CathInfo.com

Mother Angelica

There was a heresy at one time that you had to be Catholic, otherwise you didn't go to Heaven. That's not what the Church teaches. All people are saved by the merits of Jesus, the grace in the Church, but they don't have to be Catholic. We hope they're all Catholic, but many people are of different religions, no religion, they don't know. Nobody has told them about Jesus, so they're going to be judged only by what they know, what they've been told, and the graces they have, you see.  You know what our dear Lord said: there are other people that we must save, and will enter the Kingdom.

At the video go to timestamp 48:20

Mother Angelica Live
ROAD TO EMMAUS

5/16/2000

Mother Angelica

There was a heresy at one time that you had to be Catholic, otherwise you didn't go to Heaven

This is where we've gotten, to denounce dogma as heresy and promote heresy as dogma.  You have to give Satan some credit for pulling this one off.

Bishop Sanborn

Ecclesiology Debate: Bp. Donald Sanborn vs. Dr. Robert Fastiggi (2004)

In Vatican II we see this repeated, over and over again, that if you are in full communion it means that you are completely reconciled to the Roman Catholic Church, but at the same time, if you are in partial communion it means you have some things in common, somethings not in common.

Timestamp 4:54







Frankenchurch Rises Again: Ratzinger on the Church

Rev. Anthony Cekada

http://www.fathercekada.com/2007/07/16/frankenchurch-rises-again-ratzinger-on-the-church/

According to Vatican II, John Paul II’s Code of Canon Law and Ratzinger’s Catechism of the Catholic Church, all those who have been baptized — Catholics, heretics, schismatics — are incorporated into the “People of God.” This endows them with “degrees of incorporation” into, degrees of “communion” with, or “elements” of, the Church of Christ, which work out as follows:

(1) Catholics: Full incorporation or communion, or all elements of the Church of Christ.
(2) Schismatics and heretics: Partial incorporation or communion, or some elements of the Church of Christ.

Having all elements of the Church is best, but having just some of them is pretty good too.

If you are in the second category and “partially incorporated,” you have “invisible bonds of communion” that somehow attach you to the Church of Christ.

That is why I call it “Frankenchurch.” The Church is not an integral entity, but a monster stitched together with visible and invisible bonds, full and partial, from disparate parts — Catholics, heretics and schismatics.

www.stdominicchapel.com/public_html/content/docuмents/ecclesiology.pdf

Commentary:

Page 5

Those who hold even one doctrine at variance with the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church are to be considered alien to the Church. Therefore they are not in “partial communion.”

The CMRI, SSPX, SSPV, etc.  would say a Protestant in invincible ignorance, if he be in good faith, would be united to the Church by desire.  He is said to have supernatural faith, hope, and charity, he is united to the Catholic Church, but this Protestant publicly espouses his Protestant religion. Is it not fair to say that he has some things in common, somethings not in common with Catholics?


The CMRI, SSPX, SSPV, etc.  would say an Eastern "Orthodox" in invincible ignorance, if he be in good faith, would be united to the Church by desire.  He is said to have supernatural faith, hope, and charity, he is united to the Catholic Church, but this Eastern "Orthodox" publicly espouses his Eastern "Orthodox" religion. Is it not fair to say that he has some things in common, somethings not in common with Catholics?


The CMRI, SSPX, SSPV, etc.  would say a Muslim in invincible ignorance, if he be in good faith, would be united to the Church by desire.  He is said to have supernatural faith, hope, and charity, he is united to the Catholic Church, but this Muslim publicly espouses his Islamic religion. Is it not fair to say that he has some things in common, somethings not in common with Catholics?


The CMRI, SSPX, SSPV, etc.  would say a Jew in invincible ignorance, if he be in good faith, would be united to the Church by desire.  He is said to have supernatural faith, hope, and charity, he is united to the Catholic Church, but this Jew publicly espouses his тαℓмυdic religion. Is it not fair to say that he has some things in common, somethings not in common with Catholics?


The CMRI, SSPX, SSPV, etc.  would say a Buddhist in invincible ignorance, if he be in good faith, would be united to the Church by desire.  He is said to have supernatural faith, hope, and charity, he is united to the Catholic Church, but this Buddhist publicly espouses his Buddhist religion. Is it not fair to say that he has some things in common, somethings not in common with Catholics?


The CMRI, SSPX, SSPV, etc.  would say a Hindu in invincible ignorance, if he be in good faith, would be united to the Church by desire.  He is said to have supernatural faith, hope, and charity, he is united to the Catholic Church, but this Hindu publicly espouses his Brahman religion. Is it not fair to say that he has some things in common, somethings not in common with Catholics?