention to be incorporated into the Church are by that very intention joined with her. With love and solicitude Mother Church already embraces them as her own...



2.

7. This missionary activity derives its reason from the will of God, "who wishes all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, Himself a man, Jesus Christ, who gave Himself as a ransom for all" (1 Tim. 2:45), "neither is there salvation in any other" (Acts 4:12). 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. 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." Therefore though God in ways known to Himself can lead those inculpably ignorant of the Gospel to find that faith without which it is impossible to please Him (Heb. 11:6), yet a necessity lies upon the Church (1 Cor. 9:16), and at the same time a sacred duty, to preach the Gospel. And hence missionary activity today as always retains its power and necessity…

CATHOLIC CULTURE SUGGESTS THOSE SAVED IN INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE OR THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE ARE EXPLICITLY KNOWN

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/catholic-culture-suggests-that-those.html


MEDUGORJE BANS BOOK IN WHICH JESUS SAYS CHURCH IS NEGLECTING MISSION AND PROCLAIMING THE GOSPEL TO PROTECT ITS PROPERTY AND INTERESTS
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/medugorje-bans-book-in-which-jesus-says.html


LEGIONARY OF CHRIST PRIEST FR.RAFAEL PASCUAL AFFIRMS CANTATE DOMINO, COUNCIL OF FLORENCE
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/legionary-of-christ-priest-frrafael.html

Catholic Mission said...

Saturday, October 15, 2011
CATHOLIC CULTURE REJECTS VATICAN COUNCIL II, DENIES DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS AND ASKS FOR DONATIONS
To knowingly reject an infallible teaching is a mortal sin. Catholics who donate would not have to go for Confession?


The President of Catholic Culture Jeffrey Mirus will not affirm the dogma Cantate Domino ,Council of Florence and neither will be affirm Vatican Council II in accord with the dogma.(1)Catholic priests in Rome who offer the Novus Ordo Mass in Italian have endorsed Cantate Domino and Vatican Council II and other Magisterial documents in agreement with the dogma(2).

Jeffrey Mirus is also contradicted by Catholic priests here who say there is no case of the baptism of desire known to us(3).To reject the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus claiming it is contradicted by those saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire is heresy.


He misinterprets Vatican Council II and misleads Catholics with the report on the Internet 'Tragic Errors of Fr.Leonard Feeney'.- Lionel Andrades
___________________________________

continued

Catholic Mission said...

continued
1.
FRIDAY, OCTOBER 14, 2011

CATHOLIC CULTURE PROVIDES A DEFINITION OF EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/catholic-culture-provides-definition-of.html

THURSDAY, OCTOBER 13, 2011
Catholic Culture suggests those who know about the Church and yet do not enter is the only ordinary means of salvation and these cases are known to us
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/catholic-culture-suggests-those-who.html

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 12, 2011
CATHOLIC CULTURE SUGGESTS THOSE SAVED IN INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE OR THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE ARE EXPLICITLY KNOWN
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/catholic-culture-suggests-that-those.html

Trinity Communications of Jeff Mirus and Catholic Culture is a legal entity that is spreading falsehood about the Catholic Faith.
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/09/trinity-communications-is-legal-entity.html

2.

Friday, October 7, 2011
LEGIONARY OF CHRIST PRIEST FR.RAFAEL PASCUAL AFFIRMS CANTATE DOMINO, COUNCIL OF FLORENCE

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/legionary-of-christ-priest-frrafael.html

TUESDAY, AUGUST 9, 2011
FR.TULLIO ROTONDO AFFIRMS CANTATE DOMINO, COUNCIL OF FLORENCE ON EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/08/frtullio-rotondo-affirms-cantate-domino.html#links

WEDNESDAY, JULY 20, 2011
CANTATE DOMINO, COUNCIL OF FLORENCE ON EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS IS DE FIDE AND NOT CONTRADICTED BY VATICAN COUNCIL II- Fr. Nevus Marcello O.P
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/07/cantate-domino-council-of-florence-on.html

SATURDAY, JULY 16, 2011
BRAZILIAN PRIEST SAYS VATICAN COUNCIL II DOES NOT CONTRADICT DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/07/brazilian-priest-says-vatican-council.html#links


3.

Wednesday, August 10, 2011

CATHOLIC PRIESTS IN ROME AGREE WITH FR.LEONARD FEENEY: THERE IS NO BAPTISM OF DESIRE THAT WE CAN KNOW OF
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/08/catholic-priests-in-rome-agree-with.html#links

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/catholic-culture-rejects-vatican.html

Carol said...

I do have another post coming on this subject - with further information - a part 2, shall we say. In the meantime, I will post the Catechism of the Catholic Church, once again with respect to the baptism of desire and the mercy of Christ, which is NOT BOUND by the Sacraments.

Meaning, Christ's Church leaves an open door for the Mercy of Christ. It does not strip Him of His right to judge the condition and desires of the soul.

Those who represent the Catechism of Christ's Church as being inconsistent with Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus are mistaken. I am not talking about what Pope Boniface wrote -- but the actual teaching that there is no salvation outside of the Church.

The Catechism of Christ's Church binds baptism to salvation. What it does not do, is strip Christ of His Divine Knowledge of the soul and Mercy.

Fr. Feeney contradicted the teachings of Christ's Church. That's why he was cut loose. Again, thankfully, he repented and reunited. But those who are circling the quagmire of his errors claiming they trump Church teaching have lost their way on this one. It's a hard pill to swallow. But it's our duty to say it.

There is no such thing as a 'vatican 2 church' or vatican 2 catechism. Christ's Church is headed by Christ and we are to assent to the Catechism of Christ's Church from the cradle to the grave.

cont...

Carol said...

This is the only thing you ever need to know or to do. Assent and if you fall, repent and seek the Sacrament of Penance and Reconciliation to get back into a state of grace. Just stay on the road with Christ's Church.

Dividing Christ's Catechism from Christ Himself is not coming from the Holy Spirit.

There is all kinds of whackiness out there. Test everything.

CCC


1257 The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation.60 He also commands his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all nations and to baptize them.61 Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament.62 The Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude; this is why she takes care not to neglect the mission she has received from the Lord to see that all who can be baptized are "reborn of water and the Spirit." God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments.

1258 The Church has always held the firm conviction that those who suffer death for the sake of the faith without having received Baptism are baptized by their death for and with Christ. This Baptism of blood, like the desire for Baptism, brings about the fruits of Baptism without being a sacrament.

1259 For catechumens who die before their Baptism, their explicit desire to receive it, together with repentance for their sins, and charity, assures them the salvation that they were not able to receive through the sacrament.

1260 "Since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partakers, in a way known to God, of the Paschal mystery."63 Every man who is ignorant of the Gospel of Christ and of his Church, but seeks the truth and does the will of God in accordance with his understanding of it, can be saved. It may be supposed that such persons would have desired Baptism explicitly if they had known its necessity.

1261 As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus' tenderness toward children which caused him to say: "Let the children come to me, do not hinder them,"64 allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism. All the more urgent is the Church's call not to prevent little children coming to Christ through the gift of holy Baptism.

TheLastCatholicinBoston said...

I am not a theologian nor do I aspire to be one. i do know that God is the one who makes the call, burn, salvation, or salvation after awhile. BOD has been debated and will continue to be legitimately debated. If you find a priest who is willing to make the statement that I am a heretic and therefore automatically excommunicated for holding that the common interpretation of BOD is wrong, please send me a note and I will recant.

The new translation that is coming includes the correction ...will be shed for all (to)...will be shed for many. This was a well known error in the English translation that has taken 40 years to correct. Error happens. Regarding the catechism, there are several, some are better than others. The 1983 that Cardinal's Law and Schonborn were very involved in my humble opinion is weak and full of modernist drivel. Historical Catechisms do not expire and they often accurately reflect the thinking of the day. This alone is a good reason to not over emphasis the common thinking of 1983 version.
RE:The issue of a new sect. There is a point at which we are no longer Catholic. Sacrilege is real, in fact it is far more real than pro or con beliefs on BOD. A few months back you kind of poo poo'd my thoughts on the error of extraordinary ministers. Since that time Phoenix and Madison WI dioceses have stopped the distribution of the Sacred Blood altogether except for a very few situations. The Neocatecumena has had some issues with distribution of communion and the Vatican found it necessary to step in.

There will come a time again when only Priests distribute communion. You may not hear it anywhere else but it is only because of the Heresy of Modernism and enemies within that the EEM practice was promulgated in the US.
Yup - A conspiracy.

Fr. Feeney was disciplined for his lack of obedience. Not for opinions he held on debatable or controversial topics.

Carol said...

LCIB,


You drop in from time to time, take something that is bound to Christ's Church in teaching and then mischaracterize those who assent to the authority of Christ's Church as some breed of schism led by the Popes.


This discussion is about assent to Catholic Church teaching that there are souls who have been saved that have not been baptized by the Catholic Church who indeed have been and will continue to attain salvation, and the category of possible situations that the Catholic Church leaves open.

The category of situations are spelled out in black and white above. Those suffering from ignorance, Christian martyrs, babies who die before baptism,etc.

There are those who have not been baptized who are saved. There is no error in this teaching or the Catechism that spells out this teaching. Those who accept it, preach it, teach it are being faithful to Catholic Church teaching. Period.

Your posts reflect a rejection of the Catholic Church led by the Roman Pontiffs who affirm and explain Church teaching regarding Christ's Mercy in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. I am surprised to hear you imply that Fr. Higgins subscribes to and has led his flock to unfaithfulness but I assure you that if he does, he has derailed.

Carol said...

p.s. To say I "pooh-pooh" what is happening to Christ with Communion by hand is something else you are taking out of context. Anyone who knows me, including readers here at TTC, knows that I vigorously object to the practice.

The conversation you are alluding to was a discussion about a possible blog that talks about which priests and parishes have good, holy liturgies and preach and teach faithfully leading to salvation. You wanted priests in parishes who give Communion by hand to be characterized as places that are unfaithful and I tried to explain to you the reasons why that was not only an error - but would be a terrible disservice to the priest, the faithful and to Christ's Church.

I know many faithful Catholics who have tried to escape madness and retreat to the Latin community only to find it operates as if the Pope was outside of Christ's Church. When it comes to a choice between practice in a community that divides the flock from the Catechism and the Pope and one who follows and assents but gives Communion by hand - there is no contest.

There is much unfaithfulness surrounding us in our present trials. It is going to require much discernment. The blog is following One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, Christ's Pope and the Deposit of Faith sealed in His Blood. Come what may.

TheLastCatholicinBoston said...

What?

I'm not a sedavacantist, never have been, OK? I even go to the regular Mass sometimes.
Whew.

We have a right and reason for hope. We do not know who has attained salvation, that definitive judgement is for God alone.

To state that a soul is or is not in Heaven is presumption, Of course we say these niceties but our belief rests on our personal Faith and Hope.

Your reference of Fr. Higgins is completely off base. I have no idea where you are coming from on it or how it even remotely relates to the topic at hand. I am genuinely concerned that you statement could bring scandal to a good priest. It is squarely on you.

I came back to your blog because Jerry sent me a note. After this exchange I'm not sure it was a good idea.

We all have gifts. Discernment and intellect are two not given out equally by our loving God.
You have basically called me a heretic because I don't believe what you believe about The Faith.
Heresy is about rejecting The Faith not about rejecting what someone else believes about it.

Modernism is the most recent heresy defined by the Church and papal documents (1910?). It is the intellectual scourge of our time.

TheLastCatholicinBoston said...

Its late...
I believe my point at the time was that if the practice of EEM was to stop immediately there would be no down side. You dismissed it as not a big deal, that was enough for me to move on. Communion in the hand was not the issue.

I am in favor of an inquisition, it would need to be led by the clergy.

Catholic Mission said...

CATHOLIC LAY PROFESSOR AT UNIVERSITA EUROPA DI ROMA AFFIRMS DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
Weekly Il Settimanale di Padre Pio says a non Catholic can be saved in invincible ignorance but we do not know of any such case, it is known only to God. There is exclusive salvation in only the Catholic Church says Corrado Gnerre. This is an infallible teaching according to Venerable Pope Pius XII.



The October 2, 2011 issue of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate magazine Il Settimanale di Padre Pio has published the fourth and final part of the apologetical series by Corrado Gnerre, Dio e Cattolicismo!-Verita del Cattolicesimo e falsita delle altre religioni’.



Corrado Gnerre a professor at the Universita Europa di Roma, Rome clearly affirms the dogma extra ecclesiam nula salus and the necessity of all people, with no exception, to convert into the Catholic Church for salvation.(1) Outside the Church, he writes, there is no possibility of salvation.(2) He means de facto everyone on earth needs to enter the Church (Cantate Domino, Council of Florence), with Catholic Faith and the baptism of water (Lumen Gentium 14, Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II).Corrado Gnerre accepts conceptually, in principle (de jure), as a possibility known only to God, the salvation of a non Catholic who has not been a Catholic through no fault of his own.(3)

Corrado Gnerre writes that Pope Pius XII in the Letter of the Holy Office (Nov.1949) says ‘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.’ We have an affirmation says Corrado Gnerre of the infallibility of the teaching extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
CONTINUED

Catholic Mission said...

CONTNUED
A person can be saved in invincible ignorance, the baptism of desire or following the natural law he accepts. We do not know of any person saved in invincible ignorance he says and this is only known to God. ('e questo lo può sapere solo il Signore'). He implies that since we do not know any case of a person saved in invincible ignorance, it is not an exception to the dogma. Since those saved with the baptism of desire or following the natural law are not explicitly known to us they are not an exception to the dogma. They do not contradict the infallible teaching that everyone needs to be a formal, visible member of the Catholic Church to go to Heaven. These cases are accepted only in principle, dejure, conceptually.They are not de facto known.We do not know personally any such case.



Since they are not defacto this Professor of Philosophy knows that they do not violate the Principle of Non Contradiction. The dogma refers to de facto cases in reality on earth and we do not know anyone on earth saved with the baptism of desire, in invincible ignorance or following the natural law. Neither do we know anyone presently saved who did not know the Gospel through no fault of this own.


Corrado Gnerre is married and has five children.He has written many books, contributes articles for magazines and can be heard on Radio Maria, Italy.His recent book Apologetica Vol 2. has been published by Il Settimanale di Padre Pio.
-Lionel Andrades
___________________________________________


1.
Bisogna ribadire la Dottrina tradizionale della Chiesa in merito all’ esclusivismo salvificio cattolico : al di fuori della Chiesa non vi è possibilità di salvezza.
2.

Bisogna ribadire la Dottrina tradizionale della Chiesa in merito all’ esclusivismo salvificio cattolico : al di fuori della Chiesa non vi è possibilità di salvezza.
3.
Ricordando ovviamente anche la possible salvezza per chi non ha colpa a non essere cattolico.


http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/catholic-lay-professor-at-universita.html

Carol said...

LCIB,

The conversation has nothing to do with a difference between what LCIB believes and what Carol believes. The conversation is about what the Catechism of the Catholic Church binds us to believe.

You called the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the magnificent deposit of truth, "drivel" and expressed, counseled and advised here that Catholics should reject it, as you have. You imply Catholic teaching is codified in something other than the Catechism of the Catholic Church bound by the Roman Pontiff. You describe the Catholic Church as if the Pope is leading a schism and you and others are actually the people preserving the faith. In other words, you refer to Christ's Church as if the Pope is leading a Church within the Church and the Pope is on the wrong side. You call what you imply as the Pope's division 'the vatican 2 church'.

Your posts reveal a rejection of the authority granted to Christ's Church to His Vicar on Earth to dictate truth to the people in ways they are able to receive that message.

When you mentioned that you have not come across a priest in the diocese who has released you from these errors, since your formation is under the guardianship of Fr. Higgins, you leave the impression that Fr. Higgins and others have affirmed your misunderstandings.

Either Fr. Higgins accepts the Catechism of the Catholic Church and he leads people to it or he has not confirmed your understanding. Which is it?

You have placed that burden upon Fr. Higgins reputation. I am simply calling you on your own representations.

All I did was espouse the teachings of salvation of the Catholic Church. You have come along to say those teachings are not part of the Magisterium as nobody outside of being baptized by water is saved.

If you are now saying that the Catechism of the Catholic Church is correct - I am at a loss as to what your objection is to our assent to it.

Your belief over the context of our conversation over Communion by hand and the use of Extraordinary Ministers of the Eucharist is mistaken. The conversation was about a blog which would help the faithful find a priest operating in communion with the Catholic Church as there are many who are leading souls into temptation - like Fr. Unni. The conversation was about the situation we now find ourselves in - headed by a Cardinal whose trajectory has divided from the Roman Catholic Church and Her teachings - and what to do about it in terms of letting people know where the Sacraments are valid and where people can take their families to be safely led to their salvation.

You wanted to represent priests who give Communion by hand and use lay people to Communicate Christ's Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity on the list with the wolves. I objected vehemently to this characterization. You then characterized me as a 'modernist' and somebody who does not object to both of these practices. I tried to explain your mischarterizations of me, which you continue to express here in the comments section. To those who follow my blog and know my convictions about both of these practices, your characterization of my beliefs are ludicrous.

For the record, let us cut to the chase.

1. You affirm the teachings of the Catechism of the Catholic Church on salvation through the baptism of blood and desire, #1257-1261 cited above and you thereby do not have a beef with saying the teaching of the RCC is people can be saved without being baptized by water.

2. No martyr, saint our soul ever has or ever will be saved unless they are baptized with water.

Is it # 1 or #2 because you cannot have it both ways. You either reject Church teaching or you accept it.

Carol said...

p.s - while seeking clarification, it would be helpful for you to clear up the misunderstanding about a blog that represents where our faithful priests are leading souls to salvation and valid sacraments.

Are you now saying that if a blog were to publish the situation in the diocese by parish, you hold no objection to characterizing priests who give Communion by hand and use lay people as EMEs on the list of faithful priests and parishes?

Carol said...

"A person can be saved in invincible ignorance, the baptism of desire or following the natural law he accepts. We do not know of any person saved in invincible ignorance he says and this is only known to God."

Thank you for this. It is exactly right. Salvation happens under these circumstances but the people to whom it applies can only be known to God.

Alternately, those who trump Church teaching by saying God only saves through baptism by water reject the theology of God's mercy and place themselves above Christ's Church as the arbiter of truth and moreover, above God as the arbiter of salvation.

TheLastCatholicinBoston said...

Carol,
I go to blogs occasionally for entertainment. Yours is a great slice of Catholic culture in Boston. You also strike me as the kind of gal who knows how to use a frying pan...as a weapon.
I'm a little ticked off at this point and I'll tell you why and I'll move on permanently.

A list of diocese clergy that do not use EEM to distribute communion I proposed would be a good idea, with virtually no (theological or moral) down side. It is debatable.

My comment on drivel, perhaps this guy said it better.
Amerio, Romano (1996). Iota Unum: A Study of Changes in the Catholic Church in the XXth Century. Sarto House.

"new catechesis ... attempts to produce existential reactions rather than intellectual conviction."

If you understand what Modernism is you will understand why this is a problem. If you don't... well, then you don't. Some of the language in the 1994 CCC is problematic. I am not the only one who holds this opinion, if you don't, I'm cool with that. I find the Baltimore to be magnificent in its simplicity.

Re: The reality of The Church Christ founded prior to Vatican 2 and post Vatican 2. It is self evident that some of the innovations have been... problematic.

I never said "The Pope is leading a schism". Nor did I imply it, I was a fan of Card. Ratzinger and predicted that he would be Pope. I'd like to see a few more excommunications but you can't please everybody. Benedict XVI has spoken of enemies within the Church, we suspect that there are several working in Braintree.

Now here is the hard part. You said
the following that has no basis in reality:
"Your formation is under the guardianship of Fr. Higgins" And then went on to rant connecting my thoughts with his ministry. You made this false assumption because I have shared that i attend the Latin Mass he offers on occasion. you are wrong, in fact you are goofy wrong.

Have at the rest of it.
You win.

Carol said...

LCIB,

I'm sorry that you are ticked off, but I'm not sure this conversation was the cause if it, as you seemed to be ticked off before I responded. Here I was thinking I keep getting conked on the head with your frying pan!

You do imply Christ 'founded' two churches - one of which you reject, has two catechisms - one of which you reject, two liturgies - with rubics that have been approved by Rome that you refuse to accept.

Christ's Church is not divided. It is a living united body and the Catechism of the Church is the Catechism. There is not a problem with the translation of the Catechism but there are many problems with the translators. There is a difference.

I did not 'make the false assumption' that Fr. Higgins has affirmed your misunderstandnigs because you share you attend the Latin Mass. You implied that there hasn't been a priest in teh diocese who has disputed your theology. Are you making it up as you go along or have you run your ideas past a priest? If it isn't Fr. Higgins, then who? You gave the impression that many have affirmed you theologically.


"A list of diocese clergy that do not use EEM to distribute communion I proposed would be a good idea, with virtually no (theological or moral) down side. It is debatable."

That is not what I asked you.

You keep making misrepresentations of the context of discussions and then foisting your own misinterpretations upon me.

The discussion was about a blog that labels our good and holy priests, teaching flawlessly the deposit of faith that use EMEs and communion by hand. You wanted these priests to be labeled unfaithful. I wouldn't do it. You then characterized it to mean I don't have a problem with EMEs and Communion by hand - which is false.

I will repeat the question:

If a priest is teaching the faith flawlessly and leading people to salvation, valid sacraments but gives Communion by hand and uses lay people as EMEs - do you agree that their name should be on on the list of faithful priests and parishes?

You wanted lay people to be instructed to avoid them. I found that to be a disservice to Christ, the priests and the people they serve. That was the disagreement.

TheLastCatholicinBoston said...

I'm mad that you mentioned Fr. Higgin's name in your blog several times. Absolutely no need of it.

"The discussion was about a blog that labels our good and holy priests".

A blog that would judge ANY persons goodness or holiness is asinine. It would be a subjective opinion hit list.

A list of Priests that do not utilize EEM would be a simple objective measure. Meaningless?
All i can say is - pay attention and stay tuned.

Carol said...

LCIB,

Actually, I mentioned Fr. Higgins name for a very good reason. I was responding to my own baptismal call and duty. Because the context of your rejection of the Catechism mentioned the affirmation of priests, I was concerned about Fr. Higgins and wanted to know if that is what he is teaching. Actually, more than wanted to know, I NEEDED to know. If it was, I would privately contact him. because I care about his salvation. Furthermore, what would be more likely the case, knowing Fr. Higgins, something he said may have been misinterpreted and he may need to make a clarification to his flock - because the confusion may involve others. I know for certain that he wouldn't want that on his watch.

If it makes you mad, there's not much I can do about that. My servitude is to Christ. He knows my motives and intentions and I'm pretty sure He isn't mad and that is all that counts.

I am trying to pay attention to your responses, but your answers seem as though you misunderstand a lot of context and are evasive.

I still don't know what priests are leading you to your rejection of the Catholic Church as a unified body from It's beginning to this point in time.

And you still haven't answered the question - Is a priest who is preaching the Deposit of Faith flawlessly, providing valid Sacraments and using EMEs and Communion by hand a priest who is 100% in communion with the Roman Catholic Church and a safe place for Catholic families seeking that kind of obedience?

I didn't ask you your thoughts about the project - which is very much wanted by many in the diocese who want to know where to take their families. It does not judge goodness or holiness - it judges whether the priest is teaching from the Catechism and Deposit of Faith - which is actually factual information.

TheLastCatholicinBoston said...

"And you still haven't answered the question - Is a priest who is preaching the Deposit of Faith flawlessly, providing valid Sacraments and using EMEs and Communion by hand a priest who is 100% in communion with the Roman Catholic Church and a safe place for Catholic families seeking that kind of obedience?"
Come on, are you baiting me? Do a CORI check first?
In theory?, sure.
They are men, I judge'm as they come,as should everybody else.

Riddle me this:
Same super star as above only...
at the consecration he uses one hand and offers the Eucharist to the crowd like a poker chip.

A) He's a moron, never comprehended the need or beauty of the rubrics
B) It is intentional and he consciously is mocking the sacrificial nature of the Mass.
C) He has been deceived by modernist in his seminary days formation. He is a victim.
D) What is the big deal? After all he is a really good guy, and I feel really good about myself when I sing these meaningful songs.

What do you do?

E) Hit'm with the pan

Carol said...

That's quite a combination of a riddle, a supposition and rash judgement.

Is it me or are you trying to characterize every priest who gives Communion by hand and EMEs as non-believers in Transubstantiation?

Your characterization is way off base. There was quite a few of those around in the 90s but they are few and far between now.

I'm talking about solid, Eucharistic, Marian, faithful to doctrine priests, using solid catechesis. We have quite a few of them now. It isn't a theory. It is reality. Thanks be to God.

But for every one of them there's a half dozen parishes that are gone to the dogs. In between, there are some who are making their way towards faithfulness which cannot be recommended but neither would I bruise that reed.

Over the past few years we've probably had a hundred requests to put up a website to let families know where they are.

I still don't have an answer. When you say "Sure" - that's an affirmative answer? It is acceptable to characterize priests who flawlessly teach, preach, lead souls to salvation and valid Sacraments and use EMEs and give Communion by hand as parishes that are faithful.

Leave the editorializing out of it. Just a simple yes or no.

Catholic Mission said...

Monday, October 17, 2011
CONFERENCES WITHOUT THE DOGMA
Last month there was a symposium on the 60th anniversary of the dogma of the Assumption of Our Lady in Heaven. It was an international Marian symposium. It was organised by the Franciscans of the Immaculate and was opened with a Pontifical High Mass in the Extraordinary form of the Ancient Roman Rite. It was held at the Santuario della Madonna del Buon Consiglio in Frigento,Italy.


The cardinal spoke on Our Lady as Coredemptrix:Other speakers included Frs. Settimo and Giovanni Manelli F.I, Sr. Cecilia Manelli F.I and Fr. Masimilliano Degaspari F.I


Our Lady is Coredemptrix she shared in Jesus’ sufferings and is the Mother of the Church, the only Church Jesus founded, and in which everyone needs to formerly, visibly enter to receive the grace won for us by the Sacrifice of the only Redeemer, Jesus Christ.


We need to believe in Our Lady as Coredemptrix of all Graces in a Catholic Church which teaches that there is no non-Catholic on earth, none, who can be saved from Hell, unless he has Catholic Faith and the baptism of water and dies without the stain of a mortal sin on his soul.

CONTINUED

Catholic Mission said...

CONTINUED
Every person de facto needs to enter the Church for salvation said Fr. Massimiliano DeGaspari, one of the speakers, while speaking to me a few years back when he was the Rector of the Church Santa Maria di Annunziata, Lungotevere, Rome. De jure, in principle he said a non Catholic can be saved 'in certain circumstances’ (Letter of the Holy Office 1949). This is a possibility but we do not know of any case in the present times. De facto there are no exceptions he said. This is the exclusiveness of the dogma outside the church there is no salvation. Pope Pius XII who gave us the dogma of the Immaculate Conception of Our Lady called the dogma extra eccleisam nulla salus an ‘infallible statement’.


Fr. Settimo Mannelli one of the speakers at the Conference needs to affirm this thrice defined dogma.An American Philipino priest of their community who is a formator at their philosophy seminary in Boccea, Rome, where Fr.Settimo is the Rector, says this is a confusing subject and he does not want to teach something wrong.


Sr. Cecilia Mannelli F.I writes on the beauty of ‘the Mass of all Ages ‘but excludes any reference to the dogma which has accompanied the Mass of all Ages.


Fr. Giovanni Manelli F.I one of the speakers, mentions the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance, when I spoke to him a few years back, as if they are explicitly known cases and they contradict the 'infallible statement'.


Yet all of them are clear on Our Lady being Coredemptrix and will express this teaching forthrightly.


Cardinal Raymond Burke has publicly endorsed Kolbean theology but never has spoken on the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.


If the Franciscans of the Immaculate hold a conference on the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus there would be so much confusion.


In the Il Settimanale di Padre Pio (Oct 2, 2011) the magazine of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate a report says those in invincible ignorance are known only to God. They are unknown to us. The dogma mentions exclusiveness of salvation being there in only the Catholic Church. Everyone needs to convert into the Church, formally, visibly.This is the only ‘one way of salvation’ for all people in the present times.
CONTINUED

Catholic Mission said...

CONTINUED
Cases of ‘those saved through Jesus and the Church’ are hypothetical. Those saved by following their good conscience is a concept. There are no defacto cases known. It is unknown in the present times if anyone is saved who was ‘ignorant of the Gospel through no fault of this own’. We accept the possibility of this happening but do not know of any specific case. Neither is there any church document which refers to explicitly known baptism of desire or invincible ignorance. The Church Fathers never said that there were exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. We do not know of any non Catholic saved by following natural law. Also if someone was following natural law with a good conscience the Holy Spirit would have led him to the Catholic Church.


The possibility of all who are saved are ‘saved by Jesus and the Church ‘does not rule out the need for everyone in the present times to formally enter the Church for salvation. It also still means that millions of non Catholics are oriented to the fires of Hell (Cantate Domino, Council of Florence).




ASSISI
A seminar was held on Oct 1, 2011 in Rome on the subject of the interfaith meeting to be held at Assisi.


According to the teachings of the Catholic Church there is exclusive salvation in only one Church and we know that all the non Catholic participants at Assisi are not in this one, true Church.


According to Vatican Council II, the non Catholic participants are out of the ‘ordinary means of salvation’ for all people (Catholic Faith and the baptism of water, Lumen Gentium 14, Ad Gentes 7).The Christian participants have the baptism of water but not the necessary Catholic Faith; the Sacraments and the interpretation of the Gospel. The non Catholics participants cannot be saved through invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire since this is not the ordinary means of salvation.


We need programs on Mission, which convey these Church teachings to Catholic and non Catholics. We need conferences that express these Catholic teachings.-Lionel Andrades

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/conferences-iwithout-dogma.html

Catholic Mission said...

Tuesday, October 18, 2011
FR.MASIMILLIANO DEGASPARI EXPLAINS THE IMPORTANCE OF A DOGMA


Father Masimillian Degaspari refers to the dogma of the Assumption into Heaven of Our Lady, in body and soul as Pope Pius XII taught (1). The Church believes in the Assumption of the Mother of God in body and soul.


Fr. Masimillino Degaspari F.I has explained the dogma of the Assumption into Heaven of Our Lady, body and soul in Il Settimanale di Padre Pio, the weekly of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate.


Similarly extra ecclesiam nulla salus is also a dogma of the Church defined by three councils. It is a dogma of the Church which does not refer to those saved in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire. It does not claim that these are exceptions to the dogmatic teaching that every one needs to convert into the Catholic Church to avoid the fires of Hell. (Cantate Domino, Council of Florence).


There are no Church documents also which claim that those saved in invincible ignorance (Lumen Gentium 16, Vatican Council II) are explicitly known and so contradict the dogma.


To suggest that everyone needs to enter the Church except for those in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire is heresy. It is rejecting the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.


The three Popes who gave us the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus knew that those saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are implicit and so do not contradict the dogma. So they did not mention it.

CONTINUED

Catholic Mission said...

Tuesday, October 18, 2011
FR.MASIMILLIANO DEGASPARI EXPLAINS THE IMPORTANCE OF A DOGMA

Father Masimillian Degaspari refers to the dogma of the Assumption into Heaven of Our Lady, in body and soul as Pope Pius XII taught (1). The Church believes in the Assumption of the Mother of God in body and soul.

Fr. Masimillino Degaspari F.I has explained the dogma of the Assumption into Heaven of Our Lady, body and soul in Il Settimanale di Padre Pio, the weekly of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate.

Similarly extra ecclesiam nulla salus is also a dogma of the Church defined by three councils. It is a dogma of the Church which does not refer to those saved in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire. It does not claim that these are exceptions to the dogmatic teaching that every one needs to convert into the Catholic Church to avoid the fires of Hell. (Cantate Domino, Council of Florence).

There are no Church documents also which claim that those saved in invincible ignorance (Lumen Gentium 16, Vatican Council II) are explicitly known and so contradict the dogma.

To suggest that everyone needs to enter the Church except for those in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire is heresy. It is rejecting the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

The three Popes who gave us the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus knew that those saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are implicit and so do not contradict the dogma. So they did not mention it.

CONTINUED

Catholic Mission said...

CONTINUED
Similarly St. Thomas Aquinas mentioned the possibility of the man in the forest in ignorance, who could be saved but at the same time St. Thomas Aquinas affirmed the ‘rigorist interpretation’ of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 did not say that Fr.Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for heresy but for disobedience. The excommunication was lifted without the priest having to recant.
The participants at this seminar allege that everyone on earth does not have to enter the Church through Catholic Faith and the baptism of water since there could be some people saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance. They assume that these cases are not implicit but explicit and so are exceptions to the dogma which Pope Pius XII called an ‘infallible statement’ (Letter of the Holy office 1949).

This is the error being made by priests and seminarians at the Philosophy Seminary of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate in Boccea, Rome where Fr. Settimo Manelli F.I is the Rector. Fr. Settimo, one of the speakers at the symposium along with Fr. Massimiliano DeGaspari ,will not publicly affirm the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/07/seminarian-of-franciscan-friars-of.html#links
This is also the error (heresy?) of Fr. Giovanni Manelli F.I, on of the speakers at this symposium who consider those saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire as explicitly known and so contradicting the dogma.



Both of them are admirable, good priests and are probably just picking up what others repeat without thinking.
-Lionel Andrades
E-mail: lionelandrades10@gmail.com
_________________________________________


1.
Fr.Masimilliano Degaspari F.I says:


The fundamentals of a dogma are not strictly theological, biblical or patristic reasoning but Faith that is universal and which the Church teaches. A faith that helps define a dogma with the universal consensus of the ordinary magisterium of the Church.Il Settimanale di Padre Pio, Ottobre 2, 2011. Speciale Simposio Mariologico Internazionale di Padre Serafico M. Lanzetta F. I)

Its a mortal sin to deny the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. It is a sacrilege to receive the Eucharist in this condition- Fr. Gabrielle, priest of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/07/its-mortal-sin-to-deny-dogma-extra.html#links

TheLastCatholicinBoston said...

Here is your answer.
Any measure of a Priests 'Holiness' would be a subjective measure.
Even pastorially some folks like a warm hug - others - a kick in the pants. Even a 'score' of obedience to the rubrics of the Mass and the degree to which he follows the guidelines of what a homily should contain -would be problematic.
So,
My score card would include:
Follows the Mass Rubrics Yes No
Girl alter servers? Yes No
Use of EME? Yes No
Latin Mass 4 times/month? Yes No

You'll get men back to Mass. You will revive Catholic Culture, increase vocations, increase reverence for the Eucharists and support Pope Benedict.

You will also make
some people around town very very angry because they are modernists and everything is relative and there are no absolutes etc. etc. etc. You will also be accused of being uncharitable.

I speak only for myself, no clergy has guided, influenced or otherwise tampered with my particular thoughts relative to the question. My comments have no dogmatic authority and represent my personal interpretations of the State of the Church in Boston and what could potentially be a method to improve the state of affairs leading to the salvation of a greater number.

TheLastCatholicinBoston said...

also

Eucharistic adoration? Yes No

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=dBBSh-0sr-M#!

Carol said...

I have asked you to answer the question now close to a half dozen times. I don't understand why you keep dancing around it. You have to be doing it intentionally, which is a bit disturbing.

Holiness is an interior disposition - a state between a soul and God. Having a website that characterizes whether the priest is using valid matter, preaching and teaching the faith has nothing to do with judging the interior disposition and state of relationship with God. That accusation is way off the mark. I have explained this before so either you are not reading what I am saying or you are intentionally repeating the misunderstanding. Either way, this conversation is very disturbing and I am finished with it.

God Bless,

Catholic Mission said...

Carol,
There could be seemingly holy Hindu priests and Buddhist monks but the Catholic Church tells us de fide that they are all going to Hell.

In Christ
Lionel

Carol said...

Lionel,

That is exactly right. Someone could have an outward appearance of reverence and have a real spiritual battle going on inside.

A priest who is teaching Catholic doctrine, leading and healing with sanctifying grace, promoting our devotions, and saying a valid Mass is factual. It is a project that says here is where you will find our religion in all of its glory. Here is where you, your children owill never be led astray.

We can and should be a witness in these parishes about what is happening to Christ with Communion by hand and the use of EMEs but we cannot exclude these places from being the shining lights on the hill in this valley of tears. That would be a terrible disservice for all concerned.


There are always going to be people who have been abused, hurt, who will be traumatized by the imperfections. Been there. Those moments can serve to teach everyone, serve everyone and improve the quality of what we offer Christ. If you have to money on down the road because you are in a place where it overwhelms you, that is ok. Go. I've been there too.

Believe me when I say I have zero tolerance for heresy, sophomoric antics, drivel or liturgical abuses but until Rome puts the kibosh on EMEs and Communion by hand it is slander to characterize the priest as unfaithful or irreverent or a non-believer.

Catholic Mission said...

Carol says,
Alternately, those who trump Church teaching by saying God only saves through baptism by water reject the theology of God's mercy and place themselves above Christ's Church as the arbiter of truth and moreover, above God as the arbiter of salvation...
_____________________________

LIVE WITH JOY BUT KNOW THAT EVERY NON CATHOLIC YOU MEET ON THE STREET IS ORIENTED TO HELL
There are no exceptions since those saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16) are always implicit and never explicitly known to us.

A mission program for youth recently had ‘villlages of joy’, the Charismatic Renewal calls to express joy, Our Lady at Medugorje has the same message. I am reminded of it as a little copy of the September message fell out of my pocket as I was searching for a paper.


Joy is a gift of the Holy Spirit and I believe it comes naturally when you live a certain life. I am reminded of the ‘perfect joy’ of St. Francis of Assisi. He found it in very extreme suffering. Extreme, by our comfortable standards. If you have not read the book, then read ‘The Little Flowers of St. Francis of Assisi’, (1) it is a narration of the early life of the Franciscans when Francis speaks about ‘perfect joy’. Where do you find it? How to find it? The book is inspiring.


The book may not be meaningful to many Franciscan religious today since it has the theme of outside the church there is no salvation. Francis often speaks of Hell and mentions religious going there. Francis would freely talk about Hell and no salvation outside the Church and the fear of God - and yet he experienced perfect joy.


Today socially you could find yourself in a ‘wasn’t that great, ha, ha, ha’, ‘I like that ha, ha, ha’ crowd. Counterfeit joy. One has to live in this society knowing that all non Catholics, and Catholics in mortal sin, are oriented to Hell with fire. No ha, ha, ha there.The media projects perfect images, all smiling and seemingly happy. There is the on the air, happiness, when the red light is switched on.


The saints tell us Hell is dirty, it smells, the sights are bad and no one sleeps.


No one talks about this.


At Medugorje Our Lady says there is Hell and people go there. This is a politically incorrect message of hers. I think the visionaries there are not asking her many things. Or at least they are not making her answers public, to avoid controversy. Example, what if they asked Our Lady where is the Muslim prophet now...? One group would say the answer is true, others, that this is right wing extremism.


Where is the prophet? Francis could give a direct answer and maintain perfect joy!-Lionel Andrades
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/live-with-joy-but-know-that-every-non.html

Carol said...

Salvation under these circumstances do happen but only God knows to whom it applies. This is the teaching of the Church. We don't know to whom it applies just like we don't know anything else that God knows.

Anyone citing anything from any document and interpreting it as evidence the Catechism contradicts Church teaching is in error. There are no errors in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Anyone cooking up the idea the Catechism has errors needs to find a solid priest for counseling and the Sacraments. Spreading those errors around to others is not a good idea.

There is no matrix for Catholics to cook up their own theology and then claim it is Catholic teaching. If it is good enough for the Pope, it is good enough for us.

Catholic Mission said...

Carol says:
Salvation under these circumstances do happen but only God knows to whom it applies. This is the teaching of the Church. We don't know to whom it applies just like we don't know anything else that God knows.
Lionel: True. We cannot judge individually. However the Bible tells us that some people are oriented to Hell e.h fornictors...

And the Church says all non Catholics need to enter the Church to avoid Hell. This is based on Jesus' teachings.
So we as Catholics know that certain actions and certain people are oriented to Hell.

Lionel

Catholic Mission said...

Carol says:
Anyone citing anything from any document and interpreting it as evidence the Catechism contradicts Church teaching is in error. There are no errors in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Anyone cooking up the idea the Catechism has errors needs to find a solid priest for counseling and the Sacraments. Spreading those errors around to others is not a good idea.


Lionel:The Catechism does not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. However one can interpret the Catechism wrongly and in contradiction of the dogma

Catholic Mission said...

Carol

There is no matrix for Catholics to cook up their own theology and then claim it is Catholic teaching. If it is good enough for the Pope, it is good enough for us.

Lionel:If it is good enough for the pope, in accord with the other popes and the magisterium texts then it is good enough for us.

Carol said...

Lionel,

I believe we are saying the exact same thing.

TheLastCatholicinBoston said...

Carol,
Here is a list of the correction made in the 2nd edition of the 1994 CCC.

http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/updates.htm

If I died before the 2nd addition did I have the fullness of the faith?

"There are no errors in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Anyone cooking up the idea the Catechism has errors needs to find a solid priest for counseling and the Sacraments."

Perhaps they need to just relax, not be so scrupulous, avoid clericalism and buy the 2nd edition...

Oh, and while i got ya...
Medugorje is a complete and utter HOAX.
Visits from BVM -
The three in Fatima 6 times...
including one with 70,000 witnesses.
Ivan's hometown crowd 40,000 times.
Only a modernist would even entertain this diabolical absurdity.
Come on Lionel Our Lady has visited the Yugoslav seers Forty thousand times and counting?

5) Believe Medjugoje Hoax? Yes No

Catholic Mission said...

Carol says:
I believe we are saying the same thing.

Lionel: Are you saying that all the non Catholics you meet or see on the street are oriented to Hell ?

Carol said...

I did not realize you were saying you have personal knowledge about the souls of the non-Catholics you meet and they are going to hell. That is knowledge only God has so no, I am definitely not claiming I have that knowledge. Good luck with that, I was affirming the teaching of the Church.

LCIB,

You posted this link in the context of claiming the Church was correcting doctrinal errors they made. Since anyone rational can see they were enriching the syntax of teaching, not correcting doctrinal mistakes it seems kinda sneaky and sophomoric.

Yes, the only thing Catholics have to be concerned about is assent. Every day, by the hour if necessary. You are living as if Christ left the Magisterium in your brain. There isn't a dime's worth of difference between what you are doing and what Joan Chittister does.

I presume your question about Medjugore is directed at Lionel as he is the party who referenced it and I have been clear through ten years of blogging that I don't buy it. The Holy See has not put the formal kibosh on it so he is free to follow it if he wishes. There is a sucker born every minute. They have been dropping hints for years for those able to discern. It is my understanding the hammer is going to come down at the end of the investigation in God's time. It won't come soon enough for me.

Catholic Mission said...

Carol says:I did not realize you were saying you have personal knowledge about the souls of the non-Catholics you meet and they are going to hell. That is knowledge only God has so no, I am definitely not claiming I have that knowledge.
Lionel: Neither you nor I have personal knowledge of the souls we meet on the street. We agree here.

Carol:
Good luck with that, I was affirming the teaching of the Church.

Lionel: The Church in the dogma Cantate Domino, Council of Florence says every one needs to convert into the Church to avoid Hell.
Everyone means every one you meet on the street.
Lumen Gentium 14 and Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II says all need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation.
Similarly with the Catechism, Dominus Iesus etc.
Are you affirming the teaching of the Church ?

In Christ
Lionel

Carol said...

Lionel,

I don't know what you're doing here but in light of these recent posts, they are coming across as misleading. Hopefully, this is a communication problem and not a rejection of dogma.

What seem to be doing is citing a fraction of Church teaching, guiding souls to be ignorant of the teaching of salvation in its entirety and then drawing them to a false conclusion that there is nothing in the deposit of faith that opens the door for the Mercy of Christ.

Because we do not have access to the Mind of God, each of us is to work towards the conversion of souls into Christ's One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. This does not mean that each soul we see is 'oriented to hell' or going to hell as only God knows whether that person is rejecting truth, was not evangelized, is a victim of the malpractice or misfeasance of a priest or lay people, is mentally compromised.

Given time constraints, it would be imprudent to repeat myself any further but please know that I'm going to start deleting your comments if they are ambiguous or conflict with Church teaching.

Catholic Mission said...

Carol says:
This does not mean that each soul we see is 'oriented to hell' or going to hell as only God knows whether that person is rejecting truth, was not evangelized, is a victim of the malpractice or misfeasance of a priest or lay people, is mentally compromised.

Lionel: 'This does not mean that each soul we see is 'oriented to hell'. How would you know? can you judge?

I'm using the judgement of the Church in a dogma and the interpretation of the Catechism in accord with that dogma.

Carol said...

Lionel,

As the Catechism of the Catholic Church explains, cited above, Christ's judgment is based upon what you knew and when you knew it.

As the Church explains, cited above, it is impossible for mortals to make the judgment call because of the limitations of human resources.

The Church is not saying and has never said that only way people are saved is by Baptism by Water. It is stated clearly that a person can be ignorant and be saved, can be non-baptized and martyred by blood and be saved, can be saved by desire to be baptized.

The Church has never taught that these circumstances do not exist, She explains that we do not have access the Divine knowledge.

We do not need that knowledge, nor should we want that knowledge. Because we are ignorant of whether a soul who has not been baptized by water will be saved, our job as mortals is to evangelize and work for the conversion of souls into the Catholic Church.

If you are seeing every non-Catholic soul as "oriented to hell" you are eating the apple in the Garden of Eden and what you are seeing is the fruit of the ancient serpent. You have absolutely no way of knowing. None. That is the role of God.

Because there is a God and we are not it, all the Church tells us is to proceed to evangelize every soul that Christ gives us the opportunity to witness about the Sacraments and the Catholic Church AS IF their salvation depended upon it.

That is all. Just proceed to draw people into the Catholic Church AS IF their salvation depended upon it .

Give to God what is God's. Only God knows who is on the road to hell.

The knowledge we have access to, are the list of sins we know we are required repent and use the Sacraments to amend our lives and the duty to evangelize AS IF the soul's salvation depended upon communion with the Catholic Church.

Carol said...

"The Church is not saying and has never said that only way people are saved is by Baptism by Water. It is stated clearly that a person can be ignorant and be saved, can be non-baptized and martyred by blood and be saved, can be saved by desire to be baptized."

Fr. Feeney misunderstood and thereby refuted this Catholic teaching. He fell into the sin of presumption and paid a heavy price.

Heresy can swing both ways.

What is happening is, priests and bishops, who have the highest duty to ensure that the flock is not ignorant is intentionally leaving them ignorant - or worse, baiting them into temptation - because they stupidly translate this teaching to mean there is no requirement to work to convert souls to communion with and through the Catholic Church. But their own soul will bear the weight of every soul lost under their guardianship. Every opportunity squandered and every sin committed. I have never understood Catholics who leave a priest's soul in such peril in the false charity of silence. It is like watching somebody standing on train tracks with an ipod in their ears humming their favorite tunes without yelling "get off the tracks (you idiot), there's a train coming"

As frustrating as this is to watch, we can't overcompensate with another kind of heresy.

Catholic Mission said...

Carol says:
As the Catechism of the Catholic Church explains, cited above, Christ's judgment is based upon what you knew and when you knew it.

Lionel: Christ's judgement is based on those who know about Jesus and the Church and yet do not enter as compared to those in invincible ignorance. Either way it is only Jesus who judges. So why do you have to mention it. Your nothing saying that you know who these cases are?

Since we do not know we depend on what the Church teaches.
CCC 845 says God the Father wants all people to be united in the Catholic Church. The Church is the only Ark of Noah that saves in the Flood.
CCC 846 says all need to enter the Church as through a door (AG 7).
As through a door and the only ark of salvation were terms used by the Church Fathers for outside the church there is no salvation.

Catholic Mission said...

Carol says:
The Church is not saying and has never said that only way people are saved is by Baptism by Water. It is stated clearly that a person can be ignorant and be saved, can be non-baptized and martyred by blood and be saved, can be saved by desire to be baptized.

Lionel: True a person can be saved with the baptism of water and it will not be known to us.

The Church is not saying the baptism of water is the ordinary means of salvation.

The ordinary means of salvation is the Catholic Church (Redemptoris Missio 55).

Catholic Faith and the baptism of water is the ordinary means of salvation.(LG 14,AG 7)

Catholic Mission said...

Carol says:
If you are seeing every non-Catholic soul as "oriented to hell" you are eating the apple in the Garden of Eden and what you are seeing is the fruit of the ancient serpent. You have absolutely no way of knowing. None. That is the role of God.

Lionel: We believe that the Catholic Church is the only moral authority. This is the only Church Jesus founded. This is the only Church that has the fullness of truth. Outside this Church which is the Mystical Body of Jesus no one is saved. This is the Church that God wants all people to enter.
It is this Church, and not me, which tells us that all non Catholics who do not convert are oriented to Hell.

Carol said...

Lionel - I agree the Deposit of Faith contains everything you say it does, but for this sentence:

"It is this Church, and not me, which tells us that all non Catholics who do not convert are oriented to Hell."

Perhaps what I truly disagree with is your use of the word 'oriented' because the Church is saying we have limited means to know what God knows so there is no way anyone can say a soul is 'oriented' towards Hell. The Church does not teach this and you should re-calibrate your message.

The Church teaches that we only have the means to judge the actions and therefore we work on converting every soul to One Institution that Christ left as the offering to all who wish to enter into eternal life through Its Heavenly Gate.

It is an offer to all but all do not enter. What happens to those who do not enter is a crap shoot at best. For sure, there is a division and angels gather souls to take them one way and the minions of the devil take custody of his charges. Given Christ's documented statements an sweating of Blood in the Garden of Gethsememe, I don't believe He is edified by the number.

Catholic Mission said...

Wednesday, October 26, 2011
NON CATHOLICS CAN BE SAVED IN INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE, BAPTISM OF DESIRE AND IT DOES NOT CONTRADICT THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS- Daphne McLeod, Pro Ecclesia et Pontifice, England
Vatican Council II does not oppose the centuries old interpretation of the dogma outside the church there is no salvation.


Daphne McLeod yesterday (Oct.25,2011) said that the possibility of non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance or with the baptism of desire does not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.


In an e-mail received yesterday (1) she also said that she had read the reports I sent her especially with reference to the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) and extra ecclesiam nulla salus. She agrees that those saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire do not contradict the dogma which tells us that every one needs to convert into the Church for salvation.

She said she accepts the possibility of non Catholics being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire (http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2009/10/catholic-church-teaches-muslim-in.html#links).
However it is understood that these cases are known only to God.Non Catholic religions are not paths to salvation and their members need to enter the Catholic Church to avoid Hell. This is the teaching of the Catholic Church before and after Vatican Council II.


She is affirming the dogma which Pope Pius XII called ‘the infallible teaching’ (Letter of the Holy Office 1949).This was the interpretation of the Church Fathers, it was defined at three Church Councils, repeated in the ordinary magisterium of the popes, taught by numerous saints and included in Vatican Council II (LG 14,AG 7).
continued

Catholic Mission said...

continued
Daphne McLeod who has taught for forty years in Catholic Junior and primary schools, daily teaching Religious Education is telling us that all the non-Catholic participants at the Assisi interfaith meeting tomorrow are oriented to Hell and there are no exceptions. This is the official teaching of the Catholic Church according to Magisterial texts.


Daphne McLeod has been a member of the Catholic Evidence Guild, and friend of Frank Sheed and Maisie Ward, she spoke regularly at Speaker’s Corner in Hyde Park. The Chairman of Pro Ecclesia et Pontifice, U.K says that non Catholic religions, including those of Protestants and Orthodox Christians are not paths to salvation (Cantate Domino, Council of Florence 1441, Vatican Council II LG 14, AG 7 etc). All non Catholics participating at the Assisi inter faith meeting are lost forever at the time of death unless they convert into the Church. This is not just her personal opinion but it has always been taught by the Catholic Church.


It may be mentioned that finally someone has said it loud and clear. We love all people and seek peace. We also believe that all non Catholics with no exception will go to the fires of Hell. This is not just a personal view but the teaching of the Catholic Church in three defined dogmas and in Vatican Council II.-Lionel Andrades

continued

Catholic Mission said...

continued
____________________________________________

1.Yes, of course, Lionel. That is what I was always taught about "Outside the Church there is no Salvation" way back when I was at school in the thirties and forties. That is also why we have always had missionaries who gave their lives to teach the Faith.-Daphne McLeod
ASSISI INTERFAITH MEETING OCT.27: OLD PROBLEM AMONG TRADITIONALISTS SURFACE
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/assisi-interfaith-meeting-oct27-old.html


SSPX CONSIDERS THOSE SAVED IN INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE AND WITH THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE AS DE FACTO KNOWN TO US : DISCERNING LIBERALS MUST BE LAUGHING UP THEIR SLEEVE
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/sspx-considers-those-saved-in_24.html


SSPX CONSIDERS THOSE SAVED IN INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE AND WITH THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE AS EXCEPTIONS TO THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS THIS IS HERESY
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/sspx-considers-those-saved-in.html


SSPX IN HERESY CALLS ATTENTION TO HERESY AT ASSISI
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/07/sspx-in-heresy-calls-attention-to.html#links


SSPX CLARIFY FOR US WHAT IS YOUR DOCTRINAL POSITION ON THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/09/sspx-clarify-for-us-what-is-your.html#links


ARCHBISHOP MARCEL LEFEBVRE CALLED "TO PREACH" THE RIGORIST INTERPRETATION OF "EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS"
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/07/archbishop-marcel-lefebvre-called-to.html#links


SSPX CLARIFY FOR US WHAT IS YOUR DOCTRINAL POSITION ON THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/09/sspx-clarify-for-us-what-is-your.html#links


NORMS FOR THE TRIDENTINE RITE MASS VIOLATED ?
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/norms-for-tridentine-rite-mass-violated.html


Michael Voris Hits the Jackpot…that is, “the dogma”- Brother André Marie MICM :RealCatholicTV affirms the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/09/michael-voris-hits-jackpotthat-is-dogma.html#links


CATHOLIC LAY PROFESSOR AT UNIVERSITA EUROPA DI ROMA AFFIRMS DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/catholic-lay-professor-at-universita.html


LEGIONARY OF CHRIST PRIEST FR.RAFAEL PASCUAL AFFIRMS CANTATE DOMINO, COUNCIL OF FLORENCE
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/legionary-of-christ-priest-frrafael.html


FR.TULLIO ROTONDO AFFIRMS CANTATE DOMINO, COUNCIL OF FLORENCE ON EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/08/frtullio-rotondo-affirms-cantate-domino.html#links


CANTATE DOMINO, COUNCIL OF FLORENCE ON EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS IS DE FIDE AND NOT CONTRADICTED BY VATICAN COUNCIL II- Fr. Nevus Marcello O.P
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/07/cantate-domino-council-of-florence-on.html


BRAZILIAN PRIEST SAYS VATICAN COUNCIL II DOES NOT CONTRADICT DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/07/brazilian-priest-says-vatican-council.html#links


CATHOLIC PRIESTS IN ROME AGREE WITH FR.LEONARD FEENEY: THERE IS NO BAPTISM OF DESIRE THAT WE CAN KNOW OF
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/08/catholic-priests-in-rome-agree-with.html#links


ANGELICUM UNIVERSITY IS CHURNING OUT THEOLOGY DEGREES FOR THOSE WHO SAY FR.LEONARD FEENEY WAS EXCOMMUNICATED FOR REJECTING THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/angelicum-university-is-churning-out.html

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/non-catholics-can-be-saved-in.html

Catholic Mission said...

Monday, November 28, 2011
USCCB, CCBEW, CATHOLIC ANSWERS, CUF IMPLY POPE PIUS XII SUGGESTED IN THE LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE THAT THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE WAS AN EXCEPTION TO THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
This is false. The letter refers to the dogma and indicates that de facto everyone needs to enter the Church and it also mentions that de jure a non Catholic can be saved with the baptism of desire. The Letter was critical of the Archbishop of Boston who indicated that those saved with the baptism of desire are defacto cases, known and visible. The Letter supports Fr. Leonard Feeney on doctrine.


For the baptism of desire to be an exception to the dogma outside the church there is no salvation it would have to be visible and known. Implicit unknown to us baptism of desire is not an exception to the dogma which indicates every one must me a visible member of the Church.
CONTINUED

Catholic Mission said...

continued
Monday, November 28, 2011
USCCB, CCBEW, CATHOLIC ANSWERS, CUF IMPLY POPE PIUS XII SUGGESTED IN THE LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE THAT THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE WAS AN EXCEPTION TO THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
This is false. The letter refers to the dogma and indicates that de facto everyone needs to enter the Church and it also mentions that de jure a non Catholic can be saved with the baptism of desire. The Letter was critical of the Archbishop of Boston who indicated that those saved with the baptism of desire are defacto cases, known and visible. The Letter supports Fr. Leonard Feeney on doctrine.


For the baptism of desire to be an exception to the dogma outside the church there is no salvation it would have to be visible and known. Implicit unknown to us baptism of desire is not an exception to the dogma which indicates every one must me a visible member of the Church.
continued

Catholic Mission said...

continued
The Letter affirms ‘the dogma’ as did Fr. Leonard Feeney. The dogma does not mention any exceptions and neither does Fr. Leonard Feeney. The Letter seems to refer to the issue of the baptism of desire being implied as an exception to the dogma. It is only in reference to the error of the Archbishop and the Jesuits at Boston College.


The Letter like Vatican Council II and other magisterial documents uses the defacto- dejure analysis. The Archbishop and the Jesuits used the clumsy defacto- defacto analysis and contradicted the Principle of Non Contradiction. How could they imply that everyone de facto needs to enter the Church for salvation but some people do not de facto need to enter the Church ?!


To imply that the thrice defined dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus has visible exceptions is heresy. It is a rejectiion of the dogma as it was interpreted for centuries. It is creating a new doctrine.


This error of the visible baptism of desire being a defacto exception to the dogma and Fr. Leonard Feeney is being maintained by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) in the Fr. Peter Phan Notification. They have used the mantra ‘except for those in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire’. The error is also held on the websites by the Conference of Catholic Bishops of England and Wales (CCBEW) ,Catholic Answers, Catholics United for the Faith and so many other Catholics. They assume innocently that the baptism of desire is an exception to the dogma. They wrongly imply that this was taught by Pope Pius XII.
-Lionel Andrades

DID THE CARDINAL WHO ISSUED THE LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE 1949 ASSUME THAT THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE WAS VISIBLE AND AN EXCEPTION TO THE DOGMA ?
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/11/did-cardinal-who-issued-letter-of-holy.html

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/11/usccb-ccbew-catholic-answers-cuf-imply.html