Feast of the Miraculous Medal today

At the Church of San Andrea della Fratte, Rome at the 7.30 Mass today morning Our Lady’s apparitions to St. Catherine Laboure were recalled. The Mass was celebrated at the Altar of the Miracle where Our Lady appeared to Alphonse Ratisbonne who was wearing a Miraculous Medal given to him by a friend.

During the Prayer Intentions it was prayed that the Church be an instrument of salvation for all people. This is Dominus Iesus 22.I wish they had also made a prayer intention based on Dominus Iesus 20.Salvation is open for all but to receive it one needs to respond and enter the Church. Dominus Iesus 22 is vague and can be interpreted as heresy. It could be interpreted as the Church is necessary for all and all who are saved are saved through Jesus and the Church and so non Catholics do not have to convert. They can be saved in general without believing in Jesus or entering the Church. Even if all who are saved are saved by Jesus and the Church, Jesus’ Mystical Body, it does not negate the dogma which says there is exclusive salvation in only the Catholic Church and does not mention any exceptions.

All need to be visible members of the Church, with faith and baptism (AG 7). If someone objects and says that Fr. Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for saying that every one needed to be a visible member of the Church for salvation, know this is an opinion. Something implied. The text of the Holy Office 1949 does not state this. One has to imply it. The text refers to disobedience and not  doctrine as the basis for the excommunication.

The priest at the next Mass at 8 a.m said   10 years after Our Lady appeared to Catherine Laboure she appeared to Alphonse Ratisbonne, at that very altar where he was offering Holy Mass this morning. This sanctuary of Our Lady was special, he said, for the Polish priest St. Maximillian Kolbe for whom the Miraculous Medal was part  of mission and teaching.

St. Maximillian Kolbe and Alphonse Ratisbonne, I thought, did not teach the new doctrine of the dead who are saved being visible to us all on earth. Today Vatican Council II and the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 are being interpreted with this irrationality of the visible- deceased.

It is generally held that we are able to see the dead saved in invincible ignorance, a good conscience, implicit desire etc and so these known cases on earth are exceptions to St. Maximillian Kolbe’s understanding of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus in the 1930’s.

The Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) today cannot be granted canonical status unless they accept this new doctrine in the interpretation of Vatican Council II and the Letter of the Holy Office. The Archbishops at Ecclesia Dei and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,Vatican imply there is explicit implicit salvation mentioned in Vatican Council II.

 So all traditionalists are being forced to accept this and the SSPX could be penalized for being disobedient to this innovation.

The American under Secretary at the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei,Vatican Mons. Arthur Calkins F.I also holds on to this irrationality. He writes in praise of Alphonse Ratisbonne but cannot affirm the traditional dogma as did Ratisbonne who in a flash was shown the beauty of the Catholic Church and its necessity for the salvation for all people.-Lionel Andrades

http://www.marys-touch.com/Saints/medal/medal.htm

Ask Ecclesia Dei if the SSPX can accept Vatican Council II without the error of the dead being visible on earth

The Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei in a letter, responding to queries by a priest, has stated that :

As long as the Society does not have canonical status in the Church,its ministers do not excercise legitimate ministries in the Church.There needs to be a distinction then,between the disciplinary level which deals with individuals as such,and the doctrinal level at which minsitry and instituion are involved.In order to make this clear once again: until the doctrinal questions are clarified, the Society has no canonical status in the Church...- Ecclesia Dei, Vatican City. November 6,2012 (posted on Rorate Caeli)

This is the time for the SSPX to respond. Doctrine is in their favour, if they only understand!

Ask Ecclesia Dei if Vatican Council II can be accepted as a continuation with Tradition, with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to Fr.Leonard Feeney and the Syllabus of Errors. We do not know any case of a non Catholic being saved with implicit desire or in invincible ignorance for these cases to be relevant to the literal interpretation of the dogma on salvation.

Ask them if the SSPX can accept Vatican Council II without the error of the dead being visible on earth. So Lumen Gentium 16 on invincible ignorance and a good conscience, would not contradict the thrice defined dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Nor would it contradict Ad Gentes 7 which says all need faith and baptism for salvation.

Vatican Council II would be in agreement doctrinally with the SSPX position on other religions and ecumenism.( Cantate Domino, Council of Florence 1441, Ad Gentes 7, Catechism of the Catholic Church 845 and 846 etc).

Ask them if it is a new doctrine and not part of the deposit of the faith to hold the view, that there is explicit implicit salvation and- then  to claim that this is mentioned in the text of Vatican Council II.

If Ecclesia Dei can throw away the dogma because of allegedly known cases of the dead saved and visible to us, then they should not expect Catholics not to throw away Church teachings on, abortion  and contraception.

-Lionel Andrades

Traditionalists could simply affirm Vatican Council II and the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 according to the literal interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus

Traditionalists must inform Ecclesia Dei and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith that they accept the Letter of the Holy Office and Vatican Council II in agreement with the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Error. They interpret them with the hermeneutic of continuity and not a break from the past

Dignitatis Humanae can be interpreted according to Tradition.Nostra Aetate and Unitatis Redintigratio also has a traditional interpretation.Catholics traditionalists are unfortunately still using an interpretation of the Letter and the Council based on implicit statements.

It is implied that both these Magisterial documents state there is known salvation outside the Church.They do not.

When the text of the Letter and Vatican Council II does not state that we know these cases why presume that we know them?Just because the media, secular and Catholic, make this error, Traditionalists do not need to follow.

Interpret all magisterial texts based on tradition and not what is assumed in error.

The apologist John Martigioni says, 'Zero cases of something are not exceptions'.There are zero cases of non Catholics saved who are visible to us  in 2012. So they cannot be exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors.

When these two documents do not claim that there are exceptions why should we presume that there are exceptions? Possibilities are not exceptions.

We can accept in principle the possibility of non Catholics being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire,seeds of the word, good conscience etc.The Letter of the Holy Office  and Vatican Council do not state that these cases are known, defacto, on earth. If it is implied that we can see these cases on earth it would be irrational.So we should not believe that the magisterium made this mistake.

When Denzinger quotes the Letter of the Holy Office ,no where is it said that there are exceptions to the salvation dogma.Denzinger does not make this error.

What is implied by many is not a fact.It is not Catholic doctrine and the SSPX and traditionalists should not be expected to accept it. A possibility is not a reality.A possibility is not a known exception.It is not an exception it is a 'zero case'.

Dignitatis Humanae(DH) refers to the liberty a non Catholic has to live his faith in a society with a secular Constitution.The text of DH recognizes that non Catholic religions are in error and Catholics have the right to proclaim their Faith with religious liberty.Morally we can still proclaim the Faith in a secular society - even if it becomes illegal to do so.

Similarly Nostra Aetate,Vatican Council II  does not state that non Catholic religions are equal paths to salvation or that the members of these religions are saved in general.The possibility of salvation among non Catholics is not a known reality in 2012. So it does not contradict the dogma which says all need to convert into the Church for salvation .(See also Ad Gentes 7,Dominus Iesus 20,CCC845 etc).

Similarly when Unitatis Redintigratio mentions those in imperfect communion with the Church we cannot presume to know these cases in the present times,for them to be exceptions to Tradition.

Traditionalists can affirm the Letter of the Holy Office in accord with Tradition. The Letter could be saying that Fr.Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for disobedience or for heresy. Choose one. If he was excommunicated for heresy and doctrine then the Letter made an objective mistake. It is a fact that the dead are not visible. We cannot see someone saved with implicit desire etc.

There cannot be a new Catholic teaching based on what is assumed and not mentioned in magisterial documents.

The traditionalist understanding of the Letter of the Holy Office and Vatican Council II is based on non-facts, irrationality and assuming.Vatican Council II is really traditional.

So Traditionalists must inform Ecclesia Dei and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith that they accept the Letter of the Holy Office and Vatican Council II in agreement with the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Error. They interpret them with the hermeneutic of continuity and not a break from the past.-Lionel Andrades

Photos from the websites of the Francscan Friars of the Immaculate, CMRI and Institute of Christ the King.