Gloria.TV News on the 21st of October 2016 Stopped: Cardinal Burke’s plans to ordain priests for the Sovereign Order of Malta has failed. This emerges from a letter of the Prelate of the Maltese, Bishop …More
Gloria.TV News on the 21st of October 2016
Stopped: Cardinal Burke’s plans to ordain priests for the Sovereign Order of Malta has failed. This emerges from a letter of the Prelate of the Maltese, Bishop Jean Laffitte, which Gloria.tv has seen. Laffitte claims that the media reported – quote - "inaccurately" about the plans. He adds that priests who work with the Order of Malta are incardinated in dioceses or religious orders.
Gone: Steve Skojec asks on onepeterfive.com why the documents of Pius XI are missing on the Vatican website where they were once stored. Pius XI was a staunch opponent of the kind of ecumenism and family policies the Vatican now favors. He also wrote about the Social Kingship of Christ.
Innocent: The Supreme Court of the Republic of Perú has completely exonerated defrocked Fr. Luis Alejandro Bazalar García. Fr Bazalar was condemned in January to eight years of prison for alleged abuses against a minor. He was abandoned by his own Church, which defrocked him after …More
Stopped: Cardinal Burke’s plans to ordain priests for the Sovereign Order of Malta has failed. This emerges from a letter of the Prelate of the Maltese, Bishop Jean Laffitte, which Gloria.tv has seen. Laffitte claims that the media reported – quote - "inaccurately" about the plans. He adds that priests who work with the Order of Malta are incardinated in dioceses or religious orders.
Gone: Steve Skojec asks on onepeterfive.com why the documents of Pius XI are missing on the Vatican website where they were once stored. Pius XI was a staunch opponent of the kind of ecumenism and family policies the Vatican now favors. He also wrote about the Social Kingship of Christ.
Innocent: The Supreme Court of the Republic of Perú has completely exonerated defrocked Fr. Luis Alejandro Bazalar García. Fr Bazalar was condemned in January to eight years of prison for alleged abuses against a minor. He was abandoned by his own Church, which defrocked him after …More
Lionel L. Andrades
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
not necessarily to convert.
Lionel:
Pastorally, this was not the way I heard it.
Not necessarily to comvert? Not necessarily to enter the Catholic Church? Why? Are they not all going to Hell outside the Church?
Of course not! He does not believe in the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) or Vatican Council II (AG 7, LG 14) supporting the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Church.
He is not a …More
not necessarily to convert.
Lionel:
Pastorally, this was not the way I heard it.
Not necessarily to comvert? Not necessarily to enter the Catholic Church? Why? Are they not all going to Hell outside the Church?
Of course not! He does not believe in the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) or Vatican Council II (AG 7, LG 14) supporting the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Church.
He is not a Feeneyite but an irrational and non traditional Cushingite.
He is proclaiming Jesus without the necessity of the Church.This would be in line with the new ecumenism. Even the Jehovah Witnesses' on the streets of Rome distribute pictures of Jesus. However for them Jesus is one with St. Michael Archangel and Jesus is....
He is affirming 'the absoluteness and uniqueness' of Jesus which is common for him in the Lutheran and Pentecostal communities too.
He is affirming Jesus as the one Saviour of all, even of whose Christians whose religious communities officiall y support contraception and divorce and reject the Catholic concept of the Eucharist.
He has changed salvation theology and was clearly saying when I heard it that conversion was not necessary.
First the Jesuits rejected the dogma EENS and expelled Fr. Leonard Feeney from their religious community. Now the Jesuit pope openly says that conversion is not necessary.I suppose he could judge who among the non Catholics are not going to Hell.
Lionel:
Pastorally, this was not the way I heard it.
Not necessarily to comvert? Not necessarily to enter the Catholic Church? Why? Are they not all going to Hell outside the Church?
Of course not! He does not believe in the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) or Vatican Council II (AG 7, LG 14) supporting the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Church.
He is not a Feeneyite but an irrational and non traditional Cushingite.
He is proclaiming Jesus without the necessity of the Church.This would be in line with the new ecumenism. Even the Jehovah Witnesses' on the streets of Rome distribute pictures of Jesus. However for them Jesus is one with St. Michael Archangel and Jesus is....
He is affirming 'the absoluteness and uniqueness' of Jesus which is common for him in the Lutheran and Pentecostal communities too.
He is affirming Jesus as the one Saviour of all, even of whose Christians whose religious communities officiall y support contraception and divorce and reject the Catholic concept of the Eucharist.
He has changed salvation theology and was clearly saying when I heard it that conversion was not necessary.
First the Jesuits rejected the dogma EENS and expelled Fr. Leonard Feeney from their religious community. Now the Jesuit pope openly says that conversion is not necessary.I suppose he could judge who among the non Catholics are not going to Hell.
Donna Prima Donna
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
Mr. Holy Cannoli,
I jsut want U to no that canolis are my favorite Italian desert.![👌](/emoji/f09f918c)
I jsut want U to no that canolis are my favorite Italian desert.
Holy Cannoli
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
What Pope Francis actually said in its proper context on World Mission Sunday and not the ravings of some
EENS (a position that has been condemned by the Magisterium), obsessive, devilish, fanatic on Gloria.tv.
It is time of courage, although courage does not mean having no guarantee of success. Is required of us the courage to fight, not necessarily to win; to announce, not necessarily to convert.…More
What Pope Francis actually said in its proper context on World Mission Sunday and not the ravings of some
EENS (a position that has been condemned by the Magisterium), obsessive, devilish, fanatic on Gloria.tv.
It is time of courage, although courage does not mean having no guarantee of success. Is required of us the courage to fight, not necessarily to win; to announce, not necessarily to convert. Is required of us the courage to be alternative in the world, but never becoming argumentative or aggressive. Is required of us the courage to be open to all, never belittle the absoluteness and uniqueness of Christ, the one Saviour of all. We are required courage to stand up to unbelief, without becoming arrogant. There is also required the courage of the publican in today's Gospel, who with humility not even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying: "O God, be merciful to me a sinner." Today is time of courage! Today it takes courage!
Italian
Google translation into English
EENS (a position that has been condemned by the Magisterium), obsessive, devilish, fanatic on Gloria.tv.
It is time of courage, although courage does not mean having no guarantee of success. Is required of us the courage to fight, not necessarily to win; to announce, not necessarily to convert. Is required of us the courage to be alternative in the world, but never becoming argumentative or aggressive. Is required of us the courage to be open to all, never belittle the absoluteness and uniqueness of Christ, the one Saviour of all. We are required courage to stand up to unbelief, without becoming arrogant. There is also required the courage of the publican in today's Gospel, who with humility not even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying: "O God, be merciful to me a sinner." Today is time of courage! Today it takes courage!
Italian
Google translation into English
Lionel L. Andrades
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
SUNDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2016 MISSION SUNDAY
Pope Francis says mission does not mean trying to convert
I was at St.Peter's Square today at the time of the Angelus.I was trying to walk across from the side where the Mother Teresa home for women is, to the other side, to reach the metro station.There was an immense crowd.Many were there from yesterday in rememberance of Pope John Paul II.I had to circle …More
SUNDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2016 MISSION SUNDAY
Pope Francis says mission does not mean trying to convert
I was at St.Peter's Square today at the time of the Angelus.I was trying to walk across from the side where the Mother Teresa home for women is, to the other side, to reach the metro station.There was an immense crowd.Many were there from yesterday in rememberance of Pope John Paul II.I had to circle the square to reach the other side.
When I was in front of the office of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith the pope began speaking about mission on Mission Sunday.
Speaking in Italian he said Mission does not mean conversion.
Mission does not mean conversion. The aim is not to convert!
I passed by a group of young religious men and I said to them aloud ,"You heard that! The pope said no conversion".They smiled back at me.They understood I thought. This is Pope Francis.
Possibly one of the reformed rabbis, Rabbi Skorka or someone else, told him to say this and so he repeated it.
A few days back he said that there would be no mission to the Orthodox Christians He has also closed down the Catholic Russicum seminary in Rome.
The Franciscans of the Immaculate seminary in Boccea, Rome which was missionary stll remains closed and Fr. Stefano Manelli F.I is presently being persecuted by the religious and secular authorities.
After two rabbis ,Segno and Lara, visited Vatican Offices a few years back the Urbaniana University changed its mission poliicy. Since then Christians from the other denominatations, along with Catholics conduct mission together. This is approved by the Jewish Left.It is part of the Masonic one world agenda which the two popes have to follow.
What a disappointment this must have been for those who were there in rememberance of Pope John Paul II. This was the pope who went to India and called them all to convert.He wanted to go to China with the same message but was not allowed to enter.
On a previous Mission Sunday, a few years back, Pope Benedict hesitantly at the end of the Angelus discourse said in Italian that it was Mission Sunday.Nothing more.
Pope Francis instead spoke freely about mission and it was not the prepared talk released by Vatican Radio. However he was referring as usual, to mission, without Catholic doctrine.Probably due to the Masonic lobby or may be due to personal beliefs, he comes across as ' un-believing pope'. The pope who does not believe.
He does not believe in the fires of Hell. He does not believe that most people are going there. He does not see the need for non Catholcs to formally convert and enter the Church to be saved from Hell.
He does not believe in the faith teachings of the Church, which arede fide and have been proclaimed ex cathedra by previous popes.
Amoris Laetitia also shows that he does not believe in the moral teachings of the Church too .He officially wants to change them.
When the pope follows, for whatever reason, the agenda of the secret societies who want to destroy the Church he is indirectly following the agenda of Satan.
It was Our Lady who warned us in her messages to Fr. Stefano Gobbi of the Marian Movement of Priests that Satan would enter the highest levels of the hierarchical church.
She also said that those who are faithful to the teachings of the Church in these end times, will be persecuted.Some could be called to martrydom.La Stampa/Vatican Insider the other day announced a 'hit list' of conservative Catholic Italians.
She said all the enemies of the Church will unite and try to completely eliminate it.There will also be the coming of the Anti Christ.
However in the end Her Immaculate Heart will Triumph. There will be a Catholic Church which is small but evangelical.There will also be a purification of the world at large.This must happen before the Second Coming of Jesus Christ.-Lionel Andrades
Pope Francis says mission does not mean trying to convert
I was at St.Peter's Square today at the time of the Angelus.I was trying to walk across from the side where the Mother Teresa home for women is, to the other side, to reach the metro station.There was an immense crowd.Many were there from yesterday in rememberance of Pope John Paul II.I had to circle the square to reach the other side.
When I was in front of the office of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith the pope began speaking about mission on Mission Sunday.
Speaking in Italian he said Mission does not mean conversion.
Mission does not mean conversion. The aim is not to convert!
I passed by a group of young religious men and I said to them aloud ,"You heard that! The pope said no conversion".They smiled back at me.They understood I thought. This is Pope Francis.
Possibly one of the reformed rabbis, Rabbi Skorka or someone else, told him to say this and so he repeated it.
A few days back he said that there would be no mission to the Orthodox Christians He has also closed down the Catholic Russicum seminary in Rome.
The Franciscans of the Immaculate seminary in Boccea, Rome which was missionary stll remains closed and Fr. Stefano Manelli F.I is presently being persecuted by the religious and secular authorities.
After two rabbis ,Segno and Lara, visited Vatican Offices a few years back the Urbaniana University changed its mission poliicy. Since then Christians from the other denominatations, along with Catholics conduct mission together. This is approved by the Jewish Left.It is part of the Masonic one world agenda which the two popes have to follow.
What a disappointment this must have been for those who were there in rememberance of Pope John Paul II. This was the pope who went to India and called them all to convert.He wanted to go to China with the same message but was not allowed to enter.
On a previous Mission Sunday, a few years back, Pope Benedict hesitantly at the end of the Angelus discourse said in Italian that it was Mission Sunday.Nothing more.
Pope Francis instead spoke freely about mission and it was not the prepared talk released by Vatican Radio. However he was referring as usual, to mission, without Catholic doctrine.Probably due to the Masonic lobby or may be due to personal beliefs, he comes across as ' un-believing pope'. The pope who does not believe.
He does not believe in the fires of Hell. He does not believe that most people are going there. He does not see the need for non Catholcs to formally convert and enter the Church to be saved from Hell.
He does not believe in the faith teachings of the Church, which arede fide and have been proclaimed ex cathedra by previous popes.
Amoris Laetitia also shows that he does not believe in the moral teachings of the Church too .He officially wants to change them.
When the pope follows, for whatever reason, the agenda of the secret societies who want to destroy the Church he is indirectly following the agenda of Satan.
It was Our Lady who warned us in her messages to Fr. Stefano Gobbi of the Marian Movement of Priests that Satan would enter the highest levels of the hierarchical church.
She also said that those who are faithful to the teachings of the Church in these end times, will be persecuted.Some could be called to martrydom.La Stampa/Vatican Insider the other day announced a 'hit list' of conservative Catholic Italians.
She said all the enemies of the Church will unite and try to completely eliminate it.There will also be the coming of the Anti Christ.
However in the end Her Immaculate Heart will Triumph. There will be a Catholic Church which is small but evangelical.There will also be a purification of the world at large.This must happen before the Second Coming of Jesus Christ.-Lionel Andrades
Per singulos dies benedicimus te
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
Gone: Steve Skojec asks on onepeterfive.com why the documents of Pius XI are missing on the Vatican website where they were once stored. Pius XI was a staunch opponent of the kind of ecumenism and family policies the Vatican now favors. He also wrote about the Social Kingship of Christ.
=========================================
....After the introduction to the throne of Peter heretic and a servant …More
Gone: Steve Skojec asks on onepeterfive.com why the documents of Pius XI are missing on the Vatican website where they were once stored. Pius XI was a staunch opponent of the kind of ecumenism and family policies the Vatican now favors. He also wrote about the Social Kingship of Christ.
=========================================
....After the introduction to the throne of Peter heretic and a servant of the devil Francis - , Church Freemasonry which occupied the Holy See and makes cleansing!
=========================================
....After the introduction to the throne of Peter heretic and a servant of the devil Francis - , Church Freemasonry which occupied the Holy See and makes cleansing!
Per singulos dies benedicimus te
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
Stopped: Cardinal Burke’s plans to ordain priests for the Sovereign Order of Malta has failed. This emerges from a letter of the Prelate of the Maltese, Bishop Jean Laffitte, which Gloria.tv has seen. Laffitte claims that the media reported – quote - "inaccurately" about the plans. He adds that priests who work with the Order of Malta are incardinated in dioceses or religious orders.
============…More
Stopped: Cardinal Burke’s plans to ordain priests for the Sovereign Order of Malta has failed. This emerges from a letter of the Prelate of the Maltese, Bishop Jean Laffitte, which Gloria.tv has seen. Laffitte claims that the media reported – quote - "inaccurately" about the plans. He adds that priests who work with the Order of Malta are incardinated in dioceses or religious orders.
====================================================
Very good, with gloria tv. maintains permanent contacts with true Catholic hierarchs of the Church which is Cardinal Burke. Steer clear of the post-conciliar traitors!
====================================================
Very good, with gloria tv. maintains permanent contacts with true Catholic hierarchs of the Church which is Cardinal Burke. Steer clear of the post-conciliar traitors!
Lionel L. Andrades
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
Mission Sunday is being celebrated today without the traditional Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus
Mission Sunday is being celebrated today without the traditional Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.Mission Sunday is not celebrated with the salvation dogma as it was known to the 16th century missionaries.
The present 'living magisterium …More
Mission Sunday is being celebrated today without the traditional Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus
Mission Sunday is being celebrated today without the traditional Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.Mission Sunday is not celebrated with the salvation dogma as it was known to the 16th century missionaries.
The present 'living magisterium' considers the past magisterium a 'dead magisterium'.They have changed the teachings on salvation by inferring that there are no known exceptions to the traditional teaching on outside the Church there is no salvation.
The two popes assume invisible cases of the baptism of desire are visible on October 23,2016, Wolrd Mission Day.
According to traditional Catholic teaching based on the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus all non Catholics with no exceptions are oriented to Hell unless they are incorporated visibly into the Catholic Church.So the Native Americans before the missionaries went there were on the way to Hell. In general they were all oriented to Hell without 'faith and baptism'.
The two popes and the Vatican Curia, supported by the political Left, however assume that a person can be saved in invincible ignorance and without the baptism of water. So being saved in invincible ignorance is an exception to the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma EENS. So Lumen Gentium 14 based on this irrational reasoning, of visible exceptions of people who are now in Heaven, states wrongly that only 'those who know' need to enter the Church. So now it is said that the Native Americans were all saved before the misionaries went there, since they 'did not know'.
It is with this new doctrine that Mission Sunday is being celebrated in the Catholic Church all over the world.
At the church I went to this morning there were photos of Mother Teresa and the emphasis of the posters was on mercy. Mission envelopes were available.
In general the lay people at the Church in answer to a question would say that not evert one needs to enter the Catholic Church for salvation but only those who know.
1.When it is pointed out to them that Jews, Muslims, Orthodox Chrstians and Protestants in Rome are educated and they know about Jesus and the Church so they are all on the way to Hell according to Vatican Council (LG 14) ? There is no answer.
2.If it was mentioned that Vatican Council II says all need faith and baptism for salvation(AG 7) and so all non Catholics in 2016 are oriented to the fires of Hell againthere would be no answer.Or they would object and say that the Church does not teach this any more.This would also be the case with the religious, priests and nuns.-Lionel Andrades
Mission Sunday is being celebrated today without the traditional Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.Mission Sunday is not celebrated with the salvation dogma as it was known to the 16th century missionaries.
The present 'living magisterium' considers the past magisterium a 'dead magisterium'.They have changed the teachings on salvation by inferring that there are no known exceptions to the traditional teaching on outside the Church there is no salvation.
The two popes assume invisible cases of the baptism of desire are visible on October 23,2016, Wolrd Mission Day.
According to traditional Catholic teaching based on the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus all non Catholics with no exceptions are oriented to Hell unless they are incorporated visibly into the Catholic Church.So the Native Americans before the missionaries went there were on the way to Hell. In general they were all oriented to Hell without 'faith and baptism'.
The two popes and the Vatican Curia, supported by the political Left, however assume that a person can be saved in invincible ignorance and without the baptism of water. So being saved in invincible ignorance is an exception to the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma EENS. So Lumen Gentium 14 based on this irrational reasoning, of visible exceptions of people who are now in Heaven, states wrongly that only 'those who know' need to enter the Church. So now it is said that the Native Americans were all saved before the misionaries went there, since they 'did not know'.
It is with this new doctrine that Mission Sunday is being celebrated in the Catholic Church all over the world.
At the church I went to this morning there were photos of Mother Teresa and the emphasis of the posters was on mercy. Mission envelopes were available.
In general the lay people at the Church in answer to a question would say that not evert one needs to enter the Catholic Church for salvation but only those who know.
1.When it is pointed out to them that Jews, Muslims, Orthodox Chrstians and Protestants in Rome are educated and they know about Jesus and the Church so they are all on the way to Hell according to Vatican Council (LG 14) ? There is no answer.
2.If it was mentioned that Vatican Council II says all need faith and baptism for salvation(AG 7) and so all non Catholics in 2016 are oriented to the fires of Hell againthere would be no answer.Or they would object and say that the Church does not teach this any more.This would also be the case with the religious, priests and nuns.-Lionel Andrades
Lionel L. Andrades
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
An injustice was done to Fr.Leonard Feeney.Gloria TV report on it.
There are no known cases of the baptism of desire. Yet it was stated that the baptism of desire is an exception to the traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus Then it was assumed that Fr. Leonard Feeney was wrong .Even the popes and the saints in the Church over the centuries, was wrong.
Based upon this …More
An injustice was done to Fr.Leonard Feeney.Gloria TV report on it.
There are no known cases of the baptism of desire. Yet it was stated that the baptism of desire is an exception to the traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus Then it was assumed that Fr. Leonard Feeney was wrong .Even the popes and the saints in the Church over the centuries, was wrong.
Based upon this lie, this false hood, of their being known exceptions to the dogma on exclusive salvation, and they placed restrictions on the preaching of Fr. Leonard Feeney at the St. Benedict Center.
There was no known case of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance.So St.Thomas Aquinas, St.Augustine, St.Anthony Mary Claret, the 16 th century missionaries...were all Feeneyites.They affirmed the 'rigorist interpretation' of the dogma.
SEPTEMBER 29, 2015
Her father was expelled by Boston College because of the Magisterial Heresy
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/her-father-was-…
ROBERT KENNEDY ASKED RICHARD CUSHING TO SUPPRESS FR. LEONARD FEENEY
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/robert-kennedy-…
LG16,LG 14, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc are not exceptions to EENS : Fr.Leonard Feeney's excommunication was a mistake
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/lg16lg-14-lg-8-…
FEENEYISM IS IN ACCORD WITH MAGISTERIAL DOCUMENTS
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/feeneyism-is-in…
EWTN, Trinity Communications, Jefferey Mirus suggest Native Americans before the arrival of the missionaries were saved
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/ewtn-trinity-co…
WE DO NOT KNOW ANY EXPLICIT CASE OF THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE OR OF A NON CATHOLIC BEING SAVED IN INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE- Rector, Missionaries of the Most Precious Blood, Church of Santa Maria in Trivio, Rome
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/we-do-not-know-…
Lay Catholics,including bloggers still do not realize that Vatican Council II can be interpreted with the blue or red column
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/lay-catholicsin…
This is what the SSPX and the St.Benedict Centers must agree on.The baptism of desire and baptism of blood are irrelevant to the literal interpretation of the dogma according to Fr. Leonard Feeney.
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/this-is-what-ss…
Fr.Brian Harrison also mistakes the baptism of desire as being an exception to the dogma on salvation
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/frbrian-harriso…
There are no known cases of the baptism of desire. Yet it was stated that the baptism of desire is an exception to the traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus Then it was assumed that Fr. Leonard Feeney was wrong .Even the popes and the saints in the Church over the centuries, was wrong.
Based upon this lie, this false hood, of their being known exceptions to the dogma on exclusive salvation, and they placed restrictions on the preaching of Fr. Leonard Feeney at the St. Benedict Center.
There was no known case of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance.So St.Thomas Aquinas, St.Augustine, St.Anthony Mary Claret, the 16 th century missionaries...were all Feeneyites.They affirmed the 'rigorist interpretation' of the dogma.
SEPTEMBER 29, 2015
Her father was expelled by Boston College because of the Magisterial Heresy
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/her-father-was-…
ROBERT KENNEDY ASKED RICHARD CUSHING TO SUPPRESS FR. LEONARD FEENEY
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/robert-kennedy-…
LG16,LG 14, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc are not exceptions to EENS : Fr.Leonard Feeney's excommunication was a mistake
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/lg16lg-14-lg-8-…
FEENEYISM IS IN ACCORD WITH MAGISTERIAL DOCUMENTS
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/feeneyism-is-in…
EWTN, Trinity Communications, Jefferey Mirus suggest Native Americans before the arrival of the missionaries were saved
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/ewtn-trinity-co…
WE DO NOT KNOW ANY EXPLICIT CASE OF THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE OR OF A NON CATHOLIC BEING SAVED IN INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE- Rector, Missionaries of the Most Precious Blood, Church of Santa Maria in Trivio, Rome
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/we-do-not-know-…
Lay Catholics,including bloggers still do not realize that Vatican Council II can be interpreted with the blue or red column
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/lay-catholicsin…
This is what the SSPX and the St.Benedict Centers must agree on.The baptism of desire and baptism of blood are irrelevant to the literal interpretation of the dogma according to Fr. Leonard Feeney.
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/this-is-what-ss…
Fr.Brian Harrison also mistakes the baptism of desire as being an exception to the dogma on salvation
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/frbrian-harriso…
GTVisrockin
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
Thank you for your continued work for the lord Gloriatv, there is so many bloggers exposing the truth which we are grateful to have, but you put a face behind the truth without fear leading the way in this spiritual warfare and pushing back the smoke of Satan inside the Church… God Bless you abundantly!
Gone: ...It must be examined and verified if the Vatican has changed the teachings of the Church in the past.
The Vatican Council II Church is not the Holy, Apostolic, Catholic Church of Christ, if the Vatican teaches a false notion of religious liberty and an absolute independence of conscience in the contradiction of the Church in the past.
>>>... The formal teachings of the Church condemning …More
Gone: ...It must be examined and verified if the Vatican has changed the teachings of the Church in the past.
The Vatican Council II Church is not the Holy, Apostolic, Catholic Church of Christ, if the Vatican teaches a false notion of religious liberty and an absolute independence of conscience in the contradiction of the Church in the past.
>>>... The formal teachings of the Church condemning erroneous theses of religious freedom and freedom of conscience in religious matters should not, therefore, be misconstrued as a condemnation of the true doctrine set forth by Vatican II in the Decree on Religious Liberty. What was condemned by the Church in the past (and remains condemned) is the false doctrine that conscience is absolutely independent of any external objective guide; that the Catholic Church, therefore, has no right to direct the moral and religious activities of men; and that all religions are thus more or less equal in the eyes of the State.
Religious Freedom
This distinction between the true notion of religious freedom and the false notion of religious freedom was drawn by Pope Pius XI in his Encyclical Non Abbiamo Bisogno, in 1931, when he said:
. . . We have said recently that We are happy and proud to fight the good fight for the liberty of consciences, not (as some, perhaps by inadvertence, have made Us say) for liberty of conscience, which is an equivocal expression, and one too often abused to signify absolute independence of conscience, an absurd thing in a soul created and redeemed by God.5
Men have the right to follow their consciences without external interference. The conscience itself, however, is not free to ignore objective truth in making moral judgments. Indeed, the Council teaches that "in forming their consciences the faithful must pay careful attention to the sacred and certain teaching of the Church"(DH, #14). And so it was what Pope Leo XIII declared:
If when men discuss the question of liberty they were careful to grasp its true and legitimate meaning, such as reason and reasoning have just explained, they would never venture to affix such calumny on the Church as to assert that she is the foe of individual and public liberty.6
The Decree on Religious Liberty makes it quite clear that it is speaking about the true idea of religious freedom and freedom of conscience. Freedom, absolutely speaking, excludes the notion of ignorance and error. For freedom is the state of intelligent beings who are not hindered from fulfilling their responsibilities and exercising their rights (cf., DH, #6). The previous condemnations of religious freedom by the Church must therefore be understood to be referring to the false notion of freedom, which holds that the human will is not limited in its choices by any higher law...<<<
www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm
The Vatican Council II Church is not the Holy, Apostolic, Catholic Church of Christ, if the Vatican teaches a false notion of religious liberty and an absolute independence of conscience in the contradiction of the Church in the past.
>>>... The formal teachings of the Church condemning erroneous theses of religious freedom and freedom of conscience in religious matters should not, therefore, be misconstrued as a condemnation of the true doctrine set forth by Vatican II in the Decree on Religious Liberty. What was condemned by the Church in the past (and remains condemned) is the false doctrine that conscience is absolutely independent of any external objective guide; that the Catholic Church, therefore, has no right to direct the moral and religious activities of men; and that all religions are thus more or less equal in the eyes of the State.
Religious Freedom
This distinction between the true notion of religious freedom and the false notion of religious freedom was drawn by Pope Pius XI in his Encyclical Non Abbiamo Bisogno, in 1931, when he said:
. . . We have said recently that We are happy and proud to fight the good fight for the liberty of consciences, not (as some, perhaps by inadvertence, have made Us say) for liberty of conscience, which is an equivocal expression, and one too often abused to signify absolute independence of conscience, an absurd thing in a soul created and redeemed by God.5
Men have the right to follow their consciences without external interference. The conscience itself, however, is not free to ignore objective truth in making moral judgments. Indeed, the Council teaches that "in forming their consciences the faithful must pay careful attention to the sacred and certain teaching of the Church"(DH, #14). And so it was what Pope Leo XIII declared:
If when men discuss the question of liberty they were careful to grasp its true and legitimate meaning, such as reason and reasoning have just explained, they would never venture to affix such calumny on the Church as to assert that she is the foe of individual and public liberty.6
The Decree on Religious Liberty makes it quite clear that it is speaking about the true idea of religious freedom and freedom of conscience. Freedom, absolutely speaking, excludes the notion of ignorance and error. For freedom is the state of intelligent beings who are not hindered from fulfilling their responsibilities and exercising their rights (cf., DH, #6). The previous condemnations of religious freedom by the Church must therefore be understood to be referring to the false notion of freedom, which holds that the human will is not limited in its choices by any higher law...<<<
www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm
Lionel L. Andrades
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
Atila S. Guimarães and Robert de Mattei wrote books on Vatican Council II while assuming imaginary and hypothetical cases were objectively visible
Cannoli:
he defends an unimportant already settled cause (EENS) that is irrelevant to everyone except himself and that cause has, in fact, been condemned by the Magiserium of the Catholic Church.
Lionel:
The issue of extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) …More
Atila S. Guimarães and Robert de Mattei wrote books on Vatican Council II while assuming imaginary and hypothetical cases were objectively visible
Cannoli:
he defends an unimportant already settled cause (EENS) that is irrelevant to everyone except himself and that cause has, in fact, been condemned by the Magiserium of the Catholic Church.
Lionel:
The issue of extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) cannot be settled when grown ups suggest that there are known exceptions of the baptism of desire without the baptism of water in 2016 who are exceptions to the traditional interpretation of EENS.
Also the Holy Office in 1949 and the Archbishop of Boston made an objective error when they assumed there were known cases of the baptism of desire and so there were known exceptions to exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.
Secondly becuase of this irrational interpretation of EENS, there is an irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II which for me is traditional.
Books have been written on Vatican Council II based on this error.1
Gloria TV needs to report this.
1
Atila S. Guimarães and Robert de Mattei wrote books on Vatican Council II while assuming imaginary and hypothetical cases were objectively visible
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/atila-s-guimara…
Cannoli:
he defends an unimportant already settled cause (EENS) that is irrelevant to everyone except himself and that cause has, in fact, been condemned by the Magiserium of the Catholic Church.
Lionel:
The issue of extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) cannot be settled when grown ups suggest that there are known exceptions of the baptism of desire without the baptism of water in 2016 who are exceptions to the traditional interpretation of EENS.
Also the Holy Office in 1949 and the Archbishop of Boston made an objective error when they assumed there were known cases of the baptism of desire and so there were known exceptions to exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.
Secondly becuase of this irrational interpretation of EENS, there is an irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II which for me is traditional.
Books have been written on Vatican Council II based on this error.1
Gloria TV needs to report this.
1
Atila S. Guimarães and Robert de Mattei wrote books on Vatican Council II while assuming imaginary and hypothetical cases were objectively visible
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/atila-s-guimara…
Lionel L. Andrades
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
The following quotes are examples:
Item #1) the interpretation of the living magisterium is irrational.
and
Item #2) the living Magisterium is irrational.Their conclusion is non traditional and heretical.
Lionel
The 'living magisterium' considers the past magisterium as 'the dead magisterium'.They also consider all of us as stupid and ignorant since they interpret magisterial documents with fantasy …More
The following quotes are examples:
Item #1) the interpretation of the living magisterium is irrational.
and
Item #2) the living Magisterium is irrational.Their conclusion is non traditional and heretical.
Lionel
The 'living magisterium' considers the past magisterium as 'the dead magisterium'.They also consider all of us as stupid and ignorant since they interpret magisterial documents with fantasy theology and we do not complain.
Item #2) the living Magisterium is irrational.Their conclusion is non traditional and heretical.
Lionel:
Yes and you have not explained to me why do you think they are not using an irrational premise and conclusion.
Item #1) the interpretation of the living magisterium is irrational.
and
Item #2) the living Magisterium is irrational.Their conclusion is non traditional and heretical.
Lionel
The 'living magisterium' considers the past magisterium as 'the dead magisterium'.They also consider all of us as stupid and ignorant since they interpret magisterial documents with fantasy theology and we do not complain.
Item #2) the living Magisterium is irrational.Their conclusion is non traditional and heretical.
Lionel:
Yes and you have not explained to me why do you think they are not using an irrational premise and conclusion.
2 more comments from Lionel L. Andrades
Lionel L. Andrades
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
Because a faithful Catholic knows that it is a serious sin to not only deny the truth of the teaching authority of the Church (the Magisterium) but the sin would be compounded by attempting to induce others to also commit the same sin as Lionel L. Andrades is actively doing here on Gloria.tv
Lionel:
This faithful Catholic knows that the present liberal magisterium contradicts the pre Council of …More
Because a faithful Catholic knows that it is a serious sin to not only deny the truth of the teaching authority of the Church (the Magisterium) but the sin would be compounded by attempting to induce others to also commit the same sin as Lionel L. Andrades is actively doing here on Gloria.tv
Lionel:
This faithful Catholic knows that the present liberal magisterium contradicts the pre Council of Trent magisterium on the issue of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
This faithful Catholic also knows that the two popes have rejected the Church teachings on exclusive salvation in the Church and interpret Vatican Council II as a rupture with Tradition They do this even when a rational and traditional option is available.
This faithful Catholic does not promote a lie, an irrationality and fantasy theology.
__________________________________________________
Lionel:
This faithful Catholic knows that the present liberal magisterium contradicts the pre Council of Trent magisterium on the issue of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
This faithful Catholic also knows that the two popes have rejected the Church teachings on exclusive salvation in the Church and interpret Vatican Council II as a rupture with Tradition They do this even when a rational and traditional option is available.
This faithful Catholic does not promote a lie, an irrationality and fantasy theology.
__________________________________________________
Lionel L. Andrades
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
I ask these questions because I truly do not know the answer.
Lionel:
I agree with you .You don't know the answer.You cannot defend the present magisterium nor correct me with doctrine and theology.
Basically I am saying that invisible cases are not visible in 2016. You agree with me here.
But will not say it.
I am saying that the baptism of desire refers to an invisible case.Neither you nor any …More
I ask these questions because I truly do not know the answer.
Lionel:
I agree with you .You don't know the answer.You cannot defend the present magisterium nor correct me with doctrine and theology.
Basically I am saying that invisible cases are not visible in 2016. You agree with me here.
But will not say it.
I am saying that the baptism of desire refers to an invisible case.Neither you nor any one else disagrees with me here.
I am saying that an invisible case of the baptism of desire cannot be an explicit exception to the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. No one wants to correct me here.
I am saying that LG 16, LG 8,NA 2, UR 3 etc being invisible and hypothetical cannot be an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, as interpreted by the 16th century missionaries.You cannot show me where I am wrong here.
So I am saying that rationally and traditionally Vatican Council II does not contradict the 'rigorist interpretation' of the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Church.
You Canonili cannot show me where I am wrong and neither do you want to accept my conclusion for some reason.
As for Gloria TV I mentioned in a previous comment that you have the sedevacantist Trad Cat Knight who rejects Vatican Council II and has changed the interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus and you have no problem.
You have the pope changing Catholic moral and faith teachings and you have no problem.
I am affirming all the documents of Catholic Church except that I am interpreting them without the irrational theology which you and the present magisterium apply to them.
Lionel:
I agree with you .You don't know the answer.You cannot defend the present magisterium nor correct me with doctrine and theology.
Basically I am saying that invisible cases are not visible in 2016. You agree with me here.
But will not say it.
I am saying that the baptism of desire refers to an invisible case.Neither you nor any one else disagrees with me here.
I am saying that an invisible case of the baptism of desire cannot be an explicit exception to the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. No one wants to correct me here.
I am saying that LG 16, LG 8,NA 2, UR 3 etc being invisible and hypothetical cannot be an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, as interpreted by the 16th century missionaries.You cannot show me where I am wrong here.
So I am saying that rationally and traditionally Vatican Council II does not contradict the 'rigorist interpretation' of the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Church.
You Canonili cannot show me where I am wrong and neither do you want to accept my conclusion for some reason.
As for Gloria TV I mentioned in a previous comment that you have the sedevacantist Trad Cat Knight who rejects Vatican Council II and has changed the interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus and you have no problem.
You have the pope changing Catholic moral and faith teachings and you have no problem.
I am affirming all the documents of Catholic Church except that I am interpreting them without the irrational theology which you and the present magisterium apply to them.
Holy Cannoli
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
Dear Don Reto,
The poster Lionel L. Andrades has freely denigrated and mocked the authority (the Magisterium) of the Catholic Church, various reputable organizations and solidly Catholic individuals within the Catholic church on your website Gloria.tv.
The following quotes are examples:
Item #1) the interpretation of the living magisterium is irrational.
and
Item #2) the living Magisterium is …More
Dear Don Reto,
The poster Lionel L. Andrades has freely denigrated and mocked the authority (the Magisterium) of the Catholic Church, various reputable organizations and solidly Catholic individuals within the Catholic church on your website Gloria.tv.
The following quotes are examples:
Item #1) the interpretation of the living magisterium is irrational.
and
Item #2) the living Magisterium is irrational.Their conclusion is non traditional and heretical.
There is NO faithful Catholic who would ever even consider writing such anti-Catholic garbage much less actually write it on a Catholic (The more Catholic the better) website). Why not? Because a faithful Catholic knows that it is a serious sin to not only deny the truth of the teaching authority of the Church (the Magisterium) but the sin would be compounded by attempting to induce others to also commit the same sin as Lionel L. Andrades is actively doing here on Gloria.tv.
He repeatedly makes essentially the same post as seen on this thread demonstrating his arrogantly superior and disdainful attitude toward the Magisterium and toward well established Catholics organizations eg. EWTN, Catholic Answers, Crux etc and individual Catholics who do not hold the same position as he holds.
Lionel L. Andrades believes HE SPEAKS FOR THE MAGISTERIUM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. This ridiculous belief has led him to go so far as to have written the following:
“The present magisterium with the use of an irrationality has not only promoted a lie but has also contradicted and rejected the teachings of the consistent magisterium of the Church.”.
Although Lionel L. Andrades claims that his bizarre rantings about the “illogical, irrational, non traditional and heretical“ Magisterium of the Catholic Church are not heretical and are not sinful, he is wrong which demonstrates the degree to which a human mind can degenerate. Lionel L. Andrades wages his imaginary daily battle against an imaginary opponent in which he defends an unimportant already settled cause (EENS) that is irrelevant to everyone except himself and that cause has, in fact, been condemned by the Magiserium of the Catholic Church. That is the same Magisterium that Lionel L. Andrades rails against each and every day. Why? Because of the following:
...the rigorist position of Fr. Feeney (that all must be actual members of the Catholic Church to be saved) has been condemned by the Magisterium. It is ironic that precisely those who know their obligation to remain united to the Magisterium, and thus on whom this doctrine is morally binding, keep themselves from union with the Roman See on this point.
Are Lionel L. Andrades' postings the kind of material you want to have posted on Gloria.tv? Is this the kind of anti-Catholic individual you seek to have as a regular poster on Gloria.tv?
I ask these questions because I truly do not know the answer. Actually, it would seem that you want his public contemptuous and dismissive attacks on the Catholic Magisterium to appear on Gloria.tv since nothing is done to eliminate them.
The poster Lionel L. Andrades has freely denigrated and mocked the authority (the Magisterium) of the Catholic Church, various reputable organizations and solidly Catholic individuals within the Catholic church on your website Gloria.tv.
The following quotes are examples:
Item #1) the interpretation of the living magisterium is irrational.
and
Item #2) the living Magisterium is irrational.Their conclusion is non traditional and heretical.
There is NO faithful Catholic who would ever even consider writing such anti-Catholic garbage much less actually write it on a Catholic (The more Catholic the better) website). Why not? Because a faithful Catholic knows that it is a serious sin to not only deny the truth of the teaching authority of the Church (the Magisterium) but the sin would be compounded by attempting to induce others to also commit the same sin as Lionel L. Andrades is actively doing here on Gloria.tv.
He repeatedly makes essentially the same post as seen on this thread demonstrating his arrogantly superior and disdainful attitude toward the Magisterium and toward well established Catholics organizations eg. EWTN, Catholic Answers, Crux etc and individual Catholics who do not hold the same position as he holds.
Lionel L. Andrades believes HE SPEAKS FOR THE MAGISTERIUM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. This ridiculous belief has led him to go so far as to have written the following:
“The present magisterium with the use of an irrationality has not only promoted a lie but has also contradicted and rejected the teachings of the consistent magisterium of the Church.”.
Although Lionel L. Andrades claims that his bizarre rantings about the “illogical, irrational, non traditional and heretical“ Magisterium of the Catholic Church are not heretical and are not sinful, he is wrong which demonstrates the degree to which a human mind can degenerate. Lionel L. Andrades wages his imaginary daily battle against an imaginary opponent in which he defends an unimportant already settled cause (EENS) that is irrelevant to everyone except himself and that cause has, in fact, been condemned by the Magiserium of the Catholic Church. That is the same Magisterium that Lionel L. Andrades rails against each and every day. Why? Because of the following:
...the rigorist position of Fr. Feeney (that all must be actual members of the Catholic Church to be saved) has been condemned by the Magisterium. It is ironic that precisely those who know their obligation to remain united to the Magisterium, and thus on whom this doctrine is morally binding, keep themselves from union with the Roman See on this point.
Are Lionel L. Andrades' postings the kind of material you want to have posted on Gloria.tv? Is this the kind of anti-Catholic individual you seek to have as a regular poster on Gloria.tv?
I ask these questions because I truly do not know the answer. Actually, it would seem that you want his public contemptuous and dismissive attacks on the Catholic Magisterium to appear on Gloria.tv since nothing is done to eliminate them.
Lionel L. Andrades
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
Not only Steve Skojec is able to able respond theologically and doctrinally, neither can Roberto de Mattei who says he is not a theologian.He uses an irrational theology and is not aware of it..
Lionel L. Andrades
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
Note only Steve Skojec is able to able respond theologically and doctrinally.This issue is related to the Social Reign of Christ the King...
Atila S. Guimarães and Robert de Mattei wrote books on Vatican Council II while assuming imaginary and hypothetical cases were objectively visible
Atila S. Guimarães and Robert de Mattei wrote their books on Vatican Council II while assuming imaginary and …More
Note only Steve Skojec is able to able respond theologically and doctrinally.This issue is related to the Social Reign of Christ the King...
Atila S. Guimarães and Robert de Mattei wrote books on Vatican Council II while assuming imaginary and hypothetical cases were objectively visible
Atila S. Guimarães and Robert de Mattei wrote their books on Vatican Council II while assuming imaginary and hypothetical cases were objectively visible and that these objectively visible cases, were mentioned in Vatican Council II and they were objective exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was interpreted in the 16th century.
So they both rejected Vatican Council II as being a break with Tradition after using this irrational premise and conclusion of which they were not aware of and nor were corrected by the contemporary magisterium.
For both of them Lumen Gentium 16( saved in invincible ignorance) referred to someone known who was saved without the baptism of water in the present times, and so was an exception to the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
For both of them Lumen Gentium 8 refers to not invisiible but actually known cases of people saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church. Otherwise why would Lumen Gentium 8 be an exception to the dogma on salvation ? So this is an exception to the old ecclesiology and an ecumenism of return.So since there was known salvation outside the Church and ecumenism of return has exceptions.With this theology they are liberals.
For both of them Unitatitis Redintigratio 3 refers to an objectively visible case, may be of a Protestant, Anglican or Lutheran, who is/was saved outside the visible limits of the Church.So outside the Church there is objecively known salvation for them.They both use the false premise to reach a non traditional and heretical conclusion.This is the new theology.It is being applied to Vatican Council II by them.
For me Vatican Council II is not a break with the traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Robert Bellarmine, St.Francis Xavier, the three Church Councils which defined it and the many popes were affirmed it.I do not reject the baptism of desire etc. I just assume that they are invisiblle and hypothetical cases. If they happened they would only be known to God.
So I am affirming the Feeneyite interpretation of EENS along with implicit and invisible for baptism of desire.Similarly being saved in invincible ignorance with or without the baptism of water, for me, is an imaginary and hypothetical case. So it is irrelevant to Feeneyite EENS. Pope Pius XII in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 made an objecitive mistake. An injustice was done to Fr. Leonard Feeney and the St.Benedict Center.
For me Cardinal Richard Cushing and the Holy Office in 1949 were in heresy and Fr. Leonard Feeney and the St.Benedict Center were teaching orthodoxy, in as much as the present day traditionalists and sedevacantists, like the liberals, are affirming heresy, though unknowingly.
-Lionel Andrades
October 21, 2016
Atila S. Guimarães was ignorant of all this when he wrote his book
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/atila-s-guimara…
Atila S. Guimarães and Robert de Mattei wrote books on Vatican Council II while assuming imaginary and hypothetical cases were objectively visible
Atila S. Guimarães and Robert de Mattei wrote their books on Vatican Council II while assuming imaginary and hypothetical cases were objectively visible and that these objectively visible cases, were mentioned in Vatican Council II and they were objective exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was interpreted in the 16th century.
So they both rejected Vatican Council II as being a break with Tradition after using this irrational premise and conclusion of which they were not aware of and nor were corrected by the contemporary magisterium.
For both of them Lumen Gentium 16( saved in invincible ignorance) referred to someone known who was saved without the baptism of water in the present times, and so was an exception to the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
For both of them Lumen Gentium 8 refers to not invisiible but actually known cases of people saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church. Otherwise why would Lumen Gentium 8 be an exception to the dogma on salvation ? So this is an exception to the old ecclesiology and an ecumenism of return.So since there was known salvation outside the Church and ecumenism of return has exceptions.With this theology they are liberals.
For both of them Unitatitis Redintigratio 3 refers to an objectively visible case, may be of a Protestant, Anglican or Lutheran, who is/was saved outside the visible limits of the Church.So outside the Church there is objecively known salvation for them.They both use the false premise to reach a non traditional and heretical conclusion.This is the new theology.It is being applied to Vatican Council II by them.
For me Vatican Council II is not a break with the traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Robert Bellarmine, St.Francis Xavier, the three Church Councils which defined it and the many popes were affirmed it.I do not reject the baptism of desire etc. I just assume that they are invisiblle and hypothetical cases. If they happened they would only be known to God.
So I am affirming the Feeneyite interpretation of EENS along with implicit and invisible for baptism of desire.Similarly being saved in invincible ignorance with or without the baptism of water, for me, is an imaginary and hypothetical case. So it is irrelevant to Feeneyite EENS. Pope Pius XII in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 made an objecitive mistake. An injustice was done to Fr. Leonard Feeney and the St.Benedict Center.
For me Cardinal Richard Cushing and the Holy Office in 1949 were in heresy and Fr. Leonard Feeney and the St.Benedict Center were teaching orthodoxy, in as much as the present day traditionalists and sedevacantists, like the liberals, are affirming heresy, though unknowingly.
-Lionel Andrades
October 21, 2016
Atila S. Guimarães was ignorant of all this when he wrote his book
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/atila-s-guimara…
One more comment from Lionel L. Andrades
Lionel L. Andrades
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
Cannoli,
The issue is one of Catholic Faith.It refers to Catholic doctrine.It is central to our Catholic understanding of salvation, Vatican Council II, ecumenism, the Social Reign of Christ the King, the non separation of Church and State etc.
You are not comfortable with the traditional teachings of the Catholic Church on salvation since your are a liberal on this issue .You also cannot support …More
Cannoli,
The issue is one of Catholic Faith.It refers to Catholic doctrine.It is central to our Catholic understanding of salvation, Vatican Council II, ecumenism, the Social Reign of Christ the King, the non separation of Church and State etc.
You are not comfortable with the traditional teachings of the Catholic Church on salvation since your are a liberal on this issue .You also cannot support your liberal position with citations from Vatican Council II, without using a false premise and conclusion as they do at EWTN and Catholic Answers.
You remain politically correct and criticise any one who does not meet your leftist-approved doctrines of the Catholic Church.
The particular subject here for me was Stece Skojec.It was not what you or Steve would like to read.Since neither of the two of you are still able to respond with theology or doctrines, for or against, and point out any error in what I have written
The issue is one of Catholic Faith.It refers to Catholic doctrine.It is central to our Catholic understanding of salvation, Vatican Council II, ecumenism, the Social Reign of Christ the King, the non separation of Church and State etc.
You are not comfortable with the traditional teachings of the Catholic Church on salvation since your are a liberal on this issue .You also cannot support your liberal position with citations from Vatican Council II, without using a false premise and conclusion as they do at EWTN and Catholic Answers.
You remain politically correct and criticise any one who does not meet your leftist-approved doctrines of the Catholic Church.
The particular subject here for me was Stece Skojec.It was not what you or Steve would like to read.Since neither of the two of you are still able to respond with theology or doctrines, for or against, and point out any error in what I have written
Holy Cannoli
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
Pope Humility the 1st,
Your post is totally irrelevant to the subject matter at hand i.e., Pope Pius XI's missing documents from the Vatican website.
You are indeed an obsessive/compulsive, very sick individual. A pity that there is no moderation at Gloria.tv so as to remove your repetitive garbage that adds absolutely nothing of value to this site and, indeed, detracts from it.More
Pope Humility the 1st,
Your post is totally irrelevant to the subject matter at hand i.e., Pope Pius XI's missing documents from the Vatican website.
You are indeed an obsessive/compulsive, very sick individual. A pity that there is no moderation at Gloria.tv so as to remove your repetitive garbage that adds absolutely nothing of value to this site and, indeed, detracts from it.
Your post is totally irrelevant to the subject matter at hand i.e., Pope Pius XI's missing documents from the Vatican website.
You are indeed an obsessive/compulsive, very sick individual. A pity that there is no moderation at Gloria.tv so as to remove your repetitive garbage that adds absolutely nothing of value to this site and, indeed, detracts from it.