Tuesday, February 27, 2018

Cardinal Ratzinger and Cardinal Luiz Ladaria in Christianity and the World Religions(ITC 1997) are in schism with the past Church Councils and popes.They can issue a correction if they want to.


The Holy See

In 1997 Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger and Fr. Luiz Ladaria s.j,President, ITC, began the elimination of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).They did this by interpreting Vatican Council II with the for and against EENS method.They also interpreted EENS with the invisible cases of the baptism of desire are visible exceptions to EENS method. The result can be seen on the Vatican website.1 It is a webpage in Italian from the daily L'Osservatorio Romano. It is a summary of the International Theological Commissions paper Christianity and the World Religions (1997).(Il Cristianesimo e le Altre Grandi Religiono)
Since 1997 Cardinal Ratzinger has chosen to interpret Vatican Council II and EENS using an irrational premise to create a non traditional conclusion. It would be a break with EENS and the past ecclesiology of the Church. So there is a new understanding of EENS for Pope Benedict and Cardinal Luiz Ladaria s.j.It is EENS with exceptions, a non traditional EENS.Then there is a Vatican Council II having exceptions to traditional EENS.Both are an innovation in the Church.
For me there is a Vatican Council II with no exceptions to traditional EENS .There is also a traditional EENS for me and I do not know of an EENS with exceptions.
Then as if to complete his life's work of error Pope Benedict in March 2016(Avvenire) said that EENS today( with his exceptions) is no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century( there were no exceptions for them). Since for him( and not for me) there was 'a development' with Vatican Council II (with exceptions to EENS).This is the only interpretation of Vatican Council II he seems to know.So he questioned the need for mission when Vatican Council II for him( and not for me) indicates that there is salvation outside the Church.This would seem reasonble, since for him there is only a Vatican Council II with exceptions to EENS.
All this is subterfuge or an innocent mistake, Masonic or just ignorance? I don't know.
Fr.Luiz Ladaria s.j was the President of the Intenational Theological Commission when this error was made in 1997.He interpreted Vatican Council II and EENS with an objective mistake.He is now the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF).
The Prefect of the CDF  does not interpret Vatican Council II like me.Neither does he interpret EENS like I do.
He has created a different version of Vatican Council II and EENS which is an innovation and differs from my traditional and rational approach.By avoiding the false premise I automatically go back to the old theology. I do not have to create any thing new.
I have no agenda to follow. I do not have to please any lobby. I am just interpreting Vatican Council II as I read it.
Cardinal Ratzinger and Cardinal Luiz Ladaria in Christianity and the World Religions(ITC 1997) are in schism with the past Church Councils and popes.
They can issue a correction if they want to.
-Lionel Andrades


1.
COMMISSIONE TEOLOGICA INTERNAZIONALE
  IL CRISTIANESIMO E LE ALTRE GRANDI RELIGIONI
Uno studio della Commissione Teologica Internazionale*
(1997)


http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_cti_1997_cristianesimo-religioni-studio-cti_it.html

The battle begins and is centered around this dogma, because once the necessity of the Catholic Faith is denied then everything else becomes meaningless. - MHFM

 From the Most Holy Family Monastery (sedevacantist) website:
Dear Brother Dimond's
My friend says to me that you are nothing but a bunch of Feeneyites. I don't believe it for a moment. I said to him "Well I like them." And as for Fr Feeney, I like him too, especially his book of poems "In Towns and Little Towns".   How can I explain to him that you are not Feeneyites?
God bless
Michael Vincent
MHFM:
We are Catholics.  Do we agree with Fr. Feeney on the absolute necessity of water baptism for salvation?  Yes, because this is what the Catholic Church teaches.  You should ask your friends if they are salvation-for-members-of-false-religions-endorsing heretics. 
Pope Paul III, The Council of Trent, Sess. 7, Can. 5 on the Sacrament of Baptism, ex cathedra“If anyone says that baptism [the Sacrament] is optional, that is, not necessary for salvation (cf. Jn. 3:5): let him be anathema.”
Pope Eugene IV, The Council of Florence, “Exultate Deo,” Nov. 22, 1439:  “Holy baptism, which is the gateway to the spiritual life, holds the first place among all the sacraments; through it we are made members of Christ and of the body of the Church.  And since death entered the universe through the first man, ‘unless we are born again of water and the Spirit, we cannot,’ as the Truth says, ‘enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:5].  The matter of this sacrament is real and natural water.”
Unfortunately, your friends probably despise Fr. Feeney because they despise the dogma on salvation.  Perhaps the following will cause them to reconsider their assessment of Fr. Feeney: 
DID FR. FEENEY PREDICT THE LOSS OF THE POPE? – FROM OUR BOOK ON SALVATION
Before I get into this point, I must remind the reader that we are not “Feeneyites” and that I had never heard of Fr. Leonard Feeney when I came to the same conclusion on the absolute necessity of water baptism based on the dogmatic teaching of the Catholic Church.  We don’t agree with some of Fr. Feeney’s conclusions on Justification (we believe he was mistaken in good faith on these points).     
In the following passages from Fr. Feeney’s book, Bread of Life—which is made up of Fr. Feeney’s sermons before Vatican II—he connects the eventual loss of the pope (i.e., what we have experienced with the reign of the Vatican II antipopes) to the denial of the dogma Outside the Catholic Church There is No Salvation. 
Fr. Leonard Feeney S.J., Bread of Life, pp. 32-33:“We have Protestants in an arrangement-religion that never knows what to call itself from one week to another, that never knows what its new minister is going to tell it from chapter to chapter of Holy Scripture.  We have Unitarians who have no faith in the assured Jesus, getting more indefinite about what Christianity meant to say.  And, of course, we have Jews evading the Faith, running away from it, pretending they do not hear the name of Jesus – pretending Christmas is not the birth of Jesus Christ, and getting civic leaders to remove ‘Merry Christmas’ from in front of City Hall and to substitute for it ‘Seasons Greetings,’ because the word ‘Christ’ in ‘Christmas’ annoys them.  All this, horrible as it is, I am prepared to cope with.
     “But imagine a priest in the Holy Roman Catholic Church, ordained by the successors of the Apostles – dedicated to the Name and purpose and Blood and robes of Jesus – sitting at Harvard College week after week and listening to religion being lectured about in invisible terms.  And imagine their going back, then, to their people and telling them about the ‘soul of the Church,’ of ‘salvation outside the Church through sincerity’ – apart from the teachings and Sacraments of Jesus Christ; and calling this arrangement ‘Baptism of Desire’...  What kind of teaching is that? That is Christmas without the manger: Good Friday without any God bleeding; Easter Sunday without any Flesh and Blood coming out of the tomb. That is the Christian Faith without any Pope – the most visible religious leader in the World!”

Fr. Feeney, writing the above passage before the Second Vatican Council, predicted the eventual loss of the pope because of the great number of heretics within the structures of the Church who denied the necessity of the Church for salvation.  This is an amazing insight! 
Fr. Feeney also notes that this heresy against the salvation dogma and the necessity of Baptism leads to “Good Friday without any God bleeding.”  Just take a look at the Novus Ordo churches to see if that has been fulfilled.  Fr. Feeney goes on to say in the same chapter:
Fr. Feeney S.J., Bread of Life, p. 42:“When the Vatican Council reconvenes, I humbly plead with our Holy Father, the Pope (Pius XII), that he will immediately gather his plenipotentiary powers of infallible pronouncement to clear up the wild confusion of visible orating (on the part of his priests and bishops) about an invisible Church – or else the gates of Hell will have all but prevailed against us.  The most visible ruler in the world, our Holy Father, in his white robe and white zuchetto, may as well take off his triple tiaraand get down from his golden throne, and leave Christianity to the kind of committee arrangements to which it is committed in the present-day America, if we keep on preaching ‘Baptism of Desire.’”
As can be seen on our video Vatican II: Council of Apostasy and on our website, this statement underlined above—the loss of the papal tiara—actually took place when Antipope Paul VI happily surrendered the papal tiara and papal pectoral cross to the representatives of the United Nations who in turn sold it to a Jewish merchant! 
When Antipope Paul VI gave away the Papal Tiara, it was symbolic of the giving away of Papal authority (although he had none to give away since he was an antipope).   But it was symbolic of how the enemies of the Church, and the non-Catholic heretics, had been allowed to take over the Church’s physical structures and create a counterfeit, non-Catholic sect (the Vatican II sect).  This insight of Fr. Feeney on the Papal Tiara is so accurate that God must have put these words into his mouth.  But it just demonstrates again that once the necessity of the Church is denied the rest of the Faith becomes meaningless.  This is why those who think that the Mass issue is the main issue, and where the battle really lies, are mistaken.  The battle begins and is centered around this dogma, because once the necessity of the Catholic Faith is denied then everything else becomes meaningless.
http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/catholic/mhfm-not-feeneyite/#.WpWsULynHcc


The Eucharist : Communion in the hand

If we really believe what we say we believe, we should be flat on our faces before the Blessed Sacrament. Once you start thinking about it, it seems astounding that we can receive the Sacrament at all. That we are able to stay on our feet at all in Its presence is a direct act of Divine mercy. It is completely mind-boggling that we can have our sins forgiven just by going to Confession. And then receive Holy Communion? The Body and Blood of Christ, that will give us everlasting life? It’s amazing, and terrifying.

On Communion in the Hand (Here, Mr. Ed Peters, Is Why Cardinal Sarah is Absolutely Right)
Monday, February 26, 2018

On Communion in the Hand (Here, Mr. Ed Peters, Is Why Cardinal Sarah is Absolutely Right)

https://abyssum.org/2018/02/27/if-we-really-believe-what-we-say-we-believe-we-should-be-flat-on-our-faces-before-the-blessed-sacrament-once-you-start-thinking-about-it-it-seems-astounding-that-we-can-receive-the-sacrament-at-all/

Bishop Fellay says the SSPX believes in nothing heretical but he still does not know that he interprets Vatican Council II with the for and against extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) method : it is irrational



He (Bishop Bernard Fellay) mentioned the doctrinal talks of 2009-2011, which showed Rome that the SSPX believes nothing heretical and that modern Catholic teaching on certain points stands in stark contrast to the traditional doctrine of the Church.1

news-header-image
Bishop Fellay says that the SSPX believes in nothing heretical but still does not know that the SSPX interprets Vatican Council II with the for and against extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) method.So there is a rupture with the dogma EENS and the past ecclesiology of the Church.The fault lies with the SSPX and not Vatican Council II.
Also he interprets invisible- for- us baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) as being visible exceptions to the dogma EENS. So there is a rupture with EENS , the past ecclesiology and the Syllabus of Errors.
I do not use this irrationality to interpret Vatican Council II and EENS and so my conclusion is different from Bishop Fellay.There is no rupture with Tradition.
The SSPX, like Rome, is using an irrational premise(invisible cases of BOD are visible) and conclusion( BOD excludes the baptism of water and is an  exception to EENS and there is known salvation outside the Church).
Now please note I am not denying BOD,BOB and I.I but pointing out that with visible or invisible BOD,BOB and I.I there are two different interpretations which have two different conclusions.
Also when the for and against method is used to interpret Vatican Council II, the conclusion will be a rupture with Tradition.Since the against passages are  inferred to be visible and known people saved outside the Church, when there are no such people.
-Lionel Andrades


1.


http://fsspx.news/en/news-events/news/bishop-fellay-gives-lecture-michigan-usa-state-society-35572?utm_source=Society+of+Saint+Pius+X+%7C+Newsletter&utm_campaign=f9e1d70c4f-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_02_27&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_8c13eb2341-f9e1d70c4f-203949361

So the charge of schism can now be made against the liberal Catholic faculty in Detroit .It can be made by Bishop Donald Sanborn against Dr.Robert Fastiggi.The tables have turned.

There can be a rational and irrational way to interpret Vatican Council II.We can read the text of Ad Gentes 7,Lumen Gentium 14 etc as being for and against the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).
The passages which are against extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) are interpreted  as being known people saved outside the Church.So there is salvation outside the Church and not no salvation outside the Church.
Now if the against passages are just accepted as being hypothetical( and they can only be hypothetical) then the 'against' passages do not contradict EENS.
Since hypothetical cases cannot be known people in real life who are saved outside the Church.So there is still no known salvation outside the Church for us human beings.
If someone is saved outside the Church it would be known only to God.So it cannot be said that there are, for example. 20 baptism of desire cases this year, or 10 invincible ignorance cases last year.
So the against EENS  passages  are 'neutral passages' which come from the error in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949. These 'neutral passages' when they are mistaken for being against EENS, create a rupture  with EENS and Tradition.It creates a break with the past ecclesiology of the Church.
It creates a schism  with the popes and Church Councils of the past.A schism is a terrible thing it is a sin said Prof.Robert Fastiggi, a professor of theology at the Sacred Heart Major Seminary, Detroit.He mentioned this in the debate with the sedevacantist Bishop Donald Sanborn.The subject was Ecclesiology  and it can be viewed on Youtube.
Now it is Dr.Robert Fastiggi  and Prof. Ralph Martin  at the Sacred Heart Major Seminary, Detroit who interpret the 'neutral passages' as being against EENS. So they are in schism with with past Magisterium.
They do not interpret EENS like the missionaries and magisterium of the 16th century, for example.Hypothetical cases mentioned in Vatican Council II, for them, are not hypothetical.They are concrete examples of salvation outside the Church. Possibilities in the past are real exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, for them, in 2018.
So they will teach and write that not every one needs to enter the Church in 2018 as members for salvation while the popes and Church Councils of the past said the very opposite.
So the charge of schism can be made against the liberal Catholic faculty in Detroit .It can be made by Bishop Donald Sanborn against Dr.Robert Fastiggi.The tables have turned.-Lionel Andrades




https://novusordowatch.org/vatican2-debate-sanborn-fastiggi/

Michael Voris is not being allowed to participate in pastoral and evangelisation programs in the Archdiocese of Detroit : canonist needed

Michael Voris is not allowed to participate in pastoral and evangelisation programs in the Archdiocese of Detroit : must contact a canonist


Michael  Voris is not being allowed to participate  in pastoral and evangelisation programs in the Archdiocese of Detroit and in particular a mens conference .
canonist must inform Deborah Amato  that the auxiliary and Archbishop of Detroit  officially tell Catholics a lie and then create a New Evangelisation,New Ecumenism and New Theology and call it Catholic.
By telling Catholics that invisible baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible  ignorance are visible exceptions to the dogma outside the Church there is no salvation, they lie. This is deception.
There are two ways to interpret Vatican Council II with this lie  and without it.They choose deception.
The New Evangelisation of Amato is based on the irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II.Invisible non Catholics are visible is the premise.The Archdiocese further assumes that these invisible-visible people are in Heaven without the baptism of water.This is all false.It is deception.
The canonist must ask Deborah Amato and the Archdiocese  to interpret Vatican Council II honestly and rationally.Ask them where are the practical exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) in Detroit,Michigan ?
Officially the Archdiocese must clarify their position on this issue.I  have written to them over the years and have not got a reply.I interpret Vatican Council II rationally and do not lie like them.
I have also e-mailed  CMTV  too but they have not responded to this particular point.
The Archdiocese of Detroit is discriminating againt CMTV and are keeping the issue vague.
Since even though Michael Voris does not explain himself with theology, he affirms outside the Church there is no salvation  like Mother Angelica and me.
The canonist must inform the Archdiocese that they:-
1. Assume invisible for us baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance are visible exceptions to Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
2.They assume hypothetical cases  of Lumen Gentium 16( invincible ignorance), Lumen Gentium 14( catechumen who desires the baptism of water),Lumen Gentium 8( elements of sanctification and truth), Nostra Aetate 2( a ray of that Truth which sanctifies all men),Unitatis Redintigratio 3 (imperfect communion with the Church) etc are not hypothetical.They refer to known people saved outside the Church, for the Archdiocese. In this way they become exceptions to the dogma EENS, the past exclusivist ecclesiology and the Syllabus of Errors.
If the Archdiocese's answer is 'Yes' then they admit to the deception.They are telling a lie in public which is already known.They are promoting this lie at Catechism class in schools, to seminarians at the Sacred Heart Major Seminary and in RCIA , Evangelisation and other programs.
They are also not telling the Protestant members of the Alpha program that they are all on the way to Hell without 'faith and baptism'(AG 7) and that LG 16, LG 14,LG 8, NA 2, UR 3, GS 22 etc are not objective exceptions to Ad Gentes 7( all need faith and baptism for salvation), the Council of Florence 1441( outside the Church there is no  salvation) etc.-Lionel Andrades



FEBRUARY 26, 2018


OOPS! -Michael Voris


http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/02/oops-michael-voris.html

https://www.churchmilitant.com/video/episode/vortex-oops