Lionel Andrades
Lionel Andrades

Father Cekada + Errors Of The Society Of St. Pius X

POPE CONTRADICTS BIBLE, CARDINAL LEVADA ISSUES NO CLARIFICATION. EXPECTS OFFICAL CLARIFICATION FROM BISHOP FELLAY
There are two errors of Pope Benedict in Light of the World p.107:-
1) He assumes that those saved in invincible ignorance etc are exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and to Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II even though we do not know any of these cases …More
POPE CONTRADICTS BIBLE, CARDINAL LEVADA ISSUES NO CLARIFICATION. EXPECTS OFFICAL CLARIFICATION FROM BISHOP FELLAY
There are two errors of Pope Benedict in Light of the World p.107:-
1) He assumes that those saved in invincible ignorance etc are exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and to Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II even though we do not know any of these cases saved in invincible ignorance etc. Since we do not know any of these cases saved they cannot be explicit exceptions on earth.
2) The pope says Jews do not have to convert in the present times and the Revised Good Friday Prayer is not for their conversion while they live .This contradicts the Bible (John 3:5,Mk:16:16 etc),Vatican Council II(AG 7), the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Catechism of the Catholic Church 845,846, Dominus Iesus 20.

The pope denies the Faith in public and expects the SSPX to do the same (with reference to the Jews) or face the penalty of excommunication. There is now a foreign doctrine on the Jews which is not part of the Deposit of the Faith.Yet all the religious have signed a profession of faith.They have all recited the Nicene Creed which says I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. And yet the Jews do not need the baptism of water in the present time 2012?

The pope expects the SSPX to accept Vatican Council II when the Council indicates Jews need to convert for salvation. (AG 7).The pope has never said this clearly in public.

Cardinal William Levada, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) never issued a clarification over the pope’s error on the Jews. He is expecting a clarification from Bishop Bernard Fellay.

Vatican Council II says all need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation (AG 7) and this includes the Jews. It says the Church is ‘the new people of God’ (NA4) and the Church of Christ is the Catholic Church (LG 8).It does not state that we know cases of non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance or a good conscience(LG 16) or that this contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus or AG 7.

It’s a shame that the members of Ecclesia Dei nod their heads in silent acquiescence.
Lionel Andrades
______________________________________

REPORT IS AN EXPOSE OF APOSTASY AT THE HIGHEST LEVELS OF THE CHURCH-ROBERT SUNGENIS
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/report-is-expos…

DID THE POPE REALLY DENY THE FAITH ON THE NEED FOR JEWS TO CONVERT ?
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/did-pope-really…
CDF CLARIFIES COMMENT ON CONDOMS BUT NOT JEWS : POPE CONTRADICTS BIBLE
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/cdf-clarifies-c…

POPE SAYS REVISED GOOD FRIDAY PRAYER IS NOT FOR THE CONVERSION OF THE JEWS ? EARTHQUAKE SHIFT IN CATHOLIC TEACHING ?
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/pope-says-revis…

Pope Benedict XVI’s objective,factual error in Light of the World(Ignatius) p.107 is contributing to widespread liberalism and dissent in the Catholic Church.
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/Light%20of%20th…

Msgr. Guido Pozzo could announce Vatican Council II agrees with literal interpretation of dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus while Nostra Aetate says Catholics are the ‘new people of God’ : pope made an error in Light of the World- all this is relevant to the Vatican-SSPX differences
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/msgr-guido-pozz…

VATICAN SECRETARY OF STATE HAS TO BE A CATHOLIC ACCORDING TO CANON LAW
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/vatican-secreta…

CATHOLIC NEWS BLACK OUT ON BAGNASCO-RABBI DEAL
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/catholic-news-b…

RABBIS WHO MET WITH CARDINAL ANGELO BAGNASCO ORIENTED TO HELL INDICATES VATICAN COUNCIL II
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/rabbis-who-met-…

CARDINAL BAGNASCO DENIES JESUS AND THE CHURCH
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/Cardinal%20Ange…

CANTATE DOMINO, COUNCIL OF FLORENCE ON EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS IS DE FIDE AND NOT CONTRADICTED BY VATICAN COUNCIL II- Fr. Nevus Marcello O.P
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/cantate-domino-…

RADICI CRISTIANE SAYS CLEARLY CHURCH HAS NOT CHANGED LITERAL MEANING OF DOGMA AND INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE AND BAPTISM OF DESIRE ARE NOT DEFACTO EXCEPTIONS.
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/radici-cristian…

Robert Sungenis, John Salza : Baptism of Desire does not compromise the Church’s teaching “No Salvation outside the Church”
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/robert-sungenis…

AMERICAN APOLOGIST SAYS ITALIAN BISHOPS IN APOSTASY
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/american-apolog…

CATHOLIC PRIESTS CORRECT POPE BENEDICT'S MISTAKE : WE DO NOT KNOW ANY CASE OF A NON CATHOLIC SAVED IMPLICITLY BY JESUS AND THE CHURCH SO IT DOES NOT CONTRADICT CANTATE DOMINO,COUNCIL OF FLORENCE
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/search

eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/pope-contradict…
Lionel Andrades

Father Cekada + Errors Of The Society Of St. Pius X

By the way, what make you so sure of what is dividing the Church and the sspx?

Lionel:
It is the interpretation of Vatican Council II which is divinding the Vatican and the SSPX. This has been repeated many times by Bishop Fellay and the others.
Lionel Andrades

Father Cekada + Errors Of The Society Of St. Pius X

Monday, April 16, 2012

Msgr. Guido Pozzo could announce Vatican Council II agrees with literal interpretation of dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus while Nostra Aetate says Catholics are the ‘new people of God’ : pope made an error in Light of the World- all this is relevant to the Vatican-SSPX differences

For political reasons Ecclesia Dei is not admitting the truth about Vatican Council II.

More
Monday, April 16, 2012

Msgr. Guido Pozzo could announce Vatican Council II agrees with literal interpretation of dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus while Nostra Aetate says Catholics are the ‘new people of God’ : pope made an error in Light of the World- all this is relevant to the Vatican-SSPX differences

For political reasons Ecclesia Dei is not admitting the truth about Vatican Council II.

Msgr. Guido Pozzo Secretary of the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei” – the Vatican body charged with helping to bring reconciliation with the SSPX - said “we haven’t yet received a response” but he added that the fraternity have “preannounced they will arrive at a final clarification, therefore I am hoping that at the beginning of next week we’ll be able to know their position and then take consequent positions.” (1)

NO DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES

There are no doctrinal differences between the Vatican and the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) if Ecclesia Dei announces that Vatican Council II (Ad Gentes 7) (2) is in agreement with the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and also with Lumen Gentium 16, Vatican Council II on invincible ignorance and those saved with a good conscience (3).
LG 16 is not an explicit exception to the dogma or AG 7.Since we do not know any case saved in invincible ignorance and a good conscience.We accept these cases as possibilities. Defacto we can never know anyone saved with a good conscience etc.They are known only in Heaven.
Secondly Nostra Aetate 4 says Catholics are the ‘new people of God’.Catholics are the Chosen People now.
These two points are in agreement with the SSPX position that all non Catholics need to convert into the Catholic Church for salvation.This was the traditional teaching and it is the teaching after Vatican Council II.Msgr. Guido Pozzo needs to announce that this is the teaching of Vatican Council II according to the text and the Catholic Church.
This very message in a comment on Rorate Caeli was pulled down on April 14,2012. (4)
If Mnsgr. Guido Pozzo makes the required announcment then many people will realize that rationally there can only be one interpretation of Vatican Council on this subject. Since the former interpretation, the liberal one, assumes LG 16 etc are explicit exceptions to the dogma which says all need to convert into the Church for salvation.
The Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI wrongly assumes in Light of the World p.107 that those saved in invincible ignorance etc are known to us and so they are exceptions to the traditional understanding of the dogma.(6)
Pope Benedict XVI also approved two theological papers of the International Theological Commission (ITC) in which the same factual error has been made. The error was that Vatican Council II metnions exceptions to the traditional teaching of exclusive salvation being there only in the Catholic Church.(7)
The President of the ITC was Cardinal Luiz Ladaria, who is now the Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican.While the Secretary of the ITC was Bishop Morerod. They both represented the Vatican in talks with the SSPX. There were differences on ecumenism and other religions since the Vatican-side used a false premise (that of visible cases of the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance).So they postulated wrongly that Vatican Council II contradicts AG 7 and the dogma.They assumed that the Catholic Church has changed its teaching on other religions and ecumenism after Vatican Council II and the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.

This is also the Rabbi Rosen-ADL interpretation of Vatican Council II. So for political reasons the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith may not want to make this announcement.It would be ‘peaceful’ to accept the false interpretation of Vatican Council II which is objectively wrong regarding LG 16, since physically, in real life, we cannot identify any such case saved in invincible ignorance.
Members of the SSPX and other Catholics can hold Press Conferences and peaceful demonstrations appealing to the pope to uphold Vatican Council II.

Lionel Andrades

1
www.ncregister.com/…/vatican-hoping-…

2.
For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, Himself a man, Jesus Christ, who gave Himself as a ransom for all" (1 Tim. 2:45), "neither is there salvation in any other" (Acts 4:12). Therefore, all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church's preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door.

3.
Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience.

4.
Sunday, April 15, 2012

RORATE CAELI PULLS DOWN COMMENT: 'WHY CANNOT ALL CARDINALS,BISHOPS, RELIGIOUS COMMUNITIES AFFIRM THE LITERAL INTERPRETATION OF THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS AND ALSO IMPLICIT BAPTISM OF DESIRE AND BEING SAVED IN INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE'
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/rorate-caeli-pu…

6.
Pope Benedict XVI’s objective,factual error in Light of the World(Ignatius) p.107 is contributing to widespread liberalism and dissent in the Catholic Church.
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/Light%20of%20th…
7.
International Theological Commission (ITC) makes an objective, factual error in two of its published documents. Could they also be wrong about Limbo?

eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/international-t…

VATICAN'S INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION MAKES AN ERROR IN ITS POSITION PAPER CHRISTIANITY AND THE WORLD RELIGIONS
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/vaticans-intern…

INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION USES PREMISE THAT IS FACTUALLY INCORRECT : LIMBO
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/international-t…

The International Theological Commission's position paper Christianity and the World Religions 1997 has an objective factual error and is approved by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger : invincible ignorance is not an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/international-t…

INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION ASSUMES ‘SEEDS OF THE WORD’ (VATICAN COUNCIL II ) IN OTHER RELIGIONS ARE KNOWN TO US AND THIS IS AN EXPLICIT EXCEPTION TO THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/international-t…

VATICAN'S INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION MAKES AN ERROR IN ITS POSITION PAPER CHRISTIANITY AND THE WORLD RELIGIONS
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/vaticans-intern…

VATICAN COUNCIL II REJECTS THE THEOLOGY OF RELIGIONS
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/vatican-council…

Former Secretary of the International Theological Commission holds that those saved with the baptism of desire and in invincible ignorance are known to us and so an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/secretary-of-in…

eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/msgr-guido-pozz…
Lionel Andrades

Father Cekada + Errors Of The Society Of St. Pius X

Declaration on Religious Freedom-Dignitatis Humanae

2. This Vatican Council declares that the human person has a right to religious freedom. This freedom means that all men are to be immune from coercion on the part of individuals or of social groups and of any human power, in such wise that no one is to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his own beliefs, whether privately or publicly, …More
Declaration on Religious Freedom-Dignitatis Humanae

2. This Vatican Council declares that the human person has a right to religious freedom. This freedom means that all men are to be immune from coercion on the part of individuals or of social groups and of any human power, in such wise that no one is to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his own beliefs, whether privately or publicly, whether alone or in association with others, within due limits.
Lionel: So we do not force anyone.
The council further declares that the right to religious freedom has its foundation in the very dignity of the human person as this dignity is known through the revealed word of God and by reason itself.(2) This right of the human person to religious freedom is to be recognized in the constitutional law whereby society is governed and thus it is to become a civil right.
Lionel:God grants us this freedom to choose.
Since the state is no more Catholic this has become a civil right.
It is in accordance with their dignity as persons-that is, beings endowed with reason and free will and therefore privileged to bear personal responsibility-that all men should be at once impelled by nature and also bound by a moral obligation to seek the truth, especially religious truth.
Lionel:Yes they are obliged to search for the truth. Lumen Gentium 14 says those who know the truth about Jesus and the Church and yet do not enter are on the way to Hell.
They are also bound to adhere to the truth, once it is known, and to order their whole lives in accord with the demands of truth
Lionel: Lumen Gentium 14
However, men cannot discharge these obligations in a manner in keeping with their own nature unless they enjoy immunity from external coercion as well as psychological freedom. Therefore the right to religious freedom has its foundation not in the subjective disposition of the person, but in his very nature. In consequence, the right to this immunity continues to exist even in those who do not live up to their obligation of seeking the truth and adhering to it and the exercise of this right is not to be impeded, provided that just public order be observed.
Lionel:We do not force them.

We agree on what religious truth is and that it is found only in the Catholic Church and that all political states should affirm Catholic teaching and be obedient to the pope or to a political representative of the Holy Father. De jure this should be the relation of the Church and state.

Even though defacto it is otherwise now.

So in principle Vatican Council II does not contradict this belief. However defacto it seems to acknowledge that states are free to create laws and this is a defacto right or reality.
Lionel Andrades

Society of St. Pius X “Regularization” Not as Easy as You Think

Monday, April 16, 2012

Msgr. Guido Pozzo could announce Vatican Council II agrees with literal interpretation of dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus while Nostra Aetate says Catholics are the ‘new people of God’ : pope made an error in Light of the World- all this is relevant to the Vatican-SSPX differences

For political reasons Ecclesia Dei is not admitting the truth about Vatican Council II.
More
Monday, April 16, 2012

Msgr. Guido Pozzo could announce Vatican Council II agrees with literal interpretation of dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus while Nostra Aetate says Catholics are the ‘new people of God’ : pope made an error in Light of the World- all this is relevant to the Vatican-SSPX differences

For political reasons Ecclesia Dei is not admitting the truth about Vatican Council II.
Msgr. Guido Pozzo Secretary of the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei” – the Vatican body charged with helping to bring reconciliation with the SSPX - said “we haven’t yet received a response” but he added that the fraternity have “preannounced they will arrive at a final clarification, therefore I am hoping that at the beginning of next week we’ll be able to know their position and then take consequent positions.” (1)

NO DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
There are no doctrinal differences between the Vatican and the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) if Ecclesia Dei announces that Vatican Council II (Ad Gentes 7) (2) is in agreement with the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and also with Lumen Gentium 16, Vatican Council II on invincible ignorance and those saved with a good conscience (3).

LG 16 is not an explicit exception to the dogma or AG 7.Since we do not know any case saved in invincible ignorance and a good conscience.We accept these cases as possibilities. Defacto we can never know anyone saved with a good conscience etc.They are known only in Heaven.
Secondly Nostra Aetate 4 says Catholics are the ‘new people of God’.Catholics are the Chosen People now.
These two points are in agreement with the SSPX position that all non Catholics need to convert into the Catholic Church for salvation.This was the traditional teaching and it is the teaching after Vatican Council II.Msgr. Guido Pozzo needs to announce that this is the teaching of Vatican Council II according to the text and the Catholic Church.
This very message in a comment on Rorate Caeli was pulled down on April 14,2012. (4)
If Mnsgr. Guido Pozzo makes the required announcment then many people will realize that rationally there can only be one interpretation of Vatican Council on this subject. Since the former interpretation, the liberal one, assumes LG 16 etc are explicit exceptions to the dogma which says all need to convert into the Church for salvation.
The Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI wrongly assumes in Light of the World p.107 that those saved in invincible ignorance etc are known to us and so they are exceptions to the traditional understanding of the dogma.(6)

Pope Benedict XVI also approved two theological papers of the International Theological Commission (ITC) in which the same factual error has been made. The error was that Vatican Council II metnions exceptions to the traditional teaching of exclusive salvation being there only in the Catholic Church.(7)

The President of the ITC was Cardinal Luiz Ladaria, who is now the Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican.While the Secretary of the ITC was Bishop Morerod. They both represented the Vatican in talks with the SSPX. There were differences on ecumenism and other religions since the Vatican-side used a false premise (that of visible cases of the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance).So they postulated wrongly that Vatican Council II contradicts AG 7 and the dogma.They assumed that the Catholic Church has changed its teaching on other religions and ecumenism after Vatican Council II and the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.

This is also the Rabbi Rosen-ADL interpretation of Vatican Council II. So for political reasons the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith may not want to make this announcement.It would be ‘peaceful’ to accept the false interpretation of Vatican Council II which is objectively wrong regarding LG 16, since physically, in real life, we cannot identify any such case saved in invincible ignorance.

Members of the SSPX and other Catholics can hold Press Conferences and peaceful demonstrations appealing to the pope to uphold Vatican Council II.
Lionel Andrades

1
www.ncregister.com/…/vatican-hoping-…

2.
For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, Himself a man, Jesus Christ, who gave Himself as a ransom for all" (1 Tim. 2:45), "neither is there salvation in any other" (Acts 4:12). Therefore, all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church's preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door.

3.
Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience.

4.
Sunday, April 15, 2012

RORATE CAELI PULLS DOWN COMMENT: 'WHY CANNOT ALL CARDINALS,BISHOPS, RELIGIOUS COMMUNITIES AFFIRM THE LITERAL INTERPRETATION OF THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS AND ALSO IMPLICIT BAPTISM OF DESIRE AND BEING SAVED IN INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE'
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/rorate-caeli-pu…

6.
Pope Benedict XVI’s objective,factual error in Light of the World(Ignatius) p.107 is contributing to widespread liberalism and dissent in the Catholic Church.
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/Light%20of%20th…

7.
International Theological Commission (ITC) makes an objective, factual error in two of its published documents. Could they also be wrong about Limbo?

eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/international-t…

VATICAN'S INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION MAKES AN ERROR IN ITS POSITION PAPER CHRISTIANITY AND THE WORLD RELIGIONS
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/vaticans-intern…

INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION USES PREMISE THAT IS FACTUALLY INCORRECT : LIMBO
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/international-t…

The International Theological Commission's position paper Christianity and the World Religions 1997 has an objective factual error and is approved by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger : invincible ignorance is not an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/international-t…

INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION ASSUMES ‘SEEDS OF THE WORD’ (VATICAN COUNCIL II ) IN OTHER RELIGIONS ARE KNOWN TO US AND THIS IS AN EXPLICIT EXCEPTION TO THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/international-t…

VATICAN'S INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION MAKES AN ERROR IN ITS POSITION PAPER CHRISTIANITY AND THE WORLD RELIGIONS
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/vaticans-intern…

VATICAN COUNCIL II REJECTS THE THEOLOGY OF RELIGIONS
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/vatican-council…

Former Secretary of the International Theological Commission holds that those saved with the baptism of desire and in invincible ignorance are known to us and so an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/secretary-of-in…
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/msgr-guido-pozz…
Lionel Andrades

Father Cekada + Errors Of The Society Of St. Pius X

thfyunc.
poinyd.
poimyd.

coeur perce
In Nostra Aetate, I saw things really worrying.
Lionel: I have not found anything in Nostra Aetate which contradicts the literal intepretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
When will the SSPX comment on this?

Nostra Aetate 4 says the Church is the new people of God. I have not read anyway that the SSPX says Vatican Council II says the Church is …More
thfyunc.
poinyd.
poimyd.

coeur perce
In Nostra Aetate, I saw things really worrying.
Lionel: I have not found anything in Nostra Aetate which contradicts the literal intepretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
When will the SSPX comment on this?

Nostra Aetate 4 says the Church is the new people of God. I have not read anyway that the SSPX says Vatican Council II says the Church is the new people of God, Catholics are the chosen people of God.

Defacto( in reality) the Church has no political power as in the past so all people are free to folllow what they want. Dejure (in principle) since outside the Church there is no salvation all people need to enter the Church with Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation( to avoid Hell).
Lionel Andrades

Father Cekada + Errors Of The Society Of St. Pius X

Saturday, April 14, 2012

LIGHT OF THE WORLD ERROR SHOWS THAT THERE ARE NO REAL DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE VATICAN AND THE SSPX

Once we realize that we cannot telephone or fax someone saved in invincible ignorance and a good conscience the problem is resolved.We have to look at Vatican Council II in a different way.
Why cannot all Catholic religious communities Franciscans,…
More
Saturday, April 14, 2012

LIGHT OF THE WORLD ERROR SHOWS THAT THERE ARE NO REAL DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE VATICAN AND THE SSPX

Once we realize that we cannot telephone or fax someone saved in invincible ignorance and a good conscience the problem is resolved.We have to look at Vatican Council II in a different way.
Why cannot all Catholic religious communities Franciscans, Dominicans, Jesuits, Society of St.Pius X etc affirm the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and also implicit baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance, a good conscience, the seeds of the Word etc?

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has just to take the first step to resolve the Society of St.Pius X problem by announcing that :
‘the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance, a good conscience, the seeds of the Word etc are known only to God.’

This is obvious! It is a non controversial statement.Other misundestandings will end.


Example, in the following analysis written by John R. T. Lamont expressly for www.chiesa there are four points of seemingly disunity. (1) In reality there is no disunity.
1.
John R. T. Lamont
"The doctrine on religious liberty, as it is expressed in no. 2 of the Declaration 'Dignitatis humanae,' contradicts the teachings of Gregory XVI in 'Mirari vos' and of Pius IX in 'Quanta cura' as well as those of Pope Leo XIII in 'Immortale Dei' and those of Pope Pius XI in 'Quas primas.'

Lionel:
N.13 Mirari Vos states :'Now We consider another abundant source of the evils with which the Church is afflicted at present: indifferentism. This perverse opinion is spread on all sides by the fraud of the wicked who claim that it is possible to obtain the eternal salvation of the soul by the profession of any kind of religion, as long as morality is maintained…'
Vatican Council II does not opppose the encyclical of Pope Gregory XVI (1832) on this point of religious indifferentism. Since Ad Gentes 7 states all need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation (to avoid Hell).This is the same teaching as the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. There are no known exceptions to this teaching since we do not know any case on earth of a non Catholic saved in invincible ignorance or a good conscience(LG 16). We accept the possibility of a non Catholic being saved in invicible ignorance but just like the Church Fathers, popes, Councils and saints we do not claim that there are defacto known cases. Vatican Council II also does not make this claim.So the Vatican Council II text does not promote religious indifferentism.
14 Mirari Vos . 'This shameful font of indifferentism gives rise to that absurd and erroneous proposition which claims that liberty of conscience must be maintained for everyone.'
Note well that it is the religious indifferentism which gives rise 'to claims of liberty of conscience' which 'must be maintained for everyone.'

Once we are clear that outside the church there is no salvation and there are no known exceptions (AG 7,LG 14) and that Catholics are 'the new people of God '(NA 4) we realize that everyone is physically free (according to the present laws in many countries) to defacto follow their conscience.However in principle (de jure) every one on earth needs to be a Catholic for salvation(to avoid Hell) according to Vatican Council II (AG 7).
So we accept the Social Reign of Jesus Christ, that Jesus must be the centre of all political and social institions. In principle we hold this belief and in this manner interpret Dignitatis Humane 2.i.e outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation and we have the liberty of conscience to express this ancient teaching ,in principle, while ackowledging that many political states in the present times permit a person to follow his conscience while other countries do not (Islamic,Communist etc).
Vatican Council II states that a non Catholic is free to follow his conscience in the sense that God also leaves us free to follow our conscience good or bad.The Council does not say that we have an obligation to follow evil and a bad conscience.Much of the Council’s writing is positive and orients us towards God and a good conscience. So this is what we need to emphasize.Everyone knows what is good in their heart and we should follow it, we follow the natural law and the teaching of a good conscience. We reject the teaching of a bad conscience and no where does Vatican Council II state that we must follow a bad conscience.

2.
John R. T. Lamont
"The doctrine on the Church, as it is expressed in no. 8 of the Constitution 'Lumen gentium,' contradicts the teachings of Pope Pius XII in 'Mystici corporis' and 'Humani generis.'

Lionel:
The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has clarified that the Church of Christ is the Catholic Church (subsistit it).
When Lumen Gentium 8 refers to ‘elements of sanctifciation’ we accept it as a possibility. Only God can know who is saved with elements of sanctification. Since we cannot judge these cases on earth it does not contradict the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

3.
John R. T. Lamont
"The doctrine on ecumenism, as it is expressed in no. 8 of 'Lumen gentium' and no. 3 of the Decree 'Unitatis redintegratio,' contradicts the teachings of Pope Pius IX in propositions 16 and 17 of the 'Syllabus,' those of Leo XIII in 'Satis cognitum,' and those of Pope Pius XI in 'Mortalium animos.'

Lionel:
Unitatis redintegratio n.3 like Lumen Gentium 8 refers to goodness and sanctification which can be founded among Christians. We accept that a Protestant or Orthodox Christian can be saved ‘in certain circumstances’(Letter of the Holy Office 1949) and it will be known only to God. The ordinary means of salvation is Catholic Faith and the baptism of water (AG 7).All Christians need Catholic Faith for salvation (to avoid Hell) (AG 7).So there is no contradiction between UR 3,LG 8 and ‘the dogma’, which Pope Pius XII called an an ‘infallible’statement.(Letter of the Holy Office 1949). The dogma on extra ecclesiam nulla salus, Cantate Domino, Council of Florence states Jews, heretics (Protestants) and schismatics (Orthodox Christians) need to convert into the Church to avoid the fires of Hell.
4.
John R. T. Lamont
"The doctrine on collegiality, as it is expressed in no. 22 of the Constitution 'Lumen gentium,' including no. 3 of the 'Nota praevia' [Explanatory Note], contradicts the teachings of the First Vatican Council on the uniqueness of the subject of supreme power in the Church, in the Constitution 'Pastor aeternus'."
Lionel:
‘All men are called to this union with Christ, who is the light of the world, from whom we go forth, through whom we live, and toward whom our whole life strains.’-Lumen Gentium 3. Yes, as Dominus Iesus 20 says Jesus died for all men and salvation is open to all, it is universal, however to receive it, all need to respond by entering the Church; the Church is necessary. The ordinary means of salvation is the Catholic Church.(AG 7, Redemptoris Missio 55 etc). So there is no contradiction between the First and Second Vatican Council II on this issue. Similarly collegiality as expressed in LG 22 does not conflict with the Church teaching that ‘submission to the Catholic Church and to the Sovereign Pontiff is required as necessary for salvation.’(Letter of the Holy Office 1949).
-Lionel Andrades

1.
chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1350219

_______________________________________________

Friday, April 13, 2012

'Light of the World' p.107 expresses Pope Benedict’s personal opinion or is the ordinary magisterium: the pope wrongly assumes those saved in invincible ignorance are known exceptions to the dogma and the SSPX position on ecumenism and non Catholic religions
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/light-of-world-…

Friday, April 13, 2012

So would the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,Vatican excommunicate me when I say I reject the liberal interpretation of Vatican Council II but accept Vatican Council II according to Tradition and a continuation with the defined dogma ? I can accept the SSPX's position on other religions as being the teaching of Vatican Council II.
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/so-would-congre…

Tuesday, April 10, 2012
HOLY FATHER ASSUMES THOSE SAVED IN INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE ARE KNOWN TO US: CONTRADICTS VATICAN COUNCIL I AND II
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/holy-father-ass…
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/light-of-world-…
Lionel Andrades

Father Cekada + Errors Of The Society Of St. Pius X

xxx

coeur percé
By invincible ignorance I means those who do not know about the Catholic Church and yet are believed to be saved. We do not know these cases. However in principle it is possible that they can be saved. God could send them a preacher before they die or even have them baptised.However the point is that we do not know if there are any such cases in the present time.(2012).We do not …More
xxx

coeur percé
By invincible ignorance I means those who do not know about the Catholic Church and yet are believed to be saved. We do not know these cases. However in principle it is possible that they can be saved. God could send them a preacher before they die or even have them baptised.However the point is that we do not know if there are any such cases in the present time.(2012).We do not dispute the possibility of their being saved in the manner God chooses.

The pope assumes that these cases are known to us and so exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. The dogma which Pope Pius X called an 'infallible' statement says all need to convert into the Church for salvation. It does not mention any known exceptions.

So being saved in invincible ignorance is not an explicit exception to the dogma.

So it means that LG 16 (invincible ignorance) is not an exception to the dogma or to Ad Gentes 7 which says all need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation.

So there is nothing in Vatican Council II which contradicts the SSPX position on ecumenism and other religions.
Lionel Andrades

Father Cekada + Errors Of The Society Of St. Pius X

Friday, April 13, 2012

'Light of the World' p.107 expresses Pope Benedict’s personal opinion or is the ordinary magisterium: the pope wrongly assumes those saved in invincible ignorance are known exceptions to the dogma and the SSPX position on ecumenism and non Catholic religions

A comment on this blog says that in Light of the World (Ignatius)p.107 the Holy Father was only expressing a perso…More
Friday, April 13, 2012

'Light of the World' p.107 expresses Pope Benedict’s personal opinion or is the ordinary magisterium: the pope wrongly assumes those saved in invincible ignorance are known exceptions to the dogma and the SSPX position on ecumenism and non Catholic religions

A comment on this blog says that in Light of the World (Ignatius)p.107 the Holy Father was only expressing a personal opinion.Whether it was his personal opinion or the ordinary magisterium there was a factual, objective error.

I respect Pope Benedict XVI and I value what he writes.The point I wanted to make was that we do not know explicit cases of those saved in invincible ignorance etc as the pope assumes. Since we do not know any of these cases they are not explicit exceptions to the ancient teaching that there is exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church only and there are no (known) exceptions.
Since the pope makes this error he assumes that Vatican Council II mentions exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
Since he thinks there are so many exceptions ( seeds of the Word, good conscience etc),then for him, the traditional position on ecumenism and other religions of the Society of St.Pius X(SSPX) is flawed. He would expect the SSPX to accept that there are defacto known cases of non Catholics in the present time (2011-2012 ) saved in invincible ignorance etc.We know there are no such cases.
These cases are always possibilities. They can never be defacto known to us. Since they are only possibilities always, they do not contradict the defined dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus which says all need to convert into the Church for salvation. It also does not contradict Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II which states all need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation.

The SSPX needs to publicly state that there are no known exceptions to the dogma mentioned in Vatican Council II. There are no reference texts.
Also before any decision is taken on the SSPX a public clarification (non secret) should be asked of the the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,Vatican.

The pope approved two position papers of the International Theological Commission(ITC) with the same error. The two papers are
1.
Christianity and the World Religions(1997)
www.vatican.va/…/rc_cti_1997_cri….

2. THE HOPE OF SALVATION FOR INFANTS WHO DIE WITHOUT BEING BAPTISED
www.vatican.va/…/rc_con_cfaith_d…

The President of the ITC was Cardinal Luiz Ladaria, Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. He represented the Vatican in failed talks with the SSPX. They differed over the issue of ecumenism, inter religious dialogue and religious liberty indicated by the Open Letter to the SSPX by Mnsgr.Nicola Bux, Consultant to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Office of Liturgical Celebrations of the Pope .
It may be mentioned that though the pope made the objective error in the book by Peter Seewald in none of the magisterial documents, including those issued by Cardinal Ratzinger and then Pope Benedict XVI, is it said that those saved in invincible ignorance etc are known to us personally or that they are explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.No magisterial text including that of Vatican Council II makes this error.
-Lionel Andrades
_______________________________________

There is no reference text in Vatican Council II contrary to the SSPX position on other religions, ecumenism
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/there-is-no-ref…

CONDITIONS FOR THE SSPX TO 'ENTER THE CHURCH'
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/conditions-for-…

There could soon be an 'ecclesial rupture' because the Vatican does not want to say that there can be two interpretations of Vatican Council II.
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/there-could-soo…

CATHOLICS THROUGHOUT THE WORLD PRAYED TODAY FOR 'HERETICS AND SCHISMATICS': DIVINE MERCY NOVENA
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/catholics-throu…

VATICAN-SSPX NEED TO CALL TIME OUT: ERROR IN LIGHT OF THE WORLD DIRECTLY LINKED TO DIFFERENCES IN ECUMENISM, INTER-RELIGIOUS DIALOGUE, RELIGIOUS LIBERTY WHICH MSGR.NICOLA BUX MENTIONED
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/vatican-sspx-ne…

HOLY FATHER ASSUMES THOSE SAVED IN INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE ARE KNOWN TO US: CONTRADICTS VATICAN COUNCIL I AND II
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/holy-father-ass…

HOLY FATHER MAKES AN OBJECTIVE ERROR IN WRITING
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/holy-father-mak…

The Jewish authorities and those who followed their lead pressed for the death of Christ says Nostra Aetate 4,Vatican Council II
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/jewish-authorit…

DID THE POPE REALLY DENY THE FAITH ON THE NEED FOR JEWS TO CONVERT ?
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/did-pope-really…

ANIVERSARY OF THE DENIAL OF THE FAITH BY THE MAGISTERIUM ?
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/aniversary-of-d…
Lionel Andrades

Society of St. Pius X “Regularization” Not as Easy as You Think

Friday, April 13, 2012

'Light of the World' p.107 expresses Pope Benedict’s personal opinion or is the ordinary magisterium: the pope wrongly assumes those saved in invincible ignorance are known exceptions to the dogma and the SSPX position on ecumenism and non Catholic religions

A comment on this blog says that in Light of the World (Ignatius)p.107 the Holy Father was only expressing a perso…More
Friday, April 13, 2012

'Light of the World' p.107 expresses Pope Benedict’s personal opinion or is the ordinary magisterium: the pope wrongly assumes those saved in invincible ignorance are known exceptions to the dogma and the SSPX position on ecumenism and non Catholic religions

A comment on this blog says that in Light of the World (Ignatius)p.107 the Holy Father was only expressing a personal opinion.Whether it was his personal opinion or the ordinary magisterium there was a factual, objective error.

I respect Pope Benedict XVI and I value what he writes.The point I wanted to make was that we do not know explicit cases of those saved in invincible ignorance etc as the pope assumes. Since we do not know any of these cases they are not explicit exceptions to the ancient teaching that there is exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church only and there are no (known) exceptions.
Since the pope makes this error he assumes that Vatican Council II mentions exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
Since he thinks there are so many exceptions ( seeds of the Word, good conscience etc),then for him, the traditional position on ecumenism and other religions of the Society of St.Pius X(SSPX) is flawed. He would expect the SSPX to accept that there are defacto known cases of non Catholics in the present time (2011-2012 ) saved in invincible ignorance etc.We know there are no such cases.
These cases are always possibilities. They can never be defacto known to us. Since they are only possibilities always, they do not contradict the defined dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus which says all need to convert into the Church for salvation. It also does not contradict Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II which states all need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation.

The SSPX needs to publicly state that there are no known exceptions to the dogma mentioned in Vatican Council II. There are no reference texts.
Also before any decision is taken on the SSPX a public clarification (non secret) should be asked of the the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,Vatican.

The pope approved two position papers of the International Theological Commission(ITC) with the same error. The two papers are
1.
Christianity and the World Religions(1997)
www.vatican.va/…/rc_cti_1997_cri….

2. THE HOPE OF SALVATION FOR INFANTS WHO DIE WITHOUT BEING BAPTISED
www.vatican.va/…/rc_con_cfaith_d…

The President of the ITC was Cardinal Luiz Ladaria, Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. He represented the Vatican in failed talks with the SSPX. They differed over the issue of ecumenism, inter religious dialogue and religious liberty indicated by the Open Letter to the SSPX by Mnsgr.Nicola Bux, Consultant to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Office of Liturgical Celebrations of the Pope .
It may be mentioned that though the pope made the objective error in the book by Peter Seewald in none of the magisterial documents, including those issued by Cardinal Ratzinger and then Pope Benedict XVI, is it said that those saved in invincible ignorance etc are known to us personally or that they are explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.No magisterial text including that of Vatican Council II makes this error.
-Lionel Andrades
_______________________________________

There is no reference text in Vatican Council II contrary to the SSPX position on other religions, ecumenism
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/there-is-no-ref…

CONDITIONS FOR THE SSPX TO 'ENTER THE CHURCH'
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/conditions-for-…

There could soon be an 'ecclesial rupture' because the Vatican does not want to say that there can be two interpretations of Vatican Council II.
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/there-could-soo…

CATHOLICS THROUGHOUT THE WORLD PRAYED TODAY FOR 'HERETICS AND SCHISMATICS': DIVINE MERCY NOVENA
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/catholics-throu…

VATICAN-SSPX NEED TO CALL TIME OUT: ERROR IN LIGHT OF THE WORLD DIRECTLY LINKED TO DIFFERENCES IN ECUMENISM, INTER-RELIGIOUS DIALOGUE, RELIGIOUS LIBERTY WHICH MSGR.NICOLA BUX MENTIONED
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/vatican-sspx-ne…

HOLY FATHER ASSUMES THOSE SAVED IN INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE ARE KNOWN TO US: CONTRADICTS VATICAN COUNCIL I AND II
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/holy-father-ass…

HOLY FATHER MAKES AN OBJECTIVE ERROR IN WRITING
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/holy-father-mak…

The Jewish authorities and those who followed their lead pressed for the death of Christ says Nostra Aetate 4,Vatican Council II
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/jewish-authorit…

DID THE POPE REALLY DENY THE FAITH ON THE NEED FOR JEWS TO CONVERT ?
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/did-pope-really…

ANIVERSARY OF THE DENIAL OF THE FAITH BY THE MAGISTERIUM ?
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/aniversary-of-d…
Lionel Andrades

SSPX (Society of St. Pius X)

Friday, April 13, 2012

'Light of the World' p.107 expresses Pope Benedict’s personal opinion or is the ordinary magisterium: the pope wrongly assumes those saved in invincible ignorance are known exceptions to the dogma and the SSPX position on ecumenism and non Catholic religions

A comment on this blog says that in Light of the World (Ignatius)p.107 the Holy Father was only expressing a perso…More
Friday, April 13, 2012

'Light of the World' p.107 expresses Pope Benedict’s personal opinion or is the ordinary magisterium: the pope wrongly assumes those saved in invincible ignorance are known exceptions to the dogma and the SSPX position on ecumenism and non Catholic religions

A comment on this blog says that in Light of the World (Ignatius)p.107 the Holy Father was only expressing a personal opinion.Whether it was his personal opinion or the ordinary magisterium there was a factual, objective error.

I respect Pope Benedict XVI and I value what he writes.The point I wanted to make was that we do not know explicit cases of those saved in invincible ignorance etc as the pope assumes. Since we do not know any of these cases they are not explicit exceptions to the ancient teaching that there is exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church only and there are no (known) exceptions.
Since the pope makes this error he assumes that Vatican Council II mentions exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
Since he thinks there are so many exceptions ( seeds of the Word, good conscience etc),then for him, the traditional position on ecumenism and other religions of the Society of St.Pius X(SSPX) is flawed. He would expect the SSPX to accept that there are defacto known cases of non Catholics in the present time (2011-2012 ) saved in invincible ignorance etc.We know there are no such cases.

These cases are always possibilities. They can never be defacto known to us. Since they are only possibilities always, they do not contradict the defined dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus which says all need to convert into the Church for salvation. It also does not contradict Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II which states all need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation.

The SSPX needs to publicly state that there are no known exceptions to the dogma mentioned in Vatican Council II. There are no reference texts.
Also before any decision is taken on the SSPX a public clarification (non secret) should be asked of the the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,Vatican.

The pope approved two position papers of the International Theological Commission(ITC) with the same error. The two papers are

1.
Christianity and the World Religions(1997)
www.vatican.va/…/rc_cti_1997_cri….

2. THE HOPE OF SALVATION FOR INFANTS WHO DIE WITHOUT BEING BAPTISED
www.vatican.va/…/rc_con_cfaith_d…

The President of the ITC was Cardinal Luiz Ladaria, Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. He represented the Vatican in failed talks with the SSPX. They differed over the issue of ecumenism, inter religious dialogue and religious liberty indicated by the Open Letter to the SSPX by Mnsgr.Nicola Bux, Consultant to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Office of Liturgical Celebrations of the Pope .
It may be mentioned that though the pope made the objective error in the book by Peter Seewald in none of the magisterial documents, including those issued by Cardinal Ratzinger and then Pope Benedict XVI, is it said that those saved in invincible ignorance etc are known to us personally or that they are explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.No magisterial text including that of Vatican Council II makes this error.
-Lionel Andrades
_______________________________________

There is no reference text in Vatican Council II contrary to the SSPX position on other religions, ecumenism
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/there-is-no-ref…

CONDITIONS FOR THE SSPX TO 'ENTER THE CHURCH'
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/conditions-for-…

There could soon be an 'ecclesial rupture' because the Vatican does not want to say that there can be two interpretations of Vatican Council II.
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/there-could-soo…

CATHOLICS THROUGHOUT THE WORLD PRAYED TODAY FOR 'HERETICS AND SCHISMATICS': DIVINE MERCY NOVENA
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/catholics-throu…

VATICAN-SSPX NEED TO CALL TIME OUT: ERROR IN LIGHT OF THE WORLD DIRECTLY LINKED TO DIFFERENCES IN ECUMENISM, INTER-RELIGIOUS DIALOGUE, RELIGIOUS LIBERTY WHICH MSGR.NICOLA BUX MENTIONED
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/vatican-sspx-ne…

HOLY FATHER ASSUMES THOSE SAVED IN INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE ARE KNOWN TO US: CONTRADICTS VATICAN COUNCIL I AND II
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/holy-father-ass…

HOLY FATHER MAKES AN OBJECTIVE ERROR IN WRITING
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/holy-father-mak…

The Jewish authorities and those who followed their lead pressed for the death of Christ says Nostra Aetate 4,Vatican Council II
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/jewish-authorit…

DID THE POPE REALLY DENY THE FAITH ON THE NEED FOR JEWS TO CONVERT ?
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/did-pope-really…

ANIVERSARY OF THE DENIAL OF THE FAITH BY THE MAGISTERIUM ?
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/aniversary-of-d…
Lionel Andrades

Society of St. Pius X “Regularization” Not as Easy as You Think

Thursday, April 12, 2012

There is no reference text in Vatican Council II contrary to the SSPX position on other religions, ecumenism

Only God can judge invincible ignorance, a good conscience and the presence of 'seeds of the Word 'so they are not an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Cardinal Luiz Ladaria is wrong to cite these texts as opposing exclusive salvation in the …More
Thursday, April 12, 2012

There is no reference text in Vatican Council II contrary to the SSPX position on other religions, ecumenism

Only God can judge invincible ignorance, a good conscience and the presence of 'seeds of the Word 'so they are not an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Cardinal Luiz Ladaria is wrong to cite these texts as opposing exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.
We often get the pitch of ‘the reforms’ of Vatican Council II from the Jewish Left and if you oppose them, correct them, then they call you anti Semitic. That’s Pastor Ted Pikes experience with the ADL. The ADL’s ‘reforms of Vatican Council II ‘ propaganda has no citations from the Council. There are no reference texts, it’s just a political slogan.
The 'reforms of Vatican Council II' seem to have been cited in the failed Vatican- SSPX talks. Cardinal Luiz Ladaria, who represented the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) ,in the talks, had to reject the SSPX position on ecumenism and other religions. Since he believes that no more, is there exclusive salvation in only the Catholic Church.It ended for him after Vatican Council II and the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.
He has made this clear in the International Theological Commission’s (ITC) website and it is still there for anyone to check it.
Cardinal Ladaria will cite Lumen Gentium 16 ( invincible ignorance/ good conscience) as being an exception to exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. He does not realize that only God can judge invincible ignorance and a good conscience. We do not know any such case in the present times (2012).Since we do not know any such person it does not contradict the teaching of exclusive salvation being there in only the Catholic Church.
So he cannot cite invincible ignorance and a good conscience (LG 16) as being explicit exceptions to outside the church no salvation. Yet this is what he did and he rejected the SSPX position on ecumenism, other religions, religious liberty etc.
He considered LG 16 as a valid citation from Vatican Council II to reject exclusive salvation and the SSPX position on ecumenism, inter religious dialogue etc. The same could be said about other quotations from Vatican Council II, ‘elements of sanctification’(LG 8) and ‘seeds of the Word’ etc.
The SSPX accepts as a possibility that a non Catholic can be saved in invincible ignorance and a good conscience and it would be known only to God. One can only accept it as a possibility since defacto ( in reality) we cannot know any such case.It is only known in Heaven.
The CDF needs to issue a clarification regarding this widespread error.
Common sense tells us that there are no citations in Vatican Council II which contradict the SSPX position on ecumenism, inter religious dialogue, religious liberty etc.
If there is an ‘ecclesial rupture’ because the SSPX is faithful to the doctrines of the Catholic Church and the CDF does not have any relevant citations from Vatican Council II-then this would be an injustice against the SSPX and all loyal, faithful Catholics.
It would be assumed that the ‘ecclesial rupture’ is politically motivated , one of the ‘reforms of Vatican Council II ‘.
-Lionel Andrades
Lionel Andrades

Society of St. Pius X “Regularization” Not as Easy as You Think

I have been asked if the SSPX should enter the Church with full canonical status by accepting Vatican Council II.

I think that the SSPX should ‘enter the Church’ after the following clarifications.

1.


There are two interpretations of Vatican Council II.

1. The Jewish Left liberal interpretation.

2. The interpretation in accord with Tradition and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

More
I have been asked if the SSPX should enter the Church with full canonical status by accepting Vatican Council II.

I think that the SSPX should ‘enter the Church’ after the following clarifications.

1.


There are two interpretations of Vatican Council II.

1. The Jewish Left liberal interpretation.

2. The interpretation in accord with Tradition and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

The Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) should reject the first interpretation of Vatican Council II and accept the second one.

2.
The SSPX should clarify that we do not know any case of a non Catholic in 2011-2012 who is saved in invincible ignorance, the baptism of desire, a good conscience, the seeds of the Word etc. So there is nothing in Vatican Council II which contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

There are no explicit exceptions and the Church has not retracted this dogma which Pope Pius XII called an ‘infallible ‘statement (Letter of the Holy Office 1949).

3.

The SSPX agrees that a non Catholic can be saved in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire. The SSPX accepts this possibility.

Since the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 also menionted this possibility the SSPX can endorse implicit baptism of desire and implicit invincible ignorance, known only to God, along with the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

There is no text in Vatican Council II or the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 which contradicts the exclusive interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus .

Since there is exclusive salvation in the only the Catholic Church (Cantate Domino, Council of Florence) and this teaching is not contradicted by LG 16 etc, the SSPX maintains its position on ecumenism, other religions and dialogue. It is in agreement also with Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II which says all need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation.

So the SSPX is affirming Vatican Council II in accord with Tradition and the defined dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and there is nothing in Vatican Council II or the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to contradict the strict interpretation of the dogma.

(Note: The Letter does not state that Fr. Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for heresy. It mentions disobedience. The Church lifted the excommunication without him having to recant. The Letter mentions ‘the dogma’. The dogma indicates all non Catholics need to enter the Church to avoid the fires of Hell (Cantate Domino).So the Letter supports Fr. Leonard Feeney here.)

If the cardinals who issued the Letter assumed that the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance are explicitly known to us then it was an objective error on their part. We don’t know these cases.

SUMMARY

1.
The SSPX should announce that they would accept Vatican Council II interpreted according to Tradition and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and with reference texts from Vatican Council lI. They reject the liberal version of Vatican Council which has no supportive texts, since we do not know cases saved in invincible ignorance, a good conscience, seeds of the Word etc.

2. Since Vatican Council II does not mention any explicitly known exceptions to the defined dogma extra eclesiam nulla salus and Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council, the exclusive salvation interpretation of the dogma still stands. So the SSPX does not have to change its traditional position on ecumenism, other religions, inter religious dialogue, religious liberty.

Once these two points are clarified other aspects of Vatican Council II can be interpreted according to Tradition and as Pope Benedict XVI has said, that the Council is not a break from tradition but a continuity.-Lionel Andrades
Lionel Andrades

Father Cekada + Errors Of The Society Of St. Pius X

Wednesday, April 11, 2012

There could soon be an 'ecclesial rupture' because the Vatican does not want to say that there can be two interpretations of Vatican Council II.

If the pope does not know personally of non Catholics saved in 2012 in invincible ignorance and when Vatican Council II does not make this claim of knowing explicit cases in real life how can the magisterium reject the SSPX …More
Wednesday, April 11, 2012

There could soon be an 'ecclesial rupture' because the Vatican does not want to say that there can be two interpretations of Vatican Council II.

If the pope does not know personally of non Catholics saved in 2012 in invincible ignorance and when Vatican Council II does not make this claim of knowing explicit cases in real life how can the magisterium reject the SSPX doctrinal position on other religions, ecumenism and dialogue?

The SSPX (Society of St.Pius X) is not obliged to accept an interpretation of Vatican Council II with no supporting text on ecumenism and inter religious dialogue. Nowhere does Vatican Council II say Judaism is a path to salvation or that Jews are saved in general in their religion. Instead the Magisterium is unable to say in public that Vatican Council II (AG 7) says Judaism and other religions are not paths to salvation and that Catholics are the Chosen People of God (NA 4).

Why does the SSPX have to accept Vatican Council II when the pope and his Curia will not affirm Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II?

The Holy Father is not proclaiming the Faith for political reasons and the falsehood and lies are being repeated by thousands of Catholics to protect their self interest or due to ignorance.
There could soon be an 'ecclesial rupture' because the Vatican does not want to say that there can be two interpretations of Vatican Council II. One according to the text of Vatican Council II and the other due to political necessity and survival and with no references from Vatican Council II text.
I repeat - Vatican Council II does not mention a visible baptism of desire or known- to- us- in- Heaven-cases of non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance, a good conscience or seeds of the Word. So there is no doctrinal basis for rejecting the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus or Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II. SSPX was in agreement with Vatican Council II on ecumenism, inter religious dialogue and religious liberty in the Vatican-SSPX failed talks.
The Vatican needs to clarify in public if they know any case of non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance, the seeds of the Word and a good conscience.
If the answer is No then they should permit the SSPC not to accept Vatican Council II (Jewish Left version) - with the Vatican agreeing to clarify the issue over time.

Catholics should sign petitions and place advertisements in the newspapers asking a politically oriented Curia how can those saved in invincible ignorance and a good conscience in the year 2012, be explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and so how can the SSPX position on ecumenism and inter religious dialogue be wrong?
Catechism Teachers should ask the Vatican how can they excommunicate the SSPX for affirming the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (in accord with Vatican Council II) when there is no contradicting text in Vatican Council II to reject the SSPX position on other religions?
Religious communities ask the Vatican why you all cannot accept the literal interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus and also implicit baptism of desire and invincible ignorance. Until this issue is settled there should not be an 'ecclesial rupture' with the SSPX.

Assuming Fr. Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for denying invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire (and he was not!) you can go ahead and affirm implicit invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire and also the literal interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus?
Catholic religious communities who attend the Novus Ordo Mass why cannot you accept the literal interpretation of extra ecclesism nulla salus and also implicit baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance implicitly,this being known only to God ?
It is the magisterium's doctrinal position which is irrational and contrary to common sense? SSPX please ask the Vatican spokesman if he actually knows any case of a non Catholic saved in invincible ignorance. Is there a visible baptism of desire?
If the pope does not know of any person saved in invincible ignorance and now in Heaven and when Vatican Council II does not make this claim of knowing in real life explicit cases inHeaven, how can the magisterium reject the SSPX doctrinal position on other religions, ecumenism and dialogue?
Even though the SSPX rejects Vatican Council II (Jewish Left version) they should start talking with the Vatican in terms of Vatican Council II: ask the Vatican Curia to cite texts in Vatican Council II which contradict extra ecclesiam nulla salus ?
Also, how can the Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF), Cardinal Luiz Ladaria S.J , as the former President of the International Theological Commission (ITC) reject the literal interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Nicene Creed, Vatican Council II (AG 7) and still offer Holy Mass ?.This heresy can be viewed on the ITC’s website.

When the pope says in Light of the World (Ignatius) p.107 that all who are saved are saved through Jesus we must note it has two meanings.
1. All who are saved are saved through Jesus and the Church and this is our general Catholic belief, which we accept.There is no controversy here.
2. However the theological meaning is that all who are saved are saved either in invincible ignorance, a good conscience, and the baptism of desire etc or with Catholic Faith and the baptism of water.
Then the pope also says in Light of the Wolrd p.107 that there is only ‘one channel’ of salvation. he says there is only one way of salvation. implying the one mentioned above.
This is false theologically since the one channel of salvation in the Catholic Church has always been through Jesus in the Catholic Church. We don’t know any case of a non Catholic saved invincible ignorance etc as the pope would wrongly assume.
When the pope makes an objective, factual error one can expect the rest of the Church to be confused or in error.
I ask Catholic priests these questions and they do not answer. Some say they do not know the answer and others say that they have not specialized in this or that.When I ask them if I can record their answer with my camera they say no.They will agree that one needs to proclaim the Faith and not be ashamed of it.-Lionel Andrades
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/there-could-soo…
Lionel Andrades

Father Cekada + Errors Of The Society Of St. Pius X

Sunday, April 1, 2012

NO NEED FOR ‘SECRET TALKS’ ANYMORE: WE KNOW THE HERETICAL POSITION OF THE VATICAN NEGOTIATORS

The International Theological Commission theological papers expose the cardinal and bishop’s teaching on visible baptism of desire and their rejection of the dogma and Vatican Council II text.
May be its unintentional heresy. Let us give them the benefit of the doubt, …More
Sunday, April 1, 2012

NO NEED FOR ‘SECRET TALKS’ ANYMORE: WE KNOW THE HERETICAL POSITION OF THE VATICAN NEGOTIATORS

The International Theological Commission theological papers expose the cardinal and bishop’s teaching on visible baptism of desire and their rejection of the dogma and Vatican Council II text.
May be its unintentional heresy. Let us give them the benefit of the doubt, but heresy it is.
In the hierarchy of truths we are all obliged to believe in the Creed. In the Nicene Creed we pray ‘I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sin.’ It means the baptism of water is needed for all. All means no known exceptions in the present time.This teaching is expressed in the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and it comes from Jesus’ teaching (John 3:5, Mk.15:15-16).
Perhaps as an oversight , two of the members of the Vatican team who participated in the discussion with the SSPX representatives, believe invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are explicit, known,defacto exceptions to the dogma and the Nicene Creed. They believe they are explicit exceptions to the need of the baptism of water being needed for salvation for all.We know that the Catholic Church gives the baptism of water to adults with Catholic Faith.The Vatican team is saying that not all adults need the baptism of water since there are some who are saved or will be saved in invincible ignorance etc. Irrational ? However this is their official position on the ITC website.
Invincible ignorance etc are exceptions to the traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to the former President International Theologcial Commission (ITC), Cardinal Luis Ladaria S.J and the former Secretary of the ITC, Bishop. Charles Morerod O.P.(former Rector of the Angelicum University,Rome).

They allege that Vatican Council II (LG 16) shows there are known exceptions.Discerning Catholics know that we do not know anyone saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire.This was the error of the Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Richard Cushing and the Jesuits there.
The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 addressed to the Archbishop of Boston does not state that we know cases of non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance or an “unconscious yearning” or desire and that these cases are exceptions to the dogma.
However Cadinal Ladaria, Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and past President of the ITC has assumed that being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are explicit, known exceptions to the thrice defined dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
This is an objective, factual error. We do not know any such case .No Vatican magisterial document makes this claim.
It is this error and interpretation of Vatican Council II that the Congergation for the Doctrine of the Faith expected the SSPX team to accept in closed door, secret talks.
The heretical position of two of the Vatican negotiators is now known to us through their writings in the ITC papers and is available on the Vatican website of the ITC.

They may say in public that they accept the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and also Vatican Council II. However if they assume that invincible ignorance,having a good conscience and the baptism of desire are explicit exceptions to the dogma and Ad Gentes 7 then it is irrational-and also a rejection of the centuries old interpretation of the dogma.
It is the Secretary of the CDF who is rejecting Vatican Council II (AG 7) and he expects the SSPX and all Catholics to endorse his heretical version of Lumen Gentium 16 (invincible ignorance).
It is saying there is salvation outside the church since we allegedly know cases of those saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire.

Whatever be ones position on Fr.Leonard Feeney, mentioned by the ITC, objectively we know there are no known cases of the baptism of desire or persons saved in invincible ignorance.So there cannot be a known exception to the dogma.To claim one knows particular exeptions is heresy. It is also irrational.
A Catholic cannot reject in public an ex cathedra dogma and then also hold the office of a cardinal and bishop as in the case of Cardinal Ladaria and Bishop Morerod.According to Canon Law priests, bishops and cardinals who hold an office in the Church need to accept those teachings which have to be ‘firmly believed’.(Dominus Iesus).
Now it is no more a secret to Catholics that it is the CDF Secretary who needs to affirm Vatican Council II, the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was interpreted for centuries ( and in accord now with Vatican Council II ) and Lumen Gentium 16, not being an explicit exception to the dogma and Ad Gentes 7.
Its unfortunate that the Vatican has annonced that the SSPX has to regularise its canonical status by accepting not just Vatican Council II as an historical event (which the SSPX does) but that they need to accept the heretical interpretation of the Vatican team approved by the CDF for secret talks with the SSPX.-Lionel Andrades

NO CANON LAW OBLIGES THE SSPX TO ACCEPT THE JEWISH LEFT VERSION OF VATICAN COUNCIL II
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/no-canon-law-ob…

Cardinal Luis Ladaria S.J Secretary Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith does away with the defined dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, Limbo and Original Sin in the International Theological Commission position papers: CDF expects the Society of St.Pius X to accept all this
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/cardinal-luis-l…

Mnsgr.Nicola Bux the SSPX in reality accepts Vatican Council II
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/mnsgrnicola-bux…

International Theological Commission (ITC) makes an objective, factual error in two of its published documents. Could they also be wrong about Limbo?
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/international-t…

VATICAN'S INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION MAKES AN ERROR IN ITS POSITION PAPER CHRISTIANITY AND THE WORLD RELIGIONS
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/vaticans-intern…

INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION USES PREMISE THAT IS FACTUALLY INCORRECT : LIMBO
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/international-t…

The International Theological Commission's position paper Christianity and the World Religions 1997 has an objective factual error and is approved by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger : invincible ignorance is not an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus

eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/international-t…

INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION ASSUMES ‘SEEDS OF THE WORD’ (VATICAN COUNCIL II ) IN OTHER RELIGIONS ARE KNOWN TO US AND THIS IS AN EXPLICIT EXCEPTION TO THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/international-t…

VATICAN'S INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION MAKES AN ERROR IN ITS POSITION PAPER CHRISTIANITY AND THE WORLD RELIGIONS

eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/vaticans-intern…

VATICAN COUNCIL II REJECTS THE THEOLOGY OF RELIGIONS

eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/vatican-council…

Former Secretary of the International Theological Commission holds that those saved with the baptism of desire and in invincible ignorance are known to us and so an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus

eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/secretary-of-in…
Lionel Andrades

Society of St. Pius X “Regularization” Not as Easy as You Think

Ireneas.
Cardinal Luiz Ladaria the former President of the International Theological Commission(ITC) in two of the position papers on the ITC website claims that the Church no more teaches exclusive salvation with reference to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. He cites Vatican Council II and the Letter of the Holy Office.

Cardinal Ladaria took part in the Vatican-SSPX talks.

Then Pope …
More
Ireneas.
Cardinal Luiz Ladaria the former President of the International Theological Commission(ITC) in two of the position papers on the ITC website claims that the Church no more teaches exclusive salvation with reference to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. He cites Vatican Council II and the Letter of the Holy Office.

Cardinal Ladaria took part in the Vatican-SSPX talks.

Then Pope Benedict XVI in Light of the World (Ignatius) p.107 also suggests that there can be exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

So it is understandable why they reject the SSPX position on ecumenism,inter-religious dialogue and other religions.

They believe that there are explicit exceptions to the dogma.

So the point I was trying to make is that being saved in invincible ignorance and having a good conscience (LG 16) etc is not an exception to the dogma. Since we do not know any of these cases in real life.

Since there are no exceptions to the dogma how can the Vatican object to the SSPX position on ecumenism and other religions?


International Theological Commission (ITC) makes an objective, factual error in two of its published documents. Could they also be wrong about Limbo?
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/international-t…

VATICAN'S INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION MAKES AN ERROR IN ITS POSITION PAPER CHRISTIANITY AND THE WORLD RELIGIONS
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/vaticans-intern…

INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION USES PREMISE THAT IS FACTUALLY INCORRECT : LIMBO
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/international-t…

The International Theological Commission's position paper Christianity and the World Religions 1997 has an objective factual error and is approved by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger : invincible ignorance is not an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus

eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/international-t…

INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION ASSUMES ‘SEEDS OF THE WORD’ (VATICAN COUNCIL II ) IN OTHER RELIGIONS ARE KNOWN TO US AND THIS IS AN EXPLICIT EXCEPTION TO THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/international-t…

VATICAN'S INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION MAKES AN ERROR IN ITS POSITION PAPER CHRISTIANITY AND THE WORLD RELIGIONS

eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/vaticans-intern…

VATICAN COUNCIL II REJECTS THE THEOLOGY OF RELIGIONS

eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/vatican-council…

Former Secretary of the International Theological Commission holds that those saved with the baptism of desire and in invincible ignorance are known to us and so an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus

eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/secretary-of-in…
Lionel Andrades

Society of St. Pius X “Regularization” Not as Easy as You Think

Wednesday, April 11, 2012
NEWSPAPER ADVERTISEMENT : APPEAL ON THE SSPX ISSUE eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/newspaper-adver…
Lionel Andrades

Society of St. Pius X “Regularization” Not as Easy as You Think

Wednesday, April 11, 2012

There could soon be an 'ecclesial rupture' because the Vatican does not want to say that there can be two interpretations of Vatican Council II.

If the pope does not know personally of non Catholics saved in 2012 in invincible ignorance and when Vatican Council II does not make this claim of knowing explicit cases in real life how can the magisterium reject the SSPX …More
Wednesday, April 11, 2012

There could soon be an 'ecclesial rupture' because the Vatican does not want to say that there can be two interpretations of Vatican Council II.

If the pope does not know personally of non Catholics saved in 2012 in invincible ignorance and when Vatican Council II does not make this claim of knowing explicit cases in real life how can the magisterium reject the SSPX doctrinal position on other religions, ecumenism and dialogue?

The SSPX (Society of St.Pius X) is not obliged to accept an interpretation of Vatican Council II with no supporting text on ecumenism and inter religious dialogue. Nowhere does Vatican Council II say Judaism is a path to salvation or that Jews are saved in general in their religion. Instead the Magisterium is unable to say in public that Vatican Council II (AG 7) says Judaism and other religions are not paths to salvation and that Catholics are the Chosen People of God (NA 4).

Why does the SSPX have to accept Vatican Council II when the pope and his Curia will not affirm Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II?
The Holy Father is not proclaiming the Faith for political reasons and the falsehood and lies are being repeated by thousands of Catholics to protect their self interest or due to ignorance.
There could soon be an 'ecclesial rupture' because the Vatican does not want to say that there can be two interpretations of Vatican Council II. One according to the text of Vatican Council II and the other due to political necessity and survival and with no references from Vatican Council II text.
I repeat - Vatican Council II does not mention a visible baptism of desire or known- to- us- in- Heaven-cases of non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance, a good conscience or seeds of the Word. So there is no doctrinal basis for rejecting the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus or Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II. SSPX was in agreement with Vatican Council II on ecumenism, inter religious dialogue and religious liberty in the Vatican-SSPX failed talks.
The Vatican needs to clarify in public if they know any case of non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance, the seeds of the Word and a good conscience.
If the answer is No then they should permit the SSPC not to accept Vatican Council II (Jewish Left version) - with the Vatican agreeing to clarify the issue over time.

Catholics should sign petitions and place advertisements in the newspapers asking a politically oriented Curia how can those saved in invincible ignorance and a good conscience in the year 2012, be explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and so how can the SSPX position on ecumenism and inter religious dialogue be wrong?
Catechism Teachers should ask the Vatican how can they excommunicate the SSPX for affirming the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (in accord with Vatican Council II) when there is no contradicting text in Vatican Council II to reject the SSPX position on other religions?
Religious communities ask the Vatican why you all cannot accept the literal interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus and also implicit baptism of desire and invincible ignorance. Until this issue is settled there should not be an 'ecclesial rupture' with the SSPX.

Assuming Fr. Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for denying invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire (and he was not!) you can go ahead and affirm implicit invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire and also the literal interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus?
Catholic religious communities who attend the Novus Ordo Mass why cannot you accept the literal interpretation of extra ecclesism nulla salus and also implicit baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance implicitly,this being known only to God ?
It is the magisterium's doctrinal position which is irrational and contrary to common sense? SSPX please ask the Vatican spokesman if he actually knows any case of a non Catholic saved in invincible ignorance. Is there a visible baptism of desire?
If the pope does not know of any person saved in invincible ignorance and now in Heaven and when Vatican Council II does not make this claim of knowing in real life explicit cases inHeaven, how can the magisterium reject the SSPX doctrinal position on other religions, ecumenism and dialogue?
Even though the SSPX rejects Vatican Council II (Jewish Left version) they should start talking with the Vatican in terms of Vatican Council II: ask the Vatican Curia to cite texts in Vatican Council II which contradict extra ecclesiam nulla salus ?
Also, how can the Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF), Cardinal Luiz Ladaria S.J , as the former President of the International Theological Commission (ITC) reject the literal interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Nicene Creed, Vatican Council II (AG 7) and still offer Holy Mass ?.This heresy can be viewed on the ITC’s website.

When the pope says in Light of the World (Ignatius) p.107 that all who are saved are saved through Jesus we must note it has two meanings.
1. All who are saved are saved through Jesus and the Church and this is our general Catholic belief, which we accept.There is no controversy here.
2. However the theological meaning is that all who are saved are saved either in invincible ignorance, a good conscience, and the baptism of desire etc or with Catholic Faith and the baptism of water.
Then the pope also says in Light of the Wolrd p.107 that there is only ‘one channel’ of salvation. he says there is only one way of salvation. implying the one mentioned above.
This is false theologically since the one channel of salvation in the Catholic Church has always been through Jesus in the Catholic Church. We don’t know any case of a non Catholic saved invincible ignorance etc as the pope would wrongly assume.
When the pope makes an objective, factual error one can expect the rest of the Church to be confused or in error.
I ask Catholic priests these questions and they do not answer. Some say they do not know the answer and others say that they have not specialized in this or that.When I ask them if I can record their answer with my camera they say no.They will agree that one needs to proclaim the Faith and not be ashamed of it.-Lionel Andrades
Lionel Andrades

Father Cekada + Errors Of The Society Of St. Pius X

Monday, April 9, 2012

HOLY FATHER MAKES AN OBJECTIVE ERROR IN WRITING

Excommunicated priests could cry foul: Members of the SSPX need to appeal to the pope to affirm Vatican Council II (AG 7) in public.
It’s all there in writing.Dissent from a religious. Not a liberal priest or bishop, but Our Holy Father the pope himself.
It’s hard to believe. It was something that was a suspicion for a …More
Monday, April 9, 2012

HOLY FATHER MAKES AN OBJECTIVE ERROR IN WRITING

Excommunicated priests could cry foul: Members of the SSPX need to appeal to the pope to affirm Vatican Council II (AG 7) in public.
It’s all there in writing.Dissent from a religious. Not a liberal priest or bishop, but Our Holy Father the pope himself.
It’s hard to believe. It was something that was a suspicion for a long time but there was no proof.Now the pope has made an error and put it in writing. He can no more stay behind the secret, confidential memos and telephone calls or cardinal - bishop proxies.
The pope’s error is not ex cathedra but it is a public error contradicting the ex cathedra statements of popes and Church Councils but worse still, to would seem for some, it’s a common sense error.
Perhaps it was inadvertant and no ill will was intended.Let us give our Holy Father the benefit of the doubt.
The error, among other things, shows that the Vatican is in no position to demand that the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) accept Vatican Council II (Jewish Left version) when the pope himself is rejecting Vatican Council II , Ad Gentes 7 and misunderstanding Lumen Gentium 16, Vatican Council II.(1)
The SSPX on April 15, the deadline for their response to the March 16 Vatican statement, should ask the pope or the Vatican spokesman, to clarify their position on AG 7 and LG 16 and the factual error made by the pope in writing.
How can there be ‘an ecclesial rupture of painful and incalculable consequences’ when the Vatican itself cannot affirm Vatican Council II according to common sense, reason and simple objectivity.

Here’s the problem for all to see:

The Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI tells Peter Seewald in the book Light of the World- Conversations with Peter Seewald (Ignatius) that there is only one way of salvation and all who are saved are saved through Jesus.
This is a simple statement and acceptable. All good Catholics can agree with the Holy Father.He implies that all non Catholics are saved with the baptsm of water and Catholic Faith or, in invincible ignorance,a good conscience and other implicit forms of salvation known only to God and unknown to us.
So this is the one way of salvation.
But there is a problem here and it may not show itself unless you think it through.

The Holy Father is saying that the one way of salvation is not just Catholic Faith and the baptism of water (AG 7, Vatican Council II) but also being saved in invincible ignorance, a good conscience (LG 16, Vatican Council II) etc.
So when AG 7 states all need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water the Holy Father says “No, Not all.”- the exceptions are those who are in invincible ignorance, a good conscience (LG 16) etc and are saved. There are exceptions.
There are exceptions to AG 7 ?
Did Vatican Council II make a mistake?

Is Vatican Council II irrational, illogical ?
How can Vatican Council II like the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus say all need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water ?
Something is wrong, somewhere?!
Now we come to the heart of the problem.The Richard Cushing Error.The objective flaw. And the Holy Father also fell for it.
It’s simple. It’s so simple that many will not believe it.
We don’t know anyone on earth saved in invincible ignorance or a good conscience.
Objectively we don’t know anyone in this category.They are in Heaven and are known only to God.
So the one way of salvation is not all who are saved through Jesus and the Church as the Holy Father told Peter Seewald.
The pope assumes that those saved in invincible ignorance etc are known to us and so they are an exception to AG 7.He also assumes that LG 16 refers to explicitly known cases of non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance and with a good conscience.
This is an objective, factual error. We cannot meet or telephone someone saved in invincible ignorance. So it is not an explicit, defacto exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the centuries-old one way of salvation for all.
So when the Vatican asks the SSPX to affirm Vatican Council II the SSPX should ask the Vatican to clarify LG 16 and AG 7, what is the Vatican’s position on this objective error of the pope?
Ask the Vatican spokesman if he knows anyone personally saved in invincible ignorance or a good conscience.
Catholic priests in Rome, to whom I have asked this question, say they don’t know a single such case.- Lionel Andrades
1.
Therefore, all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church’s preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself “by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door.- Ad Gentes 7

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

Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience.-Lumen Gentium 16
Lionel Andrades

Society of St. Pius X “Regularization” Not as Easy as You Think

Monday, April 9, 2012

HOLY FATHER MAKES AN OBJECTIVE ERROR IN WRITING

Excommunicated priests could cry foul: Members of the SSPX need to appeal to the pope to affirm Vatican Council II (AG 7) in public.

It’s all there in writing.Dissent from a religious. Not a liberal priest or bishop, but Our Holy Father the pope himself.

It’s hard to believe. It was something that was a suspicion for …More
Monday, April 9, 2012

HOLY FATHER MAKES AN OBJECTIVE ERROR IN WRITING

Excommunicated priests could cry foul: Members of the SSPX need to appeal to the pope to affirm Vatican Council II (AG 7) in public.

It’s all there in writing.Dissent from a religious. Not a liberal priest or bishop, but Our Holy Father the pope himself.

It’s hard to believe. It was something that was a suspicion for a long time but there was no proof.Now the pope has made an error and put it in writing. He can no more stay behind the secret, confidential memos and telephone calls or cardinal - bishop proxies.

The pope’s error is not ex cathedra but it is a public error contradicting the ex cathedra statements of popes and Church Councils but worse still, to would seem for some, it’s a common sense error.

Perhaps it was inadvertant and no ill will was intended.Let us give our Holy Father the benefit of the doubt.

The error, among other things, shows that the Vatican is in no position to demand that the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) accept Vatican Council II (Jewish Left version) when the pope himself is rejecting Vatican Council II , Ad Gentes 7 and misunderstanding Lumen Gentium 16, Vatican Council II.(1)

The SSPX on April 15, the deadline for their response to the March 16 Vatican statement, should ask the pope or the Vatican spokesman, to clarify their position on AG 7 and LG 16 and the factual error made by the pope in writing.

How can there be ‘an ecclesial rupture of painful and incalculable consequences’ when the Vatican itself cannot affirm Vatican Council II according to common sense, reason and simple objectivity.

Here’s the problem for all to see:

The Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI tells Peter Seewald in the book Light of the World- Conversations with Peter Seewald (Ignatius) that there is only one way of salvation and all who are saved are saved through Jesus.

This is a simple statement and acceptable. All good Catholics can agree with the Holy Father.He implies that all non Catholics are saved with the baptsm of water and Catholic Faith or, in invincible ignorance,a good conscience and other implicit forms of salvation known only to God and unknown to us.

So this is the one way of salvation.

But there is a problem here and it may not show itself unless you think it through.

The Holy Father is saying that the one way of salvation is not just Catholic Faith and the baptism of water (AG 7, Vatican Council II) but also being saved in invincible ignorance, a good conscience (LG 16, Vatican Council II) etc.

So when AG 7 states all need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water the Holy Father says “No, Not all.”- the exceptions are those who are in invincible ignorance, a good conscience (LG 16) etc and are saved. There are exceptions.

There are exceptions to AG 7 ?

Did Vatican Council II make a mistake?


Is Vatican Council II irrational, illogical ?

How can Vatican Council II like the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus say all need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water ?

Something is wrong, somewhere?!

Now we come to the heart of the problem.The Richard Cushing Error.The objective flaw. And the Holy Father also fell for it.

It’s simple. It’s so simple that many will not believe it.

We don’t know anyone on earth saved in invincible ignorance or a good conscience.

Objectively we don’t know anyone in this category.They are in Heaven and are known only to God.

So the one way of salvation is not all who are saved through Jesus and the Church as the Holy Father told Peter Seewald.

The pope assumes that those saved in invincible ignorance etc are known to us and so they are an exception to AG 7.He also assumes that LG 16 refers to explicitly known cases of non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance and with a good conscience.

This is an objective, factual error. We cannot meet or telephone someone saved in invincible ignorance. So it is not an explicit, defacto exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the centuries-old one way of salvation for all.

So when the Vatican asks the SSPX to affirm Vatican Council II the SSPX should ask the Vatican to clarify LG 16 and AG 7, what is the Vatican’s position on this objective error of the pope?

Ask the Vatican spokesman if he knows anyone personally saved in invincible ignorance or a good conscience.

Catholic priests in Rome, to whom I have asked this question, say they don’t know a single such case.- Lionel Andrades

1.
Therefore, all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church’s preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself “by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door.- Ad Gentes 7

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

Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience.-Lumen Gentium 16
Lionel Andrades

Society of St. Pius X “Regularization” Not as Easy as You Think

Sunday, April 8, 2012

DID THE POPE REALLY DENY THE FAITH ON THE NEED FOR JEWS TO CONVERT ?

Yesterday on a blog I was accused of being a liar because I said Pope Benedict XVI said Jews do not have to convert in the present time. (1) The writer (Jabba Papa) quoted the relevant passage. He denied that the pope had made that statement under pressure from the Zionists.

Here is the passage …More
Sunday, April 8, 2012

DID THE POPE REALLY DENY THE FAITH ON THE NEED FOR JEWS TO CONVERT ?

Yesterday on a blog I was accused of being a liar because I said Pope Benedict XVI said Jews do not have to convert in the present time. (1) The writer (Jabba Papa) quoted the relevant passage. He denied that the pope had made that statement under pressure from the Zionists.

Here is the passage in which the Holy Father dismisses the Nicene Creed, the defined dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Vatican Council II (Ad Gentes 7). According to the teachings of the Church any religious in this position is automatically excommunicated. Catholics have suffered persecution for not denying this very truth of our Faith. The Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) could be excommunicated this month for not affirming the same ‘heresy?’ as the pope. They have to accept the Jewish Left version of Vatican Council II and cannot say that they affirm Vatican Council II in accord with Tradition and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

1. JabbaPapa says:

April 7, 2012 at 16:10
Pope Benedict XVI in Light of the World-Conversations with Peter Seewald saysJews do not have to convert in the present times.

Do you think that it is an appropriate manner to celebrate the Resurrection of our Lord to post blatant lies about the Holy Father?

Here’s what the Pope wrote:

The old formulation really was offensive to Jews and failed to express positively the overall intrinsic unity between the Old and New Testament. For this reason, I believed that a modification of this passage in the old liturgy was necessary, especially, as I have already said, out of consideration for our relation with our Jewish friends. I altered the text in such a way as to express our faith that Christ is the Savior for all, that there are not two channels of salvation, so that Christ is also the redeemer of the Jews, and not just of the Gentiles.

But the new formulation also shifts the focus from a direct petition for the conversion of the Jews in a missionary sense to a plea that the Lord might bring about the hour of history when we may all be united. So the polemical arguments with which a whole series of theologians assailed me are ill-considered; they do not accurately reflect the reality of the situation.

In other words, rather than these mendacious claims that you have posted being accurate — the exact opposite is true, and in that book, Pope Benedict XVI has called for the conversion of the Jews.

You should be utterly ashamed for posting these sorts of lies on the eve of Easter.

2. Lionel Andrades says:

April 7, 2012 at 16:42

Jabba Papa:

Here’s what the Pope wrote :

The old formulation really was offensive to Jews and failed to express positively the overall intrinsic unity between the Old and New Testament.

Lionel:
It was offensive to the Chief Rabbinate of Israel in public they broke dialogue with the Vatican.

Pope Benedict XVI:
For this reason, I believed that a modification of this passage in the old liturgy was necessary, especially,

Lionel:
So because of the protests the Holy Father thought a modification of the passage was necessary.

Pope Benedict XVI:
as I have already said, out of consideration for our relation with our Jewish friends.

Lionel:
And to prevent the reported threat of violence and further protests reported in the media…

Pope Benedict XVI:
I altered the text in such a way as to express our faith that Christ is the Savior for all,
Lionel:
Here there is no problem. Christ is the Saviour of all.
Pope Benedict XVI:
that there are not two channels of salvation,

Lionel:
Here is the problem .
There is only one channel for the pope and this channel is that all who are saved are saved by Christ.Fine, except the centuries old one channel was Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation.

There can be those saved in their religion and this is not an exception to the dogma which referred to the one channel of salvation. So there really is one channel and all Jews need to enter it with Catholic Faith and the baptism of water. This means the need to convert in the present time. The pope says they do not have to convert.
Conceptually, vaguely he says all those who are saved are saved by Christ.
Pope Benedict XVI:
so that Christ is also the redeemer of the Jews, and not just of the Gentiles.
Lionel: This is not an issue. This was accepted.
The question is: Christ is also the redeemer of the Jews and not just of the Gentiles and does it mean that all Jews do not have to convert in the present time?
Pope Benedict XVI:
But the new formulation also shifts the focus from a direct petition for the conversion of the Jews in a missionary sense
Lionel:
‘Shifts the focus from a direct petition for conversion’????
‘I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sin’-Nicene Creed. Except for the Jews in 2012. Not applicable for them?
Jabba:
to a plea that the Lord might bring about the hour of history when we may all be united. So the polemical arguments with which a whole series of theologians assailed me are ill-considered; they do not accurately reflect the reality of the situation.
In other words, rather than these mendacious claims that you have posted being accurate — the exact opposite is true, and in that book, Pope Benedict XVI has called for the conversion of the Jews.
Lionel:
‘Shifts the focus from a direct petition for conversion’????-Pope Benedict XVI
____________________________________________

'I modified it in such a way that… one did not pray directly for the conversion of the Jews…but that the Lord might hasten the historic hour in which we will all be united.'- Light of the World-Conversations with Peter Seewald (Ignatius) p.107

'one did not pray directly for the conversion of the Jews' since they do not have to convert to avoid Hell it is implied and that they will be saved in general in their religion.
On Sept 22,2009 Cardinal Angelo Bagnasco,President of the Italian Catholic Bishops Conference (CEI) before two Jewish rabbis gave into pressure by them and issued a CEI directive which said that Jews do not have to convert in the present times.The Cardinal stated that he had the support of the Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Bertone and the Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI. There has been no contradiction from the Vatican.

Cardinal Bertone also had called the attention of the Chief Rabbinate of Israel to a front page article in the L'Osservatore Romano written by Cardinal Walter Kaspar in which he stated Jews do not have to convert in the present time.The cardinal issued the statement on Sept.22,2009 .It was reported in the daily Avvenire, on Sept.23, 2009

The front page article (April 10, 2008) in the L’Osservatore Romano was written by Cardinal Walter Kaspar.It was presented to the Chief Rabbinate of Israel by Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, Vatican Secretary of State. It was approved by the Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI.The article said that Vatican Council II indicated that non Catholics can be saved. So Cardinal Kaspar concluded that Jews do not have to convert in the present times.

Cardinal William Levada, Prefect of the Congregation for Doctrine and Faith, Vatican never issued a clarification on Sept 22,2009 when Cardinal Angelo Bagnasco quoted Cardinal Bertone saying that the Revised Good Friday Prayer was not for the conversion of the Jews and Jews do not have to convert.
The Revised Prayer for the Conversion of the Jews was not for the conversion of present day Jews the daily newspaper of the Italian Bishops Conference Avvenire reported (' Gironata ebraico-cristiana riprende la celebrazione commune Bagnasco ai rabbinic Laras e Di Segni : diamo nuovo slancio al dialogo di Lorenzo Rosoli p. 8, Chiesa).- Lionel Andrades
1.
catholicismpure.wordpress.com/…/communique-conc…
Lionel Andrades

Society of St. Pius X “Regularization” Not as Easy as You Think

Friday, April 6, 2012

ANIVERSARY OF THE DENIAL OF THE FAITH BY THE MAGISTERIUM ?

If a Catholic priest, bishop or cardinal denies a teaching of the Church which must be ‘firmly believed’ he is automatically excommunicated.Cardinal Ratzinger and Cardinal Bertone as President and Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith excommunicated a Sri Lankan OMI priest for denying …More
Friday, April 6, 2012

ANIVERSARY OF THE DENIAL OF THE FAITH BY THE MAGISTERIUM ?

If a Catholic priest, bishop or cardinal denies a teaching of the Church which must be ‘firmly believed’ he is automatically excommunicated.Cardinal Ratzinger and Cardinal Bertone as President and Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith excommunicated a Sri Lankan OMI priest for denying the Immaculate Conception o f Our Lady.

Pope Benedict XVI in Light of the World-Conversations with Peter Seewald says Jews do not have to convert in the present times. Pope Benedict XVI says that he has revised the ancient liturgy (on Good Friday) so that it does not say that Jews need to convert in the present times but that they will convert in a future time (eschatological time).
So he is saying that he has revised the Good Friday Prayer for the Conversion of the Jews which now says Jews do not have to convert in the present times.(1) This is a rejection of the Nicene Creed in which we pray “I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sin”.Jews do need the baptism of water in the present time.
The pope is saying that without the baptism of water given to adults with Catholic Faith, Jews in general, are saved in their religion.
Vatican Council II mentions the possibility of non Catholics being saved in invincible ignorance, a good conscience etc. It does not state that they are saved in general in their religion. Since in general the normal means of salvation is Catholic Faith and the baptism of water.(AG 7).
The Vatican recieved a threat from the Chief Rabbinate and the Goverment of Israel over the issue of the Good Friday Prayer for the Conversion of Jews it was reported in the secular newspapers here.There was the threat of war. The pope diffused the tension with a front page report in the L’Osservatore Romano in which it was said that Jews do not have to convert in the present time.
This message was repeated in Light of the World-Conversations with Peter Seewald (Ignatius Press). The pope told Seewald that there is only one means of salvation and all who are saved are saved through Jesus.True. However this can also be a partial truth and denial of a defined dogma offensive to the Jewish Left.Offensive to the pro-Sodom and Gomorrah Zionists posing as Jews.Yes all those who are saved are saved through Jesus and the Church, Jesus' Mystical Body, however every one needs to enter the Church with the baptism of water and Catholic Faith (Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II, dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus,Dominus Iesus 20 etc).
The pope and his Curia have put away the defined dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus which Pope Pius XII called an ‘infallible teaching’.

In the same book the pope mentioned an exception to the prohibited use of condoms, an issue already being supported before by the liberal English bishops.The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) issued a clarification saying that in general the Church has not changed its teaching on condoms. The CDF never issued a clarification to the popes comments on the Jews in that same book.
1.Do Jews do not need to convert in the present times to avoid Hell?The pope says no. The CDF says nothing.
2.Do all Jews need to enter the Church with Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation?(AG 7 etc).The pope says no. The CDF says nothing.
3.Do all Jews need to convert into the Church for salvation ?(
Cantate Domino, Council of Florence. Defined dogma).The pope says no. The CDF is silent.
The Bible says Jews need to convert. The pope says...

The Jewish Anti Defamation League(ADL) claims the Church has changed its teaching regarding Jews and Judaism.This claim is made in the ADL Bearing Witness education program for Catholic schools.The CDF ignores it. The USCCB implements the ADL program in Catholic schools.
The secular newspapers imply that those who are saved in invincible ignorance, a good conscience (LG 16) etc are known exceptions to the dogma ( and to Vatican Council II, AG 7). The Magisterium is silent.
Vatican Council II in reality says Jews need to convert for salvation.The Society of St.Pius X in reality accepts this teaching and interpretation of Vatican Council II. The SSPX is condemned.They are condemned for rejecting the Jewish Left interpretation of Vatican Council II. The Magisterium will not state like Vatican Council II,Ad Gentes 7 that Jews need to convert.The Magisterium will not affirm the Catholic Faith.
Do we pray or do we not pray for the Conversion of the Jews? At the Good Friday Service I attended today afternoon they did not mention that Jews need to convert into the Church. There was a vague mention, a hope, that Jews will know the fullness of Redemption in Jesus Christ.
The popes says they are saved in the present times.Now if the SSPX does not say the same thing they soon could be excommunicated according to the March 16 Vatican statement.
In the name of ecumenism and the one world religion the Catholic Teaching Authority could be told to excommunicate the SSPX if they do not accept the prevailing heresy. Once this is done the enemies of the Church will demand even more. The Vatican could be told to give up devotion to Our Lady and say the Mass is not a Sacrifice.

The pope has already said that in the case of the Brazilian girl there was an exception to abortion.(Cardinal Bertone and Mnsgr.Fisichella said they were instructed by the pope).The CDF issued a general statement saying there was no change in the church’s teaching on abortion.Obviously the Yes and NO position on Limbo was also useful for the media.
In the rejection of a defined dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus , Vatican Council II and the Nicene Creed the pope and his Curia stand automatically excommunicated according to the teachings of the Church always upheld by them.What would be the credibility in excommunicating the SSPX bishops for denying the Jewish Left version of Vatican Council II when they themself deny in public teachings which merit excommunication?
How can they excommunicate the SSPX for denying the Jewish Left version of Vatican Council II which claims Jews do not have to convert into the Catholic Church ?

I am not a member of the SSPX and I attend Mass in Italian.The Traditional Latin Mass is not available for me in the area where I live.Neither is it available in the evenings daily in the centre of Rome.I reject Vatican Council II as interpreted by the ADL and its allies.I accept Vatican Council II as a continuation of Tradition and in accord with the literal interpretation of the defined
dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.i.e the Catholic Church says Jews need to convert for salvation (Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II) and Catholics are the Chosen people of God, the ‘new people of God’(Nostra Aetate 4, Vatican Council II).

SAD HISTORY
On Sept 22,2009 Cardinal Angelo Bagnasco,President of the Italian Catholic Bishops Conference (CEI) before two Jewish rabbis gave into pressure by them and issued a CEI directive which said that Jews do not have to convert in the present times.The Cardinal stated that he had the support of the Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Bertone and the Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI. There has been no contradiction from the Vatican.
Cardinal Bertone also had called the attention of the Chief Rabbinate of Israel to a front page article in the L'Osservatore Romano written by Cardinal Walter Kaspar in which he stated Jews do not have to convert in the present time.The cardinal issued the statement on Sept.22,2009 .It was reported in the daily Avvenire, on Sept.23, 2009 the feast day of Padre Pio.

Father Tullio Rotondo an Italian diocesan priest in a an e-mail message to me said that the cardinal’s statement was contary to the Bible in which all Jews are called to conversion.Fr.Rotondo said that Jesus had called all people to convert, especially the Jews. Jesus had sent His Apostles to convert all people.Fr.Rotondo referred to Bible passages Matt.3:2.Matt.4:17,Matt.11:20, Matt.12:41,Matt.13:15,Matt 18:3,Mark 1:15,Marck 4:12, Mark 6:12,Luk 5:32, Luke 10:30,Luke 11:32,Luk 13:3,Luke 13:5,Luke 15:7,Luke 15:10,John 12:40,Acts 3:26,9:35,Acts.20:21,Acts.26:20,Acts.28:27,2 Tim.2:25.
The above Biblical quotations Fr.Tullio Rotondo said help us understand that first and foremost the Jews need to convert and then the others. It makes us understand that we must preach for the conversion of the Jews and we must pray and appeal to the saints for this conversion.
We pray also for the conversion of the cardinals, he said, who say things that appear scandalous and contrary to the Sacred Faith. Don Tullio said that he is praying also that the Holy Father intervenes.Don Tullio said that we must fight also in the Church of God, for the Truth.
Pope Benedict XVI tells Seewad that he revised the Good Friday Prayer ‘in such a way that it contained our faith, that Christ is salvation for all.’ (This of course does not say that all Jews are on the path to Hell unless they convert as the Church has taught for centuries. This was the one way of salvation) The pope says ‘that there do not exist two ways of salvation’( The pope indicates there is only one way of salvation and Jews are saved in general through this one way; Christ and the Church, and so they do not have to convert. Catholic priests have pointed out that we do not know any case of a non Catholic saved by Jesus and the Church. There is no case of implicit salvation which is explicit for us. The dogma says everyone needs to be an explicit member of the Church. So the pope’s one way of salvation is a strawman) The pope continues ‘and that therefore Christ is also the saviour of the Jews, and not only of the pagans ‘(Christ is the Saviour of the Jews and pagans and they are saved, even if they do not enter the Catholic Church? Pope John Paul II’s Dominus Iesus n.20 says Jesus has died for all but to receive this salvation they need to enter the Church. The Catechism of the Catholic Church 846 says that the Church is like a door in which all need to enter, Ad Gentes 7 says all need baptism for salvation).
The front page article (April 10, 2008) in the L’Osservatore Romano was written by Cardinal Walter Kaspar.It was presented to the Chief Rabbinate of Israel by Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, Vatican Secretary of State. It was approved by the Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI.

The article said that Vatican Council II indicated that non Catholics can be saved. So Cardinal Kaspar concluded that Jews do not have to convert in the present times.

Cardinal William Levada, Prefect of the Congregation for Doctrine and Faith, Vatican never issued a clarification on Sept 22,2009 when Cardinal Angelo Bagnasco quoted Cardinal Bertone saying that the Revised Good Friday Prayer was not for the conversion of the Jews and Jews do not have to convert.
The Revised Prayer for the Conversion of the Jews was not for the conversion of present day Jews the daily newspaper of the Italian Bishops Conference Avvenire reported (' Gironata ebraico-cristiana riprende la celebrazione commune Bagnasco ai rabbinic Laras e Di Segni : diamo nuovo slancio al dialogo di Lorenzo Rosoli p. 8, Chiesa).
1. Pope Benedict approved the article written on the front page of the L’Osservatore Romano by Cardinal Kaspar and sent to the Chief Rabbinate of Israel. The message was Jews do not have to convert in the present times. Also it was alleged that this was taught in Vatican Council II.
2. Pope Benedict approved the meeting of Cardinal Bagnasco with the two Rabbis when Bagnasco issued a directive of the Conference of Catholic Bishops saying that Jews do not have to convert in the present times. Bagnasco claimed that it had the support of the Pope.
3. The pope approved Cardinal Bertone’s claim to the Chief Rabbinate through a Letter, public, that we Catholics had a belief in Jesus. (That was about all). And that the Chief Rabbinate had read the article by Cardinal Kaspar which said Jews do not have to convert in the present times.
This new teaching was been given to us after protests were made by the Chief Rabbinate of Israel and the Jewish Left. Dialogue with the Vatican was suspended. The issue was the Good Friday Prayer for the Conversion of Jews.
Pope Benedict XVI is my pope and I pray for him. I would not dare to make any comments on his personality or character. I try to restrict myself to theology and doctrine.We need to be united with him during these times.It is possible that he can change the present errors .- Lionel Andrades

1.
I modified it in such a way that… one did not pray directly for the conversion of the Jews…but that the Lord might hasten the historic hour in which we will all be united.-Light of the World-Conversations with Peter Seewald (Ignatius) p.107
Lionel Andrades

Society of St. Pius X “Regularization” Not as Easy as You Think

New magisterium could excommunicate SSPX for denying Vatican Council II when they say Jews need to convert and Catholics are the Chosen People of God.

The pope was forced to say that Bishop Richard Williamson had to accept the six million Holocaust figure, even though initially the Vatican spokesman said the bishop was free to have an opinion. Probably this was the initial view of Pope Benedict. …More
New magisterium could excommunicate SSPX for denying Vatican Council II when they say Jews need to convert and Catholics are the Chosen People of God.

The pope was forced to say that Bishop Richard Williamson had to accept the six million Holocaust figure, even though initially the Vatican spokesman said the bishop was free to have an opinion. Probably this was the initial view of Pope Benedict.

Then after worldwide political pressure he had to announce that the Good Friday Prayer for the Conversion of the Jews was not for their conversion. Then he said that Jews do not have to convert in the present time.

Now he is being forced to excommunicate the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX).

Years back he did away with the defined dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Neither did he correct the error of the Archbishop of Boston on invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire.

Vatican Council II unlike the ADL- magisterium for the Catholic Church says Catholics are ‘the new people of God’(Nostra Aetate 4) and that Jews and other non Catholics need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water to avoid Hell(for salvation).(Ad Gentes 7).

The ADL magisterium wants the SSPX excommunicated and the Vatican has issued a statement indicating just that.

What an age we live in! The pope says that Jews do not have to convert in the present times, a Catholic bishop cannot say that 5,999,999 or less people died in the terrible holocaust and the SSPX can be excommunicated for saying Jews need to convert and that Catholics are the Chosen People of God, according to Vatican Council II.

The new magisterium could excommunicate the SSPX for denying Vatican Council II when they say Jews need to convert for salvation and Catholics are the new people of God.

The SSPX has to state in public that they accept a Vatican Council II which says Jews do not have to convert and that Jews are the Chosen People of God even though there is no text in Vatican Council II which makes this claim.

Unless the SSPX accepts this Jewish Left version of Vatican Council II they are likely to be excommunicated by the magisterium this month, with the approval of the ADL and the Chief Rabbinate of Israel.-Lionel Andrades
Lionel Andrades

Society of St. Pius X “Regularization” Not as Easy as You Think

It’s time for cardinal, bishops and traditional religious groups to say openly that they accept Vatican Council II and reject the Jewish Left interpretation of the Council.

For instance on the subject of other religions, why do we have to accept new doctrine which is not even there in Vatican Council II?

They could clarify the issue point by point .Begin with the subject of ‘other religions’.

More
It’s time for cardinal, bishops and traditional religious groups to say openly that they accept Vatican Council II and reject the Jewish Left interpretation of the Council.

For instance on the subject of other religions, why do we have to accept new doctrine which is not even there in Vatican Council II?

They could clarify the issue point by point .Begin with the subject of ‘other religions’.

Interpretation 1: Vatican Council II says non Catholics do not have to convert in general for salvation. (LG 16).

Interpretation II: Vatican Council II says non Catholics need to convert in general for salvation (Ad Gentes 7, LG 14).

Interpretation II is the traditional teaching which the SSPX also endorses.

So the SSPX accepts Vatican Council II?

If the SSPX accepts Interpretation 2 then clarify it in public.

Interpretation 1. Vatican Council II says those saved in invincible ignorance, a good conscience, the seeds of the word are EXPLICIT EXCEPTIONS to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and to Ad Gentes 7 i.e all need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation.

Interpretation 2: Vatican Council II says those saved in invincible ignorance etc are possibilities known to only God. There are no explicit exceptions to Ad Gentes 7 and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Call a Press Conference and clarify this issue or hold a conference and discuss the issue in public.

The doctrinal talks were held in secret. This is all just like a secret society, the Freemasons.

Cardinal Donald Wuerl and the US bishops give the Eucharist to pro abortion politicians, homosexuals and lesbians. Cardinal Wuerl was made a cardinal. The SSPX rejects Cardinal Sean O Malley and the ADL‘s interpretation of Vatican Council II and they are threatened in public with a second excommunication.

It’s time for cardinal, bishops and religious communities to openly say that they accept Vatican Council II and reject the Jewish Left interpretation of the Council: they affirm the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus in accord with Vatican Council II (AG 7,LG 14)

Affirm Lumen Gentium 16 (invincible ignorance) as a possibility known only to God so it is not in conflict with the dogma or the literal interpretation of outside the church no salvation.

Since LG 16 is not explicitly known Vatican Council II affirms the literal interpretation of the defined dogma.

This is also the interpretation of all the Catechisms, including the present one, Vatican Council I and II, the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 ( it refers to ‘the dogma’) other magisterial documents and Fr. Leonard Feeney of Boston who was not excommunicated for heresy.He was not excommunicated for saying the same thing as Vatican Council II and the dogma.


It is time to give a testimony of the Faith in public and affirm Vatican Council II, we accept Tradition ,we reject the Jewish Left version of the our Catholic Faith. Lionel Andrades
Lionel Andrades

Society of St. Pius X “Regularization” Not as Easy as You Think

Tuesday, April 3, 2012

Fr.James Martin S.J does not say the popes, the Bible and Jesus were anti-Semitic

Fr. James Martin, SJ in The Anti-Semitism of the Society of St.Pius X (Jan 31, 2009 America ) asks why would the pope move to lift the ban on a group that has as its raison d’etre the rejection of the Second Vatican Council which is an ecclesial-theological issue. He says this is a …More
Tuesday, April 3, 2012

Fr.James Martin S.J does not say the popes, the Bible and Jesus were anti-Semitic

Fr. James Martin, SJ in The Anti-Semitism of the Society of St.Pius X (Jan 31, 2009 America ) asks why would the pope move to lift the ban on a group that has as its raison d’etre the rejection of the Second Vatican Council which is an ecclesial-theological issue. He says this is a rejection of the documents of the Second Vatican Council, which includes a rejection of Nostra Aetate.

I think the SSPX in reality does not reject Vatican Council II according to the texts of the Council.Nostra Aetate 4 says the Church is' the new people of God'. While Ad Gentes 7 states all need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation. This includes Jews.
Is Vatican Council II now anti Semitic for this Jesuit priest ?

SSPX is affirming Nostra Aetate 4 and Ad Gentes 7 even though they say they reject Vatican Council II. They reject Vatican Council II as interpreted by the Jewish Left.

Fr.Martin is really saying the SSPX rejects the documents of the Council, which includes Nostra Aetate, as interpreted by the Jewish Left.

There is no text in Nostra Aetate which says Jews do not have to convert or that Jews are saved in general in their religion.
That Catholics should have good relations with the Jews and others was taught to us by Jesus and it is explained in the Bible long before Vatican Council II.

So from the ecclesial-theological view the SSPX are in accord with Vatican Council II

Regarding other points against the SSPX, as being anti Semitic,some of the quotations are those of the popes. Other information comes from the Bible.

Fr.Martin does not say that the popes, the Bible and Jesus were anti-Semitic.
-Lionel Andrades

www.americamagazine.org/blog/entry.cfm
Lionel Andrades

Society of St. Pius X “Regularization” Not as Easy as You Think

Saturday, March 31, 2012

Cardinal Luis Ladaria S.J Secretary Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith does away with the defined dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, Limbo and Original Sin in the International Theological Commission position papers: CDF expects the Society of St.Pius X to accept all this

The International Theological Commission (ITC) has done away with the centuries-old literal…More
Saturday, March 31, 2012

Cardinal Luis Ladaria S.J Secretary Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith does away with the defined dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, Limbo and Original Sin in the International Theological Commission position papers: CDF expects the Society of St.Pius X to accept all this

The International Theological Commission (ITC) has done away with the centuries-old literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. The ITC places invincible ignorance as an explicit exception to the dogma. The passage quoted does not say that it is an explicit exception to the dogma or that these cases are known to us but ITC assumes that it refers to an exception to the dogma. (1)

Then the ITC says that the Church is only necessary for those who believe and know about Jesus (LG 14) and not for all people. The dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II says all need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation. The ITC says only those who know.(2)

The ITC assumes that those who are in invincible ignorance and who can be saved ‘in certain circumstances’(Letter of the Holy Office 1949) are known to the ITC firstly, for them to be an exception to the dogma. Secondly the ITC is sure that these few cases could not receive the baptism of desire or that God could not send a preacher to them as St.Thomas Aquinas taught.The ITC assumes that they are taken up to Heaven without the baptism of water and so they are saved with Original Sin on their soul and that ITC knows who these cases are. Since ITC knows who is in invincible ignorance and saved on earth they probably assume that we know who knows about Jesus and the Church are saved ( even if they they have committed mortal sins we do not know about).

So Cardinal Luis Ladaria S.J (3) assumes that they are saved without the baptism of water and the ITC also knows who these cases are. So this is a rejection of the need to remove Original Sin in at least these few cases. They are saved without the baptism of water and the ITC knows these particular cases.For the rest of us ordinary Catholics these are hypothetical cases known only to God and the manner in which they are saved are known ONLY to God.

So the ITC has got rid of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, assumed that there are known cases of adults who are saved with Original Sin and without the baptism of water and since they know these cases saved, without the baptism of water, they assume that all infants can be saved because they are innocent and ignorant. In the final step the ITC issues a theological paper which speculates that there is no Limbo.

All this speculation began with the ITC assuming that those saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are not known only to God but they are known to us humans. This is irrational. It is also a new teaching.

Here is the process again:

1.There can be non Catholics saved with visible baptism of desire and invincible ignorance and they are known to us as they live now in Heaven. Since we know these specific cases in heaven and on earth, they are exceptions to the dogma outside the church no salvation.

This seems ludicrous but please bear with me. This is serious stuff on a Vatican website.

2.Since there are these known and visible cases of non Catholics saved and known to us in Heaven Cardinal Luis Ladaria assumes that the baptism of water is not needed for all. Since the ITC knows these exceptional cases in particular and knows that they were saved without receiving the baptism of water or being sent a preacher as St.Thomas Aquinas taught.How does the ITC know all this ? I do not know.

3.Since it is possible, and known, that there are these exceptions to all needing to receive the baptism of water to go to Heaven, it is speculated that even infants in ignorance and innocence could be saved without the baptism of water. Since adults who are saved in this manner without the baptism of water are known to members of the ITC.

4.The next step is to do away with Limbo.

Cardinal Luis Ladaria S.J has removed the Church teaching on extra ecclesiam nulla salus, Original Sin in certain cases, and Limbo. It was all done with one objective error: the visibly known case of a non Catholic saved with the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance.

A priest welcomes an end to this teaching on Original Sin.(4)

The ITC position papers have been approved by Pope Benedict XVI and Cardinal William Levada, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.The ITC paper Christianity and World Religions was approved by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger during the pontificate of Pope John Paul II. This paper was corrected in 2001 during the pontificate of Pope John Paul II with the Notification on Fr.Jacques Dupuis S.J which rejected the Theology of Religions.

ITC's Christianity and World Religions 1997 postulates that a theology of religions is possible. This is suggested even though the dogma taught exclusive salvation in only the Catholic Church and that all non Catholics are oriented to Hell unless they convert into the Catholic Church (5).

The Society of St.Pius X are expected to accept all these heresies in the name of Vatican Council II.Cardinal Luis Ladaria S.J head the Vatican team in failed talks with the SSPX.
-Lionel Andrades

1.

The Allocution of Pope Pius IX, Singulari Quadam (1854) clearly states the issues involved: “It must, of course, be held as a matter of faith that outside the apostolic Roman Church no one can be saved, that the Church is the only ark of salvation, and that whoever does not enter it, will perish in the flood. On the other hand, it must likewise be held as certain that those who live in ignorance of the true religion, if such ignorance be invincible, are not subject to any guilt in this matter before the eyes of the Lord”- 'The Hope of Salvation for Infants who die without being baptized'.(Note: It is assumed here that those saved in invincible ignorance are are explicit exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus).

2.

65. One speaks of the necessity of the Church for salvation in two senses: the necessity of belonging to the Church for those who believe in Jesus and the necessity for salvation of the ministry of the Church which, on mission from God, must be at the service of the coming of the kingdom of God. - Christianity and the World Religions 1997

67. Vatican Council II makes its own the expression extra ecclesiam nulla salus. But in using it the council explicitly directs itself to Catholics and limits its validity to those who know the necessity of the Church for salvation. The council holds that the affirmation is based on the necessity of faith and of baptism affirmed by Christ (LG 14). In this way the council aligned itself in continuity with the teaching of Pius XII, but emphasized more clearly the original parenthentical character of this expression.- Christianity and the World Religions 1997

3.

The study of the theme "Christianity and the World Religions" was adopted for study by a large majority of the members of the International Theological Commission. To prepare this study a subcommission was established composed of Bishop Norbert Strotmann Hoppe, M.S.C.; Rev. Barthelemy Adoukonou; Rev. Jean Corbon; Rev. Mario de Franca Miranda, S.J.; Rev. Ivan Golub; Rev. Tadahiko Iwashima, S.J.; Rev. Luis F. Ladaria, S.J. (president); Rev. Hermann J. Pottmeyer; and Rev. Andrzej Szostek, M.I.C. General discussion on this theme took place during several meetings of the subcommission and in the plenary sessions of the International Theological Commission held at Rome in 1993, 1994 and 1995. The present text was approved "in forma specifica" by vote of the commission on 30 September 1996 and was submitted to its president, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, who has given his approval for its publication.-Christianity and the World Religions 1997
www.vatican.va/…/rc_cti_1997_cri…4.

4.

Fr. Stephen Freeman Says:
October 31, 2006 at 10:59 am

Roland,

I do indeed think that is what Fr. Breck says in his comments – that the entire forensic metaphor is being shaken. From an Orthodox perspective I think this is good. The forensically imaged doctrine of Original Sin should be reconsidered as inadequate and not sufficiently ground in the Fathers or in Scripture. It’s use of a mistranslation of Romans 5:12 being only one example. Of course, much larger things are at stake. The governing imagery of our salvation. It’s why Orthodox and Roman Catholic can often be far apart. One would assume, that the immaculate conception, argued forensically, would also have to be reexamined. Gets kinda sticky! [...]
fatherstephen.wordpress.com/2006/10/22/in-limbo-no-more

5.
THRICE DEFINED DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS

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

◦“We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” (Pope Boniface VIII, the Bull Unam Sanctam, 1302.)

◦“The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.” (Pope Eugene IV, the Bull Cantate Domino, 1441.) - Catholicism.org
___________________________________________________

Nostra Aetate does say that the Church is the' new people of God'. Catholics are the Chosen People.They have the Promised Jewish Messiah, the Eternal Covenant and the Sacrifice of the Holy Mass

eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/nostra-aetate-d…

The International Theological Commission's position paper Christianity and the World Religions 1997 has an objective factual error and is approved by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger : invincible ignorance is not an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/international-t…

INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION ASSUMES ‘SEEDS OF THE WORD’ (VATICAN COUNCIL II ) IN OTHER RELIGIONS ARE KNOWN TO US AND THIS IS AN EXPLICIT EXCEPTION TO THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/international-t…

VATICAN'S INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION MAKES AN ERROR IN ITS POSITION PAPER CHRISTIANITY AND THE WORLD RELIGIONS
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/vaticans-intern…
Lionel Andrades

Society of St. Pius X “Regularization” Not as Easy as You Think

Monday, April 2, 2012

IF THE SSPX SAYS THEY ACCEPT VATICAN COUNCIL II IN ACCORD WITH THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS THERE WILL BE A STORM

The Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith could have to deny Vatican Council II and the Jewish Left could call the Council anti - Semitic.

One of the District Superiors of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) could issue …More
Monday, April 2, 2012

IF THE SSPX SAYS THEY ACCEPT VATICAN COUNCIL II IN ACCORD WITH THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS THERE WILL BE A STORM

The Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith could have to deny Vatican Council II and the Jewish Left could call the Council anti - Semitic.

One of the District Superiors of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) could issue a statement observing that it is reported on blogs that the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus is in accord with Vatican Council II (AG 7).

All need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation (AG 7) and there are no exceptions. There are no known exceptions since those saved in invincible ignorance or with a good conscience (LG 16) etc are known only to God. So they do not contradict the centuries-old literal interpretation of the thrice defined dogma.

So in this sense Vatican Council II is saying outside the church there is no salvation and Jews, Muslims and other non Catholics (Protestants and Orthodox Christians) need to convert into the Catholic Church for salvation ( to avoid Hell).

So the SSPX could welcome Vatican Council II’s position on ecumenism and inter religious dialogue.

All non Catholics are oriented to Hell (AG 7). We do not compel them; we do not force them to enter the Church. We do not have the power to do so. However we do have the religious liberty to tell them that Vatican Council II says they need to convert into the Church, all of them with no known exceptions, to avoid Hell (for salvation).


Imagine the world wide storm this would cause. The SSPX affirming Vatican Council II in this case in accord with the salvation dogma!

But what about Fr. Leonard Feeney?!So what? Whatever be your position on Fr. Leonard Feeney, Vatican Council II still affirms the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

He was excommunicated for holding the literal interpretation? No Magisterial text, including the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 states that he was excommunicated for heresy. And assuming he was - Vatican Council II is still in agreement with the traditional literal interpretation of the dogma.

And if he was excommunicated for heresy, for saying there was no baptism of desire or exception to the dogma, then the cardinals who wrote the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 or Pope Pius XII, made an objective, common sense mistake: the baptism of desire is not known so it cannot be an explicit, exception to the dogma which says everyone needs to convert into the Church. We do not know any one saved with the baptism of desire.

How can the ordinary magisterium of the pope, Pope Pius XII, negate Vatican Council II or the dogma which Pope Pius XII himself called an ‘infallible statement’(Letter of the Holy Office 1949).

All the same Vatican Council II affirms the literal interpretation of the dogma, the infallible statement.

According to the Vatican statement,(March 16) there is the possibility of the SSPX being excommunicated unless they affirm Vatican Council II. The statement has not mentioned the interpretation of Vatican Council II expected. The Vatican kept the doctrinal talks secret.So the SSPX could ‘try the waters out’ affirm the dogma (as they are doing so already) and welcome Vatican Council II as being in agreement with the dogma. Then wait for the Vatican’s response.

This will create a political storm and shake the Establishment which tells the pope what he should believe as a Catholic and what is acceptable to them.-Lionel Andrades

eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/if-sspx-says-th…
Lionel Andrades

Society of St. Pius X “Regularization” Not as Easy as You Think

Monday, April 2, 2012

VATICAN COUNCIL II SAYS JEWS NEED TO CONVERT, CATHOLICS ARE THE NEW PEOPLE OF GOD BUT REPORT ON SSPX CLAIMS VATICAN COUNCIL II SAYS OTHERWISE

An Associated Press report,Vatican to breakaway traditionalists: not enough by Frances D'Emilio (VCstar.com)says the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) 'has opposed the Vatican's decades-long outreach to Jews, Muslims and …More
Monday, April 2, 2012

VATICAN COUNCIL II SAYS JEWS NEED TO CONVERT, CATHOLICS ARE THE NEW PEOPLE OF GOD BUT REPORT ON SSPX CLAIMS VATICAN COUNCIL II SAYS OTHERWISE

An Associated Press report,Vatican to breakaway traditionalists: not enough by Frances D'Emilio (VCstar.com)says the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) 'has opposed the Vatican's decades-long outreach to Jews, Muslims and members of other faith. More broadly, it opposes the liberalizing reforms the Vatican enacted in the 1960s.'

However a reading of Vatican Council II’s Nostra Aetate 4 says ‘the Church is the new people of God’.Catholics are the new people of God . The Chosen People.Then Vatican Council II further says that all people, Jews included, need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation (Ad Gentes 7). Jews need to enter the Church with Catholic Faith and the baptism of water to avoid Hell (for salvation).

So Vatican Council II is still saying like the SSPX that Jews, Muslims and other non Catholics, including Protestants and Orthodox Christians, need to enter the Catholic Church for salvation.

So the so called liberalizing reforms is not supported by any text from Vatican Council II.

Vatican Council II also mentions that there can be non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance, with a good consicence (LG 16), with the ‘seeds of the Word’ etc. We accept this as a possibility just as did the popes and Church Councils of the past. They knew that we do not know any particular case. So they are not an explicit, exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus or to Ad Gentes 7 and Lumen Gentium 14, Vatican Council II.

Vatican Council II is in accord with the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus .

Vatican Council II has not changed the teaching of the Catholic Church with respect to other religions as this report on the internet alleges.


The AP report says ‘Jewish groups have expressed concern that the Vatican's overture to the breakaway Catholics could call into question 50 years of progress in Catholic-Jewish relations.’ It is the Jewish Left political position that Vatican Council II has changed church-teaching. They are unable to cite any reference from Vatican Council II.

The report states: ‘A Vatican statement, issued after Friday's meeting, said both Benedict, and Levada's office, studied the Society's response to the papal overture. But the response, delivered to the Vatican in January, "is not sufficient to overcome the doctrinal problems that are at the foundation of the fracture between the Holy See and the Society."

The Vatican has never announced that Vatican Council II states that Catholics are the new people of God and that Jews need to convert to avoid Hell, according to Vatican Council II. Instead the Vatican is building up a reputation of throwing away Catholic doctrine for the sake of peace and security.

The report says ‘the statement didn't elaborate on what failed to satisfy the Vatican's conditions.’ The Vatican has held secret talks with the SSPX however two of the negotiators during those talks, have expressed Catholic doctrine in papers of the International Theological Commission. They are available on the ITC website.They allege that those saved with the baptism of water and in invincible ignorance are known to us and so they are explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Ad Gentes 7. This is heresy. It is a rejection of the Nicene Creed in which we say “I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sin”. The ITC is saying that in some cases, rare cases, known to them there are non Catholics saved with the baptism of desire and in invincible ignorance and without the baptism of water. How do they know these cases it is not elaborated. However the bottom line for the ITC and the Vatican is that there is salvation outside the church in the present times,even though they do not know any exception to the dogma or Vatican Council II.

This is a new doctrine and irrational. Hence it is understandable that the Vatican has not elaborated on the precise doctrinal difference and has kept the issue secret.

The report said ‘Because of "worry about avoiding a church rupture with painful and incalculable consequences," Fellow was invited to "clarify his position with the aim of closing the existing fracture, as hoped for by Pope Benedict XVI," said the Vatican statement.’

The SSPX could be excommunicated for not accepting the Jewish Left approved version of Vatican Council II, denying the actual text of Vatican Council II which says Jews need to convert and Catholics are the Chosen people, and not accepting heresy and new doctrines, approved by the Vatican.-Lionel Andrades
www.vcstar.com/…/bc-eu--vatican-…

eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/vatican-council…
Lionel Andrades

Society of St. Pius X “Regularization” Not as Easy as You Think

Sunday, April 1, 2012

NO NEED FOR ‘SECRET TALKS’ ANYMORE: WE KNOW THE HERETICAL POSITION OF THE VATICAN NEGOTIATORS

The International Theological Commission theological papers expose the cardinal and bishop’s teaching on visible baptism of desire and their rejection of the dogma and Vatican Council II text.

May be its unintentional heresy. Let us give them the benefit of the doubt,…More
Sunday, April 1, 2012

NO NEED FOR ‘SECRET TALKS’ ANYMORE: WE KNOW THE HERETICAL POSITION OF THE VATICAN NEGOTIATORS

The International Theological Commission theological papers expose the cardinal and bishop’s teaching on visible baptism of desire and their rejection of the dogma and Vatican Council II text.

May be its unintentional heresy. Let us give them the benefit of the doubt, but heresy it is.

In the hierarchy of truths we are all obliged to believe in the Creed. In the Nicene Creed we pray ‘I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sin.’ It means the baptism of water is needed for all. All means no known exceptions in the present time.This teaching is expressed in the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and it comes from Jesus’ teaching (John 3:5, Mk.15:15-16).

Perhaps as an oversight , two of the members of the Vatican team who participated in the discussion with the SSPX representatives, believe invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are explicit, known,defacto exceptions to the dogma and the Nicene Creed. They believe they are explicit exceptions to the need of the baptism of water being needed for salvation for all.We know that the Catholic Church gives the baptism of water to adults with Catholic Faith.The Vatican team is saying that not all adults need the baptism of water since there are some who are saved or will be saved in invincible ignorance etc. Irrational ? However this is their official position on the ITC website.

Invincible ignorance etc are exceptions to the traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to the former President International Theologcial Commission (ITC), Cardinal Luis Ladaria S.J and the former Secretary of the ITC, Bishop. Charles Morerod O.P.(former Rector of the Angelicum University,Rome).


They allege that Vatican Council II (LG 16) shows there are known exceptions.Discerning Catholics know that we do not know anyone saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire.This was the error of the Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Richard Cushing and the Jesuits there.

The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 addressed to the Archbishop of Boston does not state that we know cases of non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance or an “unconscious yearning” or desire and that these cases are exceptions to the dogma.

However Cadinal Ladaria, Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and past President of the ITC has assumed that being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are explicit, known exceptions to the thrice defined dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

This is an objective, factual error. We do not know any such case .No Vatican magisterial document makes this claim.

It is this error and interpretation of Vatican Council II that the Congergation for the Doctrine of the Faith expected the SSPX team to accept in closed door, secret talks.

The heretical position of two of the Vatican negotiators is now known to us through their writings in the ITC papers and is available on the Vatican website of the ITC.


They may say in public that they accept the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and also Vatican Council II. However if they assume that invincible ignorance,having a good conscience and the baptism of desire are explicit exceptions to the dogma and Ad Gentes 7 then it is irrational-and also a rejection of the centuries old interpretation of the dogma.

It is the Secretary of the CDF who is rejecting Vatican Council II (AG 7) and he expects the SSPX and all Catholics to endorse his heretical version of Lumen Gentium 16 (invincible ignorance).

It is saying there is salvation outside the church since we allegedly know cases of those saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire.


Whatever be ones position on Fr.Leonard Feeney, mentioned by the ITC, objectively we know there are no known cases of the baptism of desire or persons saved in invincible ignorance.So there cannot be a known exception to the dogma.To claim one knows particular exeptions is heresy. It is also irrational.

A Catholic cannot reject in public an ex cathedra dogma and then also hold the office of a cardinal and bishop as in the case of Cardinal Ladaria and Bishop Morerod.According to Canon Law priests, bishops and cardinals who hold an office in the Church need to accept those teachings which have to be ‘firmly believed’.(Dominus Iesus).

Now it is no more a secret to Catholics that it is the CDF Secretary who needs to affirm Vatican Council II, the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was interpreted for centuries ( and in accord now with Vatican Council II ) and Lumen Gentium 16, not being an explicit exception to the dogma and Ad Gentes 7.

Its unfortunate that the Vatican has annonced that the SSPX has to regularise its canonical status by accepting not just Vatican Council II as an historical event (which the SSPX does) but that they need to accept the heretical interpretation of the Vatican team approved by the CDF for secret talks with the SSPX.-Lionel Andrades

NO CANON LAW OBLIGES THE SSPX TO ACCEPT THE JEWISH LEFT VERSION OF VATICAN COUNCIL II
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/no-canon-law-ob…

Cardinal Luis Ladaria S.J Secretary Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith does away with the defined dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, Limbo and Original Sin in the International Theological Commission position papers: CDF expects the Society of St.Pius X to accept all this
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/cardinal-luis-l…

Mnsgr.Nicola Bux the SSPX in reality accepts Vatican Council II
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/mnsgrnicola-bux…

International Theological Commission (ITC) makes an objective, factual error in two of its published documents. Could they also be wrong about Limbo?
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/international-t…

VATICAN'S INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION MAKES AN ERROR IN ITS POSITION PAPER CHRISTIANITY AND THE WORLD RELIGIONS
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/vaticans-intern…

INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION USES PREMISE THAT IS FACTUALLY INCORRECT : LIMBO
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/international-t…

The International Theological Commission's position paper Christianity and the World Religions 1997 has an objective factual error and is approved by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger : invincible ignorance is not an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus

eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/international-t…

INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION ASSUMES ‘SEEDS OF THE WORD’ (VATICAN COUNCIL II ) IN OTHER RELIGIONS ARE KNOWN TO US AND THIS IS AN EXPLICIT EXCEPTION TO THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/international-t…

VATICAN'S INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION MAKES AN ERROR IN ITS POSITION PAPER CHRISTIANITY AND THE WORLD RELIGIONS

eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/vaticans-intern…

VATICAN COUNCIL II REJECTS THE THEOLOGY OF RELIGIONS

eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/vatican-council…

Former Secretary of the International Theological Commission holds that those saved with the baptism of desire and in invincible ignorance are known to us and so an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/secretary-of-in…
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/no-need-for-sec…
Lionel Andrades

LETTER FROM FATHER BOUCHACOURT TO PRIESTS DISTRICT TO INFORM ABOUT THE MEETING OF …

Tuesday, March 20, 2012

Bishop Fellay, Fr.Schmidberger,FSSP,Joseph Fenton seem unaware the baptism of desire is not an explicit exception to the dogma

From Rorate Caeli comments on Who is a Traditionalist?

Ecclesia Militans said
...
Brother André Marie,
I've studied the articles and I must say that they do not make a convincing argument against the threefold Baptism.

Lionel:
it is important …More
Tuesday, March 20, 2012

Bishop Fellay, Fr.Schmidberger,FSSP,Joseph Fenton seem unaware the baptism of desire is not an explicit exception to the dogma

From Rorate Caeli comments on Who is a Traditionalist?

Ecclesia Militans said
...
Brother André Marie,
I've studied the articles and I must say that they do not make a convincing argument against the threefold Baptism.

Lionel:
it is important to note that there is only one baptism which is explicit. It is the baptism of water.

Ecclesia Militans
Other than quoting the many various forms of the dogma extra Ecclesiam nulla salus and discussions and speculations on St. Augustine's view, there are only two or three marginal quotes by doctors that speak against the threefold Baptism.

Lionel:
We can only accept the baptism of desire and martrydom in pinciple. Explicitly we do not know any case, we cannot judge.If the Church declares someone a martyr we accept it.

Ecclesia Militans
As for St. Emerentiana, I see that Fr. Feeney decided to deny Tradition by saying she must have been baptised in water before martyrdom, although she has always been counted as an unbaptized cathecumen who died for Christ and received the Baptism of Blood.

On the other hand, I present you a short list of those important documents, theologians, bishops and doctors that explicitly affirmed the threefold Baptism (most of the quotes are found in the article mentioned in my last comment, if you wish, I can send you the others by mail):

Lionel:
In this list it is important to note that none of them said that the baptism of desire and the baptism of blood were explicitly known to us or that we could judge these cases in general or that they were explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Ecclesia Militans
St. Cyprian BM, Tertullian, St. Cyril of Jerusalem BCD, St. John Chrysostome BCD, St. Ambrose BCD, St. Augustine BCD, St. Thomas Aquinas CD, St. Catherine of Sienna V, Ecumenical Council of Trent, Catechism of the Council of Trent, St. Alphonsus Liguori BCD, Pope Pius IX, Baltimore Cathechism (19th century), The Cathechism Explained (1899), Cathechism of Pope St. Pius X, Catholic Encyclopedia (1913), Code of Canon Law (1917), Catholic Dictionary (1946), Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office (1949), mons.

Lionel:
They all were in agrement with Fr.Leonard Feeney.

Ecclesia Militans

Joseph Fenton (1952), Archbishop Lefebvre FSSPX, Fr. Schmidberger FSSPX, Bishop Fellay FSSPX...

Lionel:
They seem unaware too that the baptism of desire etc are not defacto exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Ecclesia Militans

The inescapable conclusion is that the doctrine of Fr. Feeney denies or contradicts the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium as expressed through the above teachings of the said theologians, doctors etc.

Lionel:
Fr.Leonrd Feeney said that there is only one baptism, the baptism of water . This is the only explicit baptism. For salvation all people need the baptism of water and there are no known exceptions.This is the teaching of the Magisterium as expressed through the above mentioned theologians, doctors etc.This is the teaching of the following:

St. Cyprian BM, Tertullian, St. Cyril of Jerusalem BCD, St. John Chrysostome BCD, St. Ambrose BCD, St. Augustine BCD, St. Thomas Aquinas CD, St. Catherine of Sienna V, Ecumenical Council of Trent, Catechism of the Council of Trent, St. Alphonsus Liguori BCD, Pope Pius IX, Baltimore Cathechism (19th century), The Cathechism Explained (1899), Cathechism of Pope St. Pius X, Catholic Encyclopedia (1913), Code of Canon Law (1917), Catholic Dictionary (1946), Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office (1949), mons.

Ecclesia Militans

It even goes against the Code of Canon Law which was valid at the time (canons 737 & 1239).

Lionel:
No magisterial document states that the baptism of desire etc are explicitly known to us or an exception to the dogma.

Ecclesia Militans
you can see that to assert that so many theologians, doctors, popes and Church documents were in error for so many centuries is to deny the indefectibility of the Church.St. Alphonsus Liguori calls the baptism of desire de fide,...

Lionel:
Yes it is de fide and accepted in principle. It cannot be known explicitly and so it does not contradict the dogma or Fr.Leonard Feeney.

Ecclesia Militans
and St. Cyprian BM, back in the 3rd century, seems to call those who do not believe in the Baptism of Blood of the cathecumens "aiders and favourers of heretics".

Lionel:
The baptism of blood is not an exception to the dogma.

Ecclesia Militans
In short and precise quote:
"Outside of the Church, nobody can hope for life or salvation unless he is excused through ignorance beyond his control.“

Lionel:
Correct and we do not know any case of a non Catholic on earth who is saved in invincible ignorance or is going to be saved.

Ecclesia Militans
e Pius IX, SINGULARI QUIDEM
www.ewtn.com/library/encyc/p9singul.htm

Lionel:
No where does Pope Pius IX say that the baptism of desire etc are exceptions to the dogma or that they are explicit. On has to make this wrong assumption.The popes do not make this assumption.

20 January, 2012 23:34

-Lionel Andrades

rorate-caeli.blogspot.it/…/who-is-traditio…
Lionel Andrades

Fr. Marcel Guarnizo's fate... Priestly faculties removed.

Saturday, March 17, 2012

CANONIST REJECTS VERITATIS SPLENDOR

Canonist Peters thinks Fr.Guarnizo was wrong in witholding the Eucharist to the Barbara Johnson.
canonlawblog.wordpress.com/2012/03/15/1733

Edward Peters errs in assuming that the outward action does not indicate the internal thoughts or motivation. This is the moral theology of Fr.Bernard Haring and Fr.Charles Curran.
Homos…
More
Saturday, March 17, 2012

CANONIST REJECTS VERITATIS SPLENDOR

Canonist Peters thinks Fr.Guarnizo was wrong in witholding the Eucharist to the Barbara Johnson.
canonlawblog.wordpress.com/2012/03/15/1733

Edward Peters errs in assuming that the outward action does not indicate the internal thoughts or motivation. This is the moral theology of Fr.Bernard Haring and Fr.Charles Curran.
Homosexuality and lesbianism will always be a mortal sin.It is grave matter and the woman has admitted it in this case.She persists in receiving the Eucharist and still persists in the sin.

eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/canonist-reject…
Lionel Andrades

Lesbian Barbara Johnson Says Father Marcel Guarnizo Denied Her Communion At Her Mother's Funeral

POLITICS OVER THE EUCHARIST
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/politics-over-e…

Friday, March 16, 2012

POLITICS OVER THE EUCHARIST

Just as Fr. Marcel Guarnizo is put on administrative leave for political reasons the Archbishop of Washington gives the Eucharist to pro abortion politicians for political reasons.Also for political reasons Catholics do not want to discuss the dogma extra …More
POLITICS OVER THE EUCHARIST
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/politics-over-e…

Friday, March 16, 2012

POLITICS OVER THE EUCHARIST

Just as Fr. Marcel Guarnizo is put on administrative leave for political reasons the Archbishop of Washington gives the Eucharist to pro abortion politicians for political reasons.Also for political reasons Catholics do not want to discuss the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

When Fr. Marcel said ‘If a Quaker, a Lutheran or a Buddhist, desiring communion had introduced himself as such, before Mass, a priest would be obligated to withhold communion.’ he was using the ecclesiology (understanding of Church) of outside the church no salvation. This was the ecclesiology which Pope John Paul II used in Ecclesia di Eucarestia.

Those who are not baptized, or are baptized but are not living the Gospel according to the Catholic Church are in grave sin. They are not to receive the Eucharist. St. Paul tells us that those who receive the Eucharist in this unworthy state bring damnation upon them self.

No non Catholic has the ‘right’ to receive the Eucharist .Not because he is condemned already but because he has the opportunity to convert into the Catholic Church and receive the Sacraments which save. Jesus saves through the Sacraments.

Outside the Sacraments there is no known salvation in the present time.

For political reasons the Archdiocese of Washington has not announced that the Buddhist lesbian woman will not be able to receive the Eucharist. If she does come to receive the Eucharist during Mass in Washington a priest or Eucharistic Minister will give her the Eucharist. She will receive the Eucharist even though she has not rectified the scandal in public i.e. she has not denied that she is a Buddhist and is a practising, active lesbian living in sin. She needs to make the public clarification and go also for Confession, before receiving the Eucharist.

The Archdiocese of Washington is not likely to make this announcement. Senator Kennedy never made any such clarification. Neither did the Archdiocese clarify any change in his position on abortion. Neither did the Archdiocese of Boston mention that the Senator received absolution before his death. He was given the Eucharist in Washington and a funeral in Boston. According to the teachings of the Church and the public scandal of which he was a part of, he was oriented to Hell at the time of death.

The priority is politics and then the Eucharist.The Archdiocese of Boston like Washington would welcome lesbians and homosexuals receiving the Eucharist at Mass. The Vatican cannot apply Canon 915 against the cardinals. Would there be a schism if this done even in the interest of the Eucharist? The Vatican has not issued a clarification on this issue of the Eucharist in Washington.A Deacon of the Archdiocese of Washington will not discuss the issue of extra ecclesiam nulla salus with reference to the Eucharist. Probably if he does, they’ll suspend him too.

In the media, Catholic and secular, we are getting a canned, politically safe version of the Catholic Faith and sadly it is being extended to the Eucharist.

According to Vatican Council II (AG 7, LG 14) non Catholics are oriented to Hell and if they are all oriented to Hell then they are not to receive the Eucharist.

Jesus watches from the tabernacle. At night he is alone in most churches in Washington, if not all the churches. He watches and he knows. He feels.He is left there abandoned and now they are abandoning church teachings. They are allowing sacrilege and sin for the sake of convenience, expedience and politics.The Mass is not just a sacrifice for Jesus, an unbloody Sacrifice, it is a source of pain in so many ways.
-Lionel Andrades

Thursday, March 15, 2012

Eucharist is not to be given to the Quaker, Lutheran, and Buddhist since they are outside the Church
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/eucharist-is-no…
Lionel Andrades

Fr. Marcel Guarnizo's fate... Priestly faculties removed.

Friday, March 16, 2012

POLITICS OVER THE EUCHARIST

Just as Fr. Marcel Guarnizo is put on administrative leave for political reasons the Archbishop of Washington gives the Eucharist to pro abortion politicians for political reasons.Also for political reasons Catholics do not want to discuss the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

When Fr. Marcel said ‘If a Quaker, a Lutheran or a Buddhist, …More
Friday, March 16, 2012

POLITICS OVER THE EUCHARIST

Just as Fr. Marcel Guarnizo is put on administrative leave for political reasons the Archbishop of Washington gives the Eucharist to pro abortion politicians for political reasons.Also for political reasons Catholics do not want to discuss the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

When Fr. Marcel said ‘If a Quaker, a Lutheran or a Buddhist, desiring communion had introduced himself as such, before Mass, a priest would be obligated to withhold communion.’ he was using the ecclesiology (understanding of Church) of outside the church no salvation. This was the ecclesiology which Pope John Paul II used in Ecclesia di Eucarestia.

Those who are not baptized, or are baptized but are not living the Gospel according to the Catholic Church are in grave sin. They are not to receive the Eucharist. St. Paul tells us that those who receive the Eucharist in this unworthy state bring damnation upon them self.

No non Catholic has the ‘right’ to receive the Eucharist .Not because he is condemned already but because he has the opportunity to convert into the Catholic Church and receive the Sacraments which save. Jesus saves through the Sacraments.

Outside the Sacraments there is no known salvation in the present time.

For political reasons the Archdiocese of Washington has not announced that the Buddhist lesbian woman will not be able to receive the Eucharist. If she does come to receive the Eucharist during Mass in Washington a priest or Eucharistic Minister will give her the Eucharist. She will receive the Eucharist even though she has not rectified the scandal in public i.e. she has not denied that she is a Buddhist and is a practising, active lesbian living in sin. She needs to make the public clarification and go also for Confession, before receiving the Eucharist.

The Archdiocese of Washington is not likely to make this announcement. Senator Kennedy never made any such clarification. Neither did the Archdiocese clarify any change in his position on abortion. Neither did the Archdiocese of Boston mention that the Senator received absolution before his death. He was given the Eucharist in Washington and a funeral in Boston. According to the teachings of the Church and the public scandal of which he was a part of, he was oriented to Hell at the time of death.

The priority is politics and then the Eucharist.The Archdiocese of Boston like Washington would welcome lesbians and homosexuals receiving the Eucharist at Mass. The Vatican cannot apply Canon 915 against the cardinals. Would there be a schism if this done even in the interest of the Eucharist? The Vatican has not issued a clarification on this issue of the Eucharist in Washington.A Deacon of the Archdiocese of Washington will not discuss the issue of extra ecclesiam nulla salus with reference to the Eucharist. Probably if he does, they’ll suspend him too.

In the media, Catholic and secular, we are getting a canned, politically safe version of the Catholic Faith and sadly it is being extended to the Eucharist.

According to Vatican Council II (AG 7, LG 14) non Catholics are oriented to Hell and if they are all oriented to Hell then they are not to receive the Eucharist.

Jesus watches from the tabernacle. At night he is alone in most churches in Washington, if not all the churches. He watches and he knows. He feels.He is left there abandoned and now they are abandoning church teachings. They are allowing sacrilege and sin for the sake of convenience, expedience and politics.The Mass is not just a sacrifice for Jesus, an unbloody Sacrifice, it is a source of pain in so many ways.
-Lionel Andrades

Thursday, March 15, 2012

Eucharist is not to be given to the Quaker, Lutheran, and Buddhist since they are outside the Church
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/eucharist-is-no…
Lionel Andrades

Fr. Marcel Guarnizo's fate... Priestly faculties removed.

Thursday, March 15, 2012

Eucharist is not to be given to the Quaker, Lutheran, and Buddhist since they are outside the Church

If a Quaker, a Lutheran or a Buddhist, desiring communion had introduced himself as such, before Mass, a priest would be obligated to withhold communion. If someone had shown up in my sacristy drunk, or high on drugs, no communion would have been possible either. If a …More
Thursday, March 15, 2012

Eucharist is not to be given to the Quaker, Lutheran, and Buddhist since they are outside the Church

If a Quaker, a Lutheran or a Buddhist, desiring communion had introduced himself as such, before Mass, a priest would be obligated to withhold communion. If someone had shown up in my sacristy drunk, or high on drugs, no communion would have been possible either. If a Catholic, divorced and remarried (without an annulment) would make that known in my sacristy, they too according to Catholic doctrine, would be impeded from receiving communion. This has nothing to do with canon 915. Ms. Johnson’s circumstances are precisely one of those relations which impede her access to communion according to Catholic teaching. Ms. Johnson was a guest in our parish, not the arbitrer of how sacraments are dispensed in the Catholic Church.- Fr. Marcel Guarnizo, Archdiocese of Washington D.C

The Eucharist is not to be given to the Quaker, Lutheran or Buddhist. Since outside the Church there is no salvation. They are outside the Church. They are not saved.

Fr. Marcel Guarnizo could have been endorsing the rigorist interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. The same interpretation of Fr. Leonard Feeney, the Church Fathers, popes, Councils, Catechisms, Vatican Council I and II and Michael Voris at Real Catholic TV.com.

Ad Gentes 7 Vatican Council II says all need to enter the Cburch for salvation. All includes the Quaker,Lutheran and Buddhist. (1).

Lumen Gentium 14 says faith and baptism are necessary for salvation. The Buddhist does not have faith or baptism. The Lutheran does not have Catholic Faith.(2)

Dominus Iesus says though Christ died for all, for salvation all need to enter the Church with faith and baptism. Non Catholics do not have faith and baptism. They need to respond and enter the Church to saved.(3)

The dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the infallible teaching mentioned by Pope Pius XII in the Letter of the Holy Office says all need to convert into the Church to avoid Hell. (4)

The Catechism of the Catholic Church repeats the teaching of Vatican Council II and other magisterial texts. All need to enter the Church with Catholic Faith and the baptism of water, one needs to enter the Church as through a door.(5)


Note: There are no known cases on earth of a non Catholic saved in invincible ignorance, the baptism of desie, a good conscience, the seeds of the Word etc. We can only accept in principle that these are possibilities known only to God. So they do not contradict any of the magisterial texts mentioned above.
-Lionel Andrades

1.

Therefore, all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church's preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door.-Ad Gentes 7

2.
This Sacred Council wishes to turn its attention firstly to the Catholic faithful. Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism(124) and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church.-Lumen Gentium 14

3.
Above all else, it must be firmly believed that “the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mk 16:16; Jn 3:5), and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through baptism as through a door”.77 This doctrine must not be set against the universal salvific will of God (cf. 1 Tim 2:4); “it is necessary to keep these two truths together, namely, the real possibility of salvation in Christ for all mankind and the necessity of the Church for this salvation”.-Dominus Iesus 20

Now, among those things which the Church has always preached and will never cease to preach is contained also that infallible statement by which we are taught that there is no salvation outside the Church.

However, this dogma must be understood in that sense in which the Church herself understands it. For, it was not to private judgments that Our Savior gave for explanation those things that are contained in the deposit of faith, but to the teaching authority of the Church.-Letter of the Holy Office 1949
catholicism.org/category/outside-the-chu…

5.

"Outside the Church there is no salvation"

846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers? Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:

Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.-Catechism of the Catholic Church 846 (See also 845)
Note: All salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body refers to those who are saved 1) with the baptism of desire, invincible ignorance etc and those who are saved 2) with Catholic Faith and the baptism of water. N.1 is not in conflict with N.2. They are not explicit exceptions.

Thursday, March 15, 2012
Fr. Marcel Guarnizo Defends Himself :If a Quaker, Lutheran or Buddhist, desiring communion introduced himself as such, before Mass, a priest would be obligated to withhold communion
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/fr-marcel-guarn…

THAT EVERYONE NEEDS TO BE A VISIBLE MEMBER OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS THE OFFICIAL TEACHING OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND NOT JUST THE VIEW OF FR.LEONARD FEENEY
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/that-everyone-n…

FR.LEONARD FEENEY HELD THE SAME DOCTRINE AS THE CHURCH FATHERS, POPES, COUNCILS,CATECHISMS, VATICAN COUNCILS I AND II AND MICHAEL VORIS AT REAL CATHOLIC TV.COM
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/frleonar-feeney…
Lionel Andrades

Ugly Americanism (Real Catholic TV) Aug 22, 2011

THAT EVERYONE NEEDS TO BE A VISIBLE MEMBER OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS THE OFFICIAL TEACHING OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND NOT JUST THE VIEW OF FR.LEONARD FEENEY

So powerful is the secular liberal media that they have ‘catechized’ generations of Catholics over half a century. The leftist, mainstream media keeps repeating that Fr. Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for saying everyone …More
THAT EVERYONE NEEDS TO BE A VISIBLE MEMBER OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS THE OFFICIAL TEACHING OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND NOT JUST THE VIEW OF FR.LEONARD FEENEY

So powerful is the secular liberal media that they have ‘catechized’ generations of Catholics over half a century. The leftist, mainstream media keeps repeating that Fr. Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for saying everyone needs to be a visible member of the Church. The media does not say that everybody needing to be a visible member of the Catholic Church, is the official teaching of the Church according to magisterial documents. It cannot state this. Since the lie is their leftist ideological position.

It is made to seem that Fr. Leonard Feeney held a different view from that of the teaching authority of the Catholic Church. The magisterium, the teaching authority of the Church, it is made to appear, accepts ‘the mainstream teaching’ of the non-Catholic owners of the media.

They suggest that Fr. Leonard Feeney was wrong with a ‘minority view’. They imply that Catholics know of people saved in Heaven, in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire. So these cases known in general, are explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. They are allegedly exceptions to the Fr. Leonard Feeney’s interpretation. If there can be known exceptions to the dogma, example the baptism of desire, then it is assumed that Fr.Leonard Feeney was wrong. Also it is assumed that he was excomunicated for this error.

So the media indicates that the Catholic Church does not teach anymore the error of Fr. Leonard Feeney. Why? Since we know, it is assumed, of visible cases of the baptism of desire.

In other words: deny the dogma, deny the official teaching of the Catholic Church. Since we know of cases in Heaven in general, saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance.

The media is to never let out the secret that these cases are known only to God and are unknown to us humans.If they did reveal the secret, over 50 years of propaganda would come to an end.

So they will never state that Fr. Leonard Feeney’s interpretation of the salvation dogma outside the church no salvation, is the official teaching of the Catholic Church.

Those who can discern realize that Fr. Leonard Feeney held the same doctrinal teaching on salvation as Jesus, the Church Fathers, and the popes including Pope Pius XII, the Church Councils which defined the dogma, and the saints who were faithful to the dogma, the Catechisms, Vatican Councils and the Bible according to the Catholic Church. This was Jesus’ teaching. (Mk.16:16, Jn 3:5 etc)

For salvation every one with no exception needs to be a visible, formal member, i.e with Catholic Faith and the baptism of water, is the official Catholic teaching for all Catholics, including those who attend the Novus Ordo Mass in the different languages.-Lionel Andrades

FR.LEONARD FEENEY HELD THE SAME DOCTRINE AS THE CHURCH FATHERS, POPES, COUNCILS,CATECHISMS, VATICAN COUNCILS I AND II AND MICHAEL VORIS AT REAL CATHOLIC TV.COM
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/frleonar-feeney…

IF THE LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE 1949 CONSIDERED THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE AS A DEFACTO EXCEPTION TO THE DOGMA IT WOULD BE AN OBJECTIVE ERROR: WE DON’T KNOW ANY SUCH CASE
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/if-letter-of-ho…

ALL THE CATECHISMS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH HAVE TAUGHT THE RIGORIST VIEW OF EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/all-catechisms-…

The Vatican Councils of the Catholic Church have clearly taught that formal membership in the Catholic Church IS absolutely necessary for salvation
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/vatican-council…-

No pope has said that those saved in invincible ignorance are known to us and so are exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/no-pope-has-sai…

Being saved in invincible ignorance is not a defacto exception to the teaching of Cantate Domino Council of Florence
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/being-saved-in-…

Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church is in agreement with the rigorist interpretation of outside the church no salvation
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2012/02/blog-post.html

Whether they know it or not non Catholics with the stain of Original Sin on their soul and mortal sins committed in that state and without the Sacraments outside of which there is no salvation, are all oriented to Hell
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/whether-they-kn…

When one is clear that all those saved are explicit only in Heaven it is not difficult to affirm ‘the formal necessity of belonging to the Church’
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/when-one-is-cle…

Ultra Traditonalists in accord with Vatican Council II on extra ecclesiam nulla salus
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/ultra-traditona…

DOES THE CATHOLIC CHURCH TEACH THAT MUSLIMS ARE SAVED ?
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/does-catholic-c…

CATHOLIC PRIESTS IN ROME AGREE WITH FR.LEONARD FEENEY: THERE IS NO BAPTISM OF DESIRE THAT WE CAN KNOW OF
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/search/label/Catholic%20priests

NON CATHOLICS CAN BE SAVED IN INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE, BAPTISM OF DESIRE AND IT DOES NOT CONTRADICT THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS- Daphne McLeod, Pro Ecclesia et Pontifice, England
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/non-catholics-c…

RADICI CRISTIANE SAYS CLEARLY CHURCH HAS NOT CHANGED LITERAL MEANING OF DOGMA AND INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE AND BAPTISM OF DESIRE ARE NOT DEFACTO EXCEPTIONS.
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/radici-cristian…

The Catholic Legate - John Pacecho, Art Sippo,Peter Vere contradict each other ?
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/catholic-legate…

VATICAN RECOGNIZES DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS WITH RIGORIST INTERPRETATION : INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE (LG 16) AND BAPTISM OF DESIRE ARE NOT DEFACTO EXCEPTIONS
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/vatican-recogni…

eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/that-everyone-n…
Lionel Andrades

Archdiocese of Detroit asks Michael Voris to stop using the name ‘Catholic’

Michael Voris affirms rigorous interpetation of dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus :says there is no "anonymous Catholic"

eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/michael-voris-a…

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Michael Voris affirms rigorist interpretation of dogma outside the church no salvation: says there is no “anonymous Catholic”

When Michael Voris on Real Catholic TV refers to outside the church there…More
Michael Voris affirms rigorous interpetation of dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus :says there is no "anonymous Catholic"

eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/michael-voris-a…

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Michael Voris affirms rigorist interpretation of dogma outside the church no salvation: says there is no “anonymous Catholic”

When Michael Voris on Real Catholic TV refers to outside the church there is no salvation he means, outside the church no salvation as interpreted by the Church Councils, the popes, the saints and Fr.Leonard Feeney. Since the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance or a good conscience are explicit only in Heaven

The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 endorsed the rigorist interpretation of the dogma when it directly referred to the ‘the dogma’, the ‘infallible’ statement. (1)

Michael Voris also on Real Catholic TV.com proclaims the dogma outside the church there is no salvation (2) and says on another video that there is no anonymous Catholic.

There is no anonymous Christian no known case of a Catholic saved ‘anonymously’. If there was an anonymous Catholic in the present times it would be known only to God. So it could not be an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus which he endorses in its rigorist interpretation. There can only be the rigorist interpretation! We can never know cases of non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire, with a good conscience or the seeds of the Word, with elements of sanctification or in imperfect communion.

All the Catechisms of the Catholic Church including the present one (3) have affirmed the rigorist interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus as did the Vatican Councils (4).

We accept the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance as possibilities. We accept in principle that a non Catholic can be saved with the baptism of desire or invincible ignorance. De facto (explicitly, in reality) we do not know any such case.

Fr. Karl Rahner S.J’s theory of the ‘anonymous Christian’ is irrelevant to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Since we do not know any single case of a person saved as an anonymous Christian it does not contradict Vatican Council II which affirms the rigorist interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus. It states all need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation (to avoid Hell) ( Ad Gentes 7,Lumen Gentium 14).

No pope or Councils has stated that the baptism of desire etc is an exception to the dogma or that we know explicit cases. So Michael Voris on Real Catholic TV is affirming the teaching of the Magisterium before and after Vatican Council II.
-Lionel Andrades

1.

IF THE LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE 1949 CONSIDERED THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE AS A DEFACTO EXCEPTION TO THE DOGMA IT WOULD BE AN OBJECTIVE ERROR: WE DON’T KNOW ANY SUCH CASE
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/if-letter-of-ho…

2.
youtu.be/gaCbMcn46Wc , youtu.be/vp8zQhQE1iM youtu.be/gaCbMcn46Wc
youtu.be/GCf8C1Xcpds youtu.be/EhZK6U0papc

3.
ALL THE CATECHISMS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH HAVE TAUGHT THE RIGORIST VIEW OF EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/all-catechisms-…
4.
The Vatican Councils of the Catholic Church have clearly taught that formal membership in the Catholic Church IS absolutely necessary for salvation

eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/vatican-council…-
5

No pope has said that those saved in invincible ignorance are known to us and so are exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus

eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/no-pope-has-sai…

Being saved in invincible ignorance is not a defacto exception to the teaching of Cantate Domino Council of Florence
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/being-saved-in-…

eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/michael-voris-a…
Lionel Andrades

Michael Voris: Confusing the Faithful-----------------------uploaded by irapuato

Michael Voris affirms rigorist interpretation of dogma outside the church no salvation: says there is no "anonymous Catholic "

eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/michael-voris-a…

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Michael Voris affirms rigorist interpretation of dogma outside the church no salvation: says there is no “anonymous Catholic”

When Michael Voris on Real Catholic TV refers to outside the church…More
Michael Voris affirms rigorist interpretation of dogma outside the church no salvation: says there is no "anonymous Catholic "

eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/michael-voris-a…

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Michael Voris affirms rigorist interpretation of dogma outside the church no salvation: says there is no “anonymous Catholic”

When Michael Voris on Real Catholic TV refers to outside the church there is no salvation he means, outside the church no salvation as interpreted by the Church Councils, the popes, the saints and Fr.Leonard Feeney. Since the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance or a good conscience are explicit only in Heaven

The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 endorsed the rigorist interpretation of the dogma when it directly referred to the ‘the dogma’, the ‘infallible’ statement. (1)

Michael Voris also on Real Catholic TV.com proclaims the dogma outside the church there is no salvation (2) and says on another video that there is no anonymous Catholic.

There is no anonymous Christian no known case of a Catholic saved ‘anonymously’. If there was an anonymous Catholic in the present times it would be known only to God. So it could not be an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus which he endorses in its rigorist interpretation. There can only be the rigorist interpretation! We can never know cases of non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire, with a good conscience or the seeds of the Word, with elements of sanctification or in imperfect communion.

All the Catechisms of the Catholic Church including the present one (3) have affirmed the rigorist interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus as did the Vatican Councils (4).

We accept the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance as possibilities. We accept in principle that a non Catholic can be saved with the baptism of desire or invincible ignorance. De facto (explicitly, in reality) we do not know any such case.

Fr. Karl Rahner S.J’s theory of the ‘anonymous Christian’ is irrelevant to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Since we do not know any single case of a person saved as an anonymous Christian it does not contradict Vatican Council II which affirms the rigorist interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus. It states all need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation (to avoid Hell) ( Ad Gentes 7,Lumen Gentium 14).

No pope or Councils has stated that the baptism of desire etc is an exception to the dogma or that we know explicit cases. So Michael Voris on Real Catholic TV is affirming the teaching of the Magisterium before and after Vatican Council II.
-Lionel Andrades

1.

IF THE LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE 1949 CONSIDERED THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE AS A DEFACTO EXCEPTION TO THE DOGMA IT WOULD BE AN OBJECTIVE ERROR: WE DON’T KNOW ANY SUCH CASE
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/if-letter-of-ho…

2.
youtu.be/gaCbMcn46Wc , youtu.be/vp8zQhQE1iM youtu.be/gaCbMcn46Wc
youtu.be/GCf8C1Xcpds youtu.be/EhZK6U0papc

3.
ALL THE CATECHISMS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH HAVE TAUGHT THE RIGORIST VIEW OF EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/all-catechisms-…

4.
The Vatican Councils of the Catholic Church have clearly taught that formal membership in the Catholic Church IS absolutely necessary for salvation
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/vatican-council…-
5

No pope has said that those saved in invincible ignorance are known to us and so are exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus

eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/no-pope-has-sai…

Being saved in invincible ignorance is not a defacto exception to the teaching of Cantate Domino Council of Florence
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/being-saved-in-…
Lionel Andrades

P.G.Cavalcoli, OP: (4) Non vale più extra Ecclesiam nulla salus? (Sul dialogo interreligioso)

Sia laudati Gesu e Maria,

Il Concilio Vaticano II anche Catechismo della Chiesa Cattolica sono in accord con il dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
CCC 845,846 ha detto che tutti bisogna entrare la Chiesa Cattolica. Ad Gentes 7 e Lumen Gentium 14 anche sono in acoordo con interpretazione traditionale di extra ecclesiam nulla salus..

Lumen Gentium 16 e 8 non e contradizione perche noi non conosc…More
Sia laudati Gesu e Maria,

Il Concilio Vaticano II anche Catechismo della Chiesa Cattolica sono in accord con il dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
CCC 845,846 ha detto che tutti bisogna entrare la Chiesa Cattolica. Ad Gentes 7 e Lumen Gentium 14 anche sono in acoordo con interpretazione traditionale di extra ecclesiam nulla salus..

Lumen Gentium 16 e 8 non e contradizione perche noi non conosciamo qualquno chi ha ricevuto salvezza in invincible ignoranze, buona coscienze,battismo di desiderio ecc.
Lionel Andrades

REAL CATHOLIC TV (Sept 20, 2011)

Tuesday, January 10, 2012

ERRORS IN THE CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH: OUTSIDE THE CHURCH NO SALVATION

The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) under the sub heading outside the church there is no salvation mentions invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire as exceptions. They are not defacto exceptions.

Vatican Council II also mentions invincible ignorance (LG 16) but …More
Tuesday, January 10, 2012

ERRORS IN THE CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH: OUTSIDE THE CHURCH NO SALVATION

The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) under the sub heading outside the church there is no salvation mentions invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire as exceptions. They are not defacto exceptions.

Vatican Council II also mentions invincible ignorance (LG 16) but nowhere implies that it is an exception to the dogma or the ordinary means of salvation.

The Catechism instead implies that those who are saved in invincible ignorance are visible and known to us, so the baptism of water is needed by only those who know about Jesus and the Church.

The text of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus states that everyone needs to enter the Church. The text of the dogma defined three times is not included in the Catechism.This is all misleading.

To imply that the baptism of desire is a defacto exception to the dogma is heresy. It is indifferentism when one says non Catholics can be defacto saved in their religion and we know who these cases are. This teaching is not part of the Deposit of the Faith. It is irrational and a repititon of the Richard Cushing Error.

Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger in preparing the Catechism did not violate the Principle of Non Contradiction. Since defactro every one needs to enter the Church for salvation (Cantate Domino, Council of Florence) and dejure, in principle, in theory and known only to God a person can be saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire.

Placing invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire under the subheading Outside the Church NO Salvation however implies that they are relevant to the dogma or defacto exceptions.

For the Catechism to say that the baptism of water is needed for only those who know about Jesus and the Church could imply that those saved in invincible ignorance are defacto known to us in the present time. It implies that we know these particular cases and so we cannot say that everyone on earth with no exception needs Catholic Faith and the baptism of desire for salvation: to avoid the fires of Hell.

Also to suggest that only those who ‘know’ need the baptism of water for salvation would imply that Fr. Leonard Feeney was excommunicated not for disobedience but for heresy. It would also imply that the excommunication was wrongly lifted by the Catholic Church without the priest having to recant or make changes in his writing. It also implies that the popes, saints and Fr. Leonard Feeney were wrong in saying everyone needs to be an explicit member of the Church for salvation. It would also be a contradiction of three Councils which defined the dogma in an extra ordinary mode. The ‘dogma’ is referred to in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 as the ‘infallible statement’.

For a priest to knowingly say that there are defacto exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus is a first class heresy and a mortal sin. He is refuting the Nicene Creed in which we pray, “I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins” and “I believe in the Holy Spirit the Holy Catholic Church”. It was the Holy Spirit which guided the Magisterium of the Church to teach over the centuries that outside the church there is no salvation.

A priest, who knowingly continues in this error, even after being informed, is in manifest public heresy and is not to offer Mass without receiving absolution in the Confessional and making public amends; removing the sacrilege. Similarly it would be a sacrilege for a lay person knowingly in this error to receive the Eucharist.
-Lionel Andrades

ERRORS IN THE CATECHISM ?

eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/errors-in-catec…

Practically everyone needs the baptism of water for salvation while in theory a person can be saved with the baptism of desire - Rector, Church Santa Maria Annunziata, Rome
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/practically-eve…

In the Catechism of the Catholic Church why did Cardial Joseph Ratzinger not mention that the baptism of desire is not a defacto exception to the dogma outside the church no salvation nor to Vatican Council II ?
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/in-catechism-of…

ETERNAL WORD TELEVISION NETWORK (EWTN) SAYS 'SUBMISSION TO THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND THE SOVEREIGN PONTIFF IS NECESSARY FOR SALVATION'
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/eternal-word-te…

CHURCH TEXT IS CRITICAL OF THE ARCHBISHOP OF BOSTON : REFERS TO IMPLICIT AND NOT EXPLICIT (TO US) BAPTISM OF DESIRE
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/church-text-cri…

VICARIATE OFFICES FOR YOUTH AND THE SICK ARE TEACHING ERRORS
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/vicariate-offic…

YOUTUBE VIDEO QUESTIONS TO ASK THE CATHOLIC CHAPLAIN OR PROFESSOR
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/youtube-video-q…

PROFESSION OF FAITH: I BELIEVE IN THE HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/profession-of-f…

DID THE LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE 1949 CONTRADICT THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS? NO
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/did-letter-of-h…

ROME VICARIATE HIT BY THE RICHARD CUSHING ERROR : Centro Della pastorale sanitaria says the baptism of water is not defacto needed for the salvation of all on earth
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/rome-vicariate-…

BOSTON ARCHDIOCESE WEBSITE SAYS NOSTRA AETATE DISMISSES CHURCH INTEREST IN BAPTIZING JEWS AND AFFIRMS GOD’S COVENANT WITH THEM : NOWHERE DOES VATICAN COUNCIL II MAKE THIS CLAIM
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/boston-archdioc…

CATHOLIC ANSWERS SUCCUMBS TO THE RICHARD CUSHING ERROR
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/catholic-answer…

MSGR.JOSEPH FENTON AND FR. WILLIAM MOST DID NOT NOTICE THE RICHARD CUSHING ERROR
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/msgrjoseph-fent…

USCCB REPORT MAKES ALLOWANCE FOR THE RICHARD CUSHING ERROR
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/usccb-report-ma…

FR.LEONARD FEENEY AND HIS COMMUNITIES HAVE ACCEPTED THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE PER SE
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/frleonard-feene…

ARCHBISHOP OF BOSTON CARDINAL RICHARD CUSHINGS LEGACY: FOLLOWERS INCLUDE USCCB, EWTN, CATHOLIC ANSWERS, SSPX, SEDEVACANTISTS MHFM
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/archbishop-of-b…

CARDINAL RATZINGER DID NOT VIOLATE THE PRINCIPLE OF NON CONTRADICTION AS CATHOLICS UNITED FOR THE FAITH IMPLY
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/Catholics%20Uni…

FR.TULLIO ROTONDO AFFIRMS CANTATE DOMINO, COUNCIL OF FLORENCE ON EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/frtullio-rotond…

LEGIONARY OF CHRIST PRIEST FR.RAFAEL PASCUAL AFFIRMS CANTATE DOMINO, COUNCIL OF FLORENCE
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/Fr.Rafael%20Pas…

CATHOLIC LAY PROFESSOR AT UNIVERSITA EUROPA DI ROMA AFFIRMS DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/search/label/Corrado%20Gnerre
Lionel Andrades

Franciscan Friars of the Renewal

Sunday, January 1, 2012

ETERNAL WORD TELEVISION NETWORK (EWTN) SAYS 'SUBMISSION TO THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND THE SOVEREIGN PONTIFF IS NECESSARY FOR SALVATION'

EWTN has placed on the Internet the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 addressed to the Archbishop of Boston (1) in which it says ‘submission to the Catholic Church and the Sovereign Pontiff is required as necessary for salvat…More
Sunday, January 1, 2012

ETERNAL WORD TELEVISION NETWORK (EWTN) SAYS 'SUBMISSION TO THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND THE SOVEREIGN PONTIFF IS NECESSARY FOR SALVATION'

EWTN has placed on the Internet the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 addressed to the Archbishop of Boston (1) in which it says ‘submission to the Catholic Church and the Sovereign Pontiff is required as necessary for salvation.’ The issue was the interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

This was the same teaching of Fr.Leonard Feeney. He taught everyone needs to be a visible, explicit member of the Catholic Church for salvation.This was not the teaching of the Archbishop of Boston and the Jesuits there.They said there were exceptions to the dogma and so every one did not have to enter the Catholic Church.The exceptions for them could be people in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire.

EWTN also mentions ‘the dogma’, the ‘infallible teaching’ . The dogma says every one needs to convert into the Church for salvation .No exceptions are mentioned. (2)

EWTN refers to those saved with the baptism of desire etc.Since these cases are known only to God they are not exceptions to the dogma. We do not know a single case in the present times.

Similarly Lumen Gentium 16 (invincible ignorance/good conscience) is not an exception to the dogma outside the church there is no salvation. Neither is it an exception to the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 issued during the pontificate of Venerable Pope Pius XII which says, ‘submission to the Catholic Church and the Sovereign Pontiff is required as necessary for salvation.’

It was Mother Angelica the founder of EWTN who affirmed the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and quoted the Church Fathers.She did not consider invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire as exceptions to the Church Fathers’ interpretation of the dogma.

On doctrine/dogma the Letter of the Holy Office was a criticism of the Archbishop of Boston and the Jesuits who assumed that the baptism of desire etc were defacto known to us and so were exceptions to the centuries old interpretation of outside the church there is no salvation.The Letter of the Holy Office refers to implicit and not explicit (to us) baptism of desire. For the baptism of desire to be an exception to the dogma it would have to be explicit.(3)

EWTN has also posted an article by the late Fr.William Most who also assumes that the baptism of desire etc are visible and an exception to the dogma. Fr.Most implies being saved in invincible ignorance is the ordinary means of salvation and so the American natives were saved before the Catholic missionaries arrived there.

The Letter of the Holy Office indicates, like Vatican Council II (LG 14, AG 7) that Catholics Faith with the baptism of water is the ordinary means of salvation.So the American Natives before the missionaries were all oriented to Hell just like all non Catholics today in America unless they convert into the Catholic Church.

The ordinary means of salvation is also not just beleiving in Jesus Christ without the Catholic Church according to EWTN. Just beleiving in Jesus is sufficient for salvation is a Protestant teaching rejected by the Letter of the Holy Office 1949. All Protestants are lost unless they convert into the only Church Jesus founded, according to EWTN, ‘submission to the Catholic Church and the Sovereign Pontiff is required as necessary for salvation.’
-Lionel Andrades

1.
www.ewtn.com/library/curia/cdffeeny.htm

2.
catholicism.org/category/outside-the-chu…

3.
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/Letter%20of%20t…
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/if-you-say-that…

eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/eternal-word-te…
Lionel Andrades

Pope Benedict reconciling the Church and the World

Thursday, November 17, 2011

SSPX IMPLY BAPTISM OF DESIRE IS VISIBLE, THEN THEY ASSUME IT’S AN EXCEPTION TO THE DOGMA OUTSIDE THE CHURCH THERE IS NO SALVATION: OFFER LATIN MASS WITH NOVUS ORDO ECCLESIOLOGY

The Society of St. Pius X needs to announce that the baptism of desire is not an exception to the dogma and that everyone with no exception needs to convert into the Church …More
Thursday, November 17, 2011

SSPX IMPLY BAPTISM OF DESIRE IS VISIBLE, THEN THEY ASSUME IT’S AN EXCEPTION TO THE DOGMA OUTSIDE THE CHURCH THERE IS NO SALVATION: OFFER LATIN MASS WITH NOVUS ORDO ECCLESIOLOGY

The Society of St. Pius X needs to announce that the baptism of desire is not an exception to the dogma and that everyone with no exception needs to convert into the Church for salvation.Otherwise it is an impediment for saying the Latin Mass. It is the actual rejection of a dogma which Pope Pius XII called an ‘infallible statement’. SSPX must recognize that it is an impediment for offering Holy Mass according to Canon Law.

Similar to the SSPX, the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP), former SSPX members, are rejecting the dogma and Vatican Council II (LG 14, AG 7) which says all need to enter the Church with Catholic Faith and the baptism of water. For the FSSP all in the present time need to enter the Church except for those in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire.

I do not know if the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican will consider the SSPX and FSSP error an impediment to offering Mass since the Paulist Fathers at the Church of Santa Susanna in Rome reject the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. They claim Vatican Council II has changed this teaching and they provide a theology of religions on their website. They offer Mass in English, ordain their priests and the Vatican gives them canonical status.There are no demands made on them by the Vatican as is the case for the SSPX.

Fr. Peter Scott writes on the SSPX website that unlike the modernists they believe in the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Yes- as compared to the Paulist Fathers in Rome. However there are priests who offer the Novus Ordo Mass who say they respect the dogma however those in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are exceptions to the dogma. Sounds familiar?

Fr. Peter Scott criticizes the modernist ecclesiology in a letter to Bishop Raymond Boland, of the diocese of Kansas City, USA. Yet the SSPX is using the same ecclesiology as the priests who offer the Novus Ordo Mass. If the SSPX priests assume that the baptism of desire contradicts the dogma then they also imply that the baptism of desire is visible for us and is as explicit as the baptism of water.I do not like to write all this since in many ways I admire the SSPX but it is unfortunate that they are using the same ecclesiology as in the Novus Ordo Mass.

Fr. Peter Scott and Fr. Francois Laisney of the SSPX assume in written reports on their website, and in a book by Fr. Laisney, that the baptism of desire is visible and explicit and so is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.The SSPX needs to issue a clarification on this subject-Lionel Andrades

eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/sspx-imply-bapt…

Tuesday, November 15, 2011

Fr.Francois Laisney of the SSPX's denial is probably not willful but due to confusion between defacto-dejure salvation, implicit and explicit salvation.

I have been asked by a reader of this blog where exactly does Fr.Francois Laisney say that there are exceptions to the dogma.

Here is my answer.

Fr. Francois Laisney writes:

The first error of those who take their doctrine from Rev. Fr. Leonard Feeney, commonly known as "Feeneyites," is that they misrepresent the dogma, "Outside the [Catholic] Church there is no salvation." The Feeneyites misrepresent this as, "Without baptism of water there is no salvation."
The Feeneyites misrepresent this as, "Without baptism of water there is no salvation."www.sspx.org/…/three_errors_of…

He is implying here that there is salvation in the present times for someone without the baptism of water.

Note: I use the words ‘in the present time’. It refers to the present reality, the de facto situation i.e when I meet a non Catholic on the street or telephone him.

De facto every one needs the baptism of water for salvation this is the teaching of the dogma. So he denies the dogma here.

His denial is probably not willful but due to confusion between defacto-dejure salvation, implicit and explicit salvation.

Implicitly, and known only to God we know that for salvation there could be possible theoretical exceptions to every one needing Catholic Faith and the baptism of water, before they die.

In principle, de jure we accept that a non Catholic can be saved in the way God chooses and this would be an exception. Theoretically there can be ‘exceptions’ de facto there are no exceptions to the dogma. So those who are saved de jure are not exceptions to the dogma.
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/frfrancois-lais…

Fr. Francois Laisney says :

His teaching was then condemned by the Holy Office in 1949, and he himself was excommunicated in 1953.
Nowhere does the Letter state that Fr.Leonard Feeney was 'condemned' or that he was excommunicated for heresy. This is the propaganda of the liberal secular media.

The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 supported Fr.Leonard Feeney when it mentioned ‘the dogma’, the ‘infallible teaching’. The dogma indicates that every non Catholic in Boston and the rest of the world needs to convert into the Church to avoid the fires of Hell.(Cantate Domino, Council of Florence etc).So Fr.Leonard Feeney was correct in saying every one needs to be a visible member of the Church and there are no exceptions. The dogma does not mention exceptions and it is an infallible teaching.Fr.Francois Laisney implies that there are exceptions to the dogma and so Fr.Leonard Feeney was in error.
-Lionel Andrades
Lionel Andrades

Bishop: We Fight Poverty not Gay Unions

Thursday, November 24, 2011

ECCLESSIOLOGY OF ENGLISH BISHOPS HIT BY TWO ERRORS 1) VISIBLE BAPTISM OF DESIRE 2) FR.LEONARD FEENEY EXCOMMUNICATED FOR THE SAME VIEW AS POPES, SAINTS AND DOGMA OUTSIDE THE CHURCH THERE IS NO SALVATION

English bishops use an interpretation of Magisterial texts which contradict the Principle of Non Contradiction as taught to Catholic seminarian…More
Thursday, November 24, 2011

ECCLESSIOLOGY OF ENGLISH BISHOPS HIT BY TWO ERRORS 1) VISIBLE BAPTISM OF DESIRE 2) FR.LEONARD FEENEY EXCOMMUNICATED FOR THE SAME VIEW AS POPES, SAINTS AND DOGMA OUTSIDE THE CHURCH THERE IS NO SALVATION

English bishops use an interpretation of Magisterial texts which contradict the Principle of Non Contradiction as taught to Catholic seminarians.

It is assumed by the bishops that those saved among Christians and non Christians, in invincible ignorance, the baptism of desire, a good conscience, with ‘the seeds of the Word’ or in imperfect communion with the Church,are known to us in the present times and this is the ordinary way of salvation. They imply that this is an exception to the dogma outside the Church there is no salvation. So Protestants just have to believe in Jesus and they are saved in their religion through this ordinary means.This is a rejection of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Vatican Council II (Lumen Gentium 14, Ad Gentes 7).Vatican Council II indicates that the ordinary means of salvation is Catholic Faith and the baptism of water (LG 14, AG 7).

It is contradictory for the bishops to say:

De facto every one needs to be an explicit, visible member of the Church of salvation and defacto non Catholics in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire can be saved without the baptism of water.

It is not contradictory when they say:

Defacto every one with no exception needs to enter the Church as taught by ‘the dogma’, the ‘infallible statement’.(Letter of the Holy Office 1949 during the pontificate of Pope Pius XII)

De jure a person can be saved with the baptism of desire.(Letter of the Holy Office 1949 during the pontificate of Pope Pius XII)

It is contradictory when they believe:

De facto all people need to enter the Catholic Church with the baptism of water and Catholic Faith for salvation.(Vatican Council II, Lumen Gentium 14, Ad Gentes 7).

De facto some people can be saved in invincible ignorance.(Lumen Gentium 16).

It is not contradictory when they believe:

De facto all people need to enter the Catholic Church with the baptism of water and Catholic Faith for salvation. (Vatican Council II, Lumen Gentium 14,Ad Gentes7).

De jure some people can be saved in invincible ignorance.(Lumen Gentium 16).

English bishops use an interpretation of Magisterial texts which contradict the Principle of Non Contradiction as taught to Catholic seminarians.It is contradictory to common sense , even a lay man can notice, to imply that those saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are de facto known to us

Due to the contradiction in the interpretation young candidates with a religious vocation in England have to say everyone needs to enter the Church for salvation in the present times but there could be defacto exceptions like those saved with the baptism of desire. The baptism of desire is assumed to be visible and so is an exception to the dogma.The dogma indicates everyone needs to be an explicit, visible member of the church to go to Heaven.
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/vocation-direct…

If the baptism of desire was implicit for candidates it would not contradict the dogma, it would not be an exception. Since it is allegedly explicitly known, it is an exception to the dogma. It is an error for the bishops to interpret those saved with the baptism of desire as being de facto known to us.

Candidates with a religious vocation in England would also have to accept that Fr. Leonard Feeney was ‘condemned’ for holding the same view as the popes, including Pope Pius XII, who referred to 'the dogma', the saints and the dogma itself. Since the bishops assume that Fr.Leonard Feeney said that there are no exceptions to the dogma and that the baptism of desire etc are not exceptions. For the bishops the baptism of desire is defacto and explicitly known to us and so Fr.Leonard Feeney was wrong. So were the popes and saints.

(a) No one knows of a particular case of someone being saved with the baptism of desire even though it is being assumed as being visible (b) Fr.Leonard Feeney was not excommunicated for repeating the same teaching of the popes, Councils, saints and the thrice-defined dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. They were all saying that de facto every adult needs Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation. They did not consider the baptism of desire as explicit but knew that it was always implicit.

They imply that Vatican Council II has changed our concept of Church since those saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16) etc are visible and de facto known to us in the present times.
-Lionel Andrades

CATHOLIC BISHOPS CONFERENCE OF ENGLAND AND WALES SAYS THOSE SAVED WITH THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE, INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE ARE VISIBLE TO US
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/catholic-bishop…

ECUMENISM OF THE ENGLISH BISHOPS CONTRARY TO VATICAN COUNCIL II
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/ecumenism-of-en…

eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/ecclessiology-o…
Lionel Andrades

New Jesuit General

Wednesday, November 16, 2011

JESUIT SUPERIOR GENERAL REVIEW THE FR.LEONARD FEENEY CASE : THERE IS NO KNOWN CASE OF A PERSON SAVED WITH THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE WHICH IS VISIBLE

In a prepared statement for the press the former Jesuit added: "The conscience difficulty is that the diocese of Boston, under the auspices of Archbishop Cushing, and Boston College, under the auspices of …More
Wednesday, November 16, 2011

JESUIT SUPERIOR GENERAL REVIEW THE FR.LEONARD FEENEY CASE : THERE IS NO KNOWN CASE OF A PERSON SAVED WITH THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE WHICH IS VISIBLE

In a prepared statement for the press the former Jesuit added: "The conscience difficulty is that the diocese of Boston, under the auspices of Archbishop Cushing, and Boston College, under the auspices of Father John J. McEloney, S.J., both notably ignorant in the field of Catholic theology ... are teaching that there is salvation outside the Catholic Church." - Father Feeney Is Dismissed From Jesuit Order by Rome

www.thecrimson.com/…/father-feeney-i…

We now know that the Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Richard Cushing and the Reverend John J. McEleney S.J. the former Provincial of the New England branch of the Society of Jesus were wrong in assuming that those saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance are explicitly known to us,that they are real and visible cases and so they contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Fr.Leonard Feeney.

Fr.Leonard Feeney was correct in saying that there is no baptism ofdesire or invincible ignornance cases that we know of and so they are not exceptions to the dogma defined three times.

Fr.Leonard Feeney was unjustly deprived of his faculties to offer Mass and hear Confession when he was only affirming the centuries old interpretation of the dogma.


The Archbishop of Boston and the Jesuit Superior General did not issue a clarification when the Boston newspapers reported that the Church had changed its ancient teaching on outside the Church there is no salvation.

Instead the Archbishop and the Jesuits began teaching that there was salvation outside the church for those saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire not mentioning that these cases were accepted only on principle de jure and so did not contradict the dogma which indicated that all non Catholics need to convert into the Catholic Church to avoid Hell.

Pope Pius XII in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 affirmed ‘the dogma’ the ‘infallible teaching’. The dogma CantateDomino, Council of Florence indicates that all non Catholics in Boston and the rest of the world need to convert into the Catholic Church. This was exactly the teaching of Fr.Leonard Feeney for which he was being transferred and silenced.

Even though the Letter of the Holy Office supported the priest the excommunication was not listed and the media was allowed to state that Fr.Leonard Feeney was condemned by the Hly Office.

Justice needs to be done by the present Superior General of the Jesuits Superior General is the Reverend Father Adolfo Nicolás..-Lionel Andrades

_____________________________________________________________________________

Father Feeney Is Dismissed From Jesuit Order by Rome

Refused to Take Holy Cross Post


By Brenton WELLING Jr.,

Published: Saturday, October 29, 1949

Father Leonard Feeney last night was dismissed from the Jesuit Order.

His discharge, the latest event in his dispute with the Catholic authorities, came in the form of a decree from Rome signed by The Very Reverend Jean Baptiste Janssens, S.J., General of the order,

The decree arrived at St. Benedict's Center at 6 p.m. in a registered letter from The Reverend John J. McEleney S.J. Provincial of the New England branch of the Society of Jesus.

Judicial Process

Father Feeney announced his own dismissal at a press conference last night. He translated from the Latin a sentence of the decree, which said: "Your dismissal from the Society of Jesus through judicial process has been approved."

Father Feeney, who is the chaplain of St. Benedict's commented, "The reason is because I will not leave St. Benedict's Center." He refused to do so in August, 1948, when he was ordered by the Jesuits to join the faculty of Holy Cross.

The reason for his disobedience, Father Feeney said last night, was a "conscience difficulty which Father McEloney will not listen to."

Explains Difficulty

In a prepared statement for the press the former Jesuit added: "The conscience difficulty is that the diocese of Boston, under the auspices of Archbishop Cushing, and Boston College, under the auspices of Father John J. McEloney, S.J., both notably ignorant in the field of Catholic theology ... are teaching that there is salvation outside the Catholic Church."

Archishop Cushing declined to comment on this statement last night, and Father MeEleney could not be reached.

Father Feeney's insistence that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church has been the cause of the con- troversy which has gene on between the Archbishop and the Jesuits, on the one hand, and Father Feeney, on the other, since October 1947. Last January Father Feeney was "deprived on his faculties" by Archbishop Cushing. This meant that he could no longer say Mass or hear confession.

Despite this and the more recent punishment, Father Feeney announced last night, "I shall continue as a Catholic priest, loyal and devoted to the Church and to the Pope, at St. Benediet's Center."

The faculty and students of St. Benedict's in a statement signed by the secretary of the School, said last night; "Many of us have at one time or another been associated with Jesuit institutions, and know that their policies of late are motivated more by political expediency than by Christian charity. -Harvard Crimson online.

eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/jesuit-superior…
Lionel Andrades

LETTER FROM FATHER BOUCHACOURT TO PRIESTS DISTRICT TO INFORM ABOUT THE MEETING OF …

Thursday, November 17, 2011

SSPX IMPLY BAPTISM OF DESIRE IS VISIBLE, THEN THEY ASSUME IT’S AN EXCEPTION TO THE DOGMA OUTSIDE THE CHURCH THERE IS NO SALVATION: OFFER LATIN MASS WITH NOVUS ORDO ECCLESIOLOGY

The Society of St. Pius X needs to announce that the baptism of desire is not an exception to the dogma and that everyone with no exception needs to convert into the Church …More
Thursday, November 17, 2011

SSPX IMPLY BAPTISM OF DESIRE IS VISIBLE, THEN THEY ASSUME IT’S AN EXCEPTION TO THE DOGMA OUTSIDE THE CHURCH THERE IS NO SALVATION: OFFER LATIN MASS WITH NOVUS ORDO ECCLESIOLOGY

The Society of St. Pius X needs to announce that the baptism of desire is not an exception to the dogma and that everyone with no exception needs to convert into the Church for salvation.Otherwise it is an impediment for saying the Latin Mass. It is the actual rejection of a dogma which Pope Pius XII called an ‘infallible statement’. SSPX must recognize that it is an impediment for offering Holy Mass according to Canon Law.

Similar to the SSPX, the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP), former SSPX members, are rejecting the dogma and Vatican Council II (LG 14, AG 7) which says all need to enter the Church with Catholic Faith and the baptism of water. For the FSSP all in the present time need to enter the Church except for those in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire.

I do not know if the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican will consider the SSPX and FSSP error an impediment to offering Mass since the Paulist Fathers at the Church of Santa Susanna in Rome reject the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. They claim Vatican Council II has changed this teaching and they provide a theology of religions on their website. They offer Mass in English, ordain their priests and the Vatican gives them canonical status.There are no demands made on them by the Vatican as is the case for the SSPX.

Fr. Peter Scott writes on the SSPX website that unlike the modernists they believe in the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Yes- as compared to the Paulist Fathers in Rome. However there are priests who offer the Novus Ordo Mass who say they respect the dogma however those in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are exceptions to the dogma. Sounds familiar?

Fr. Peter Scott criticizes the modernist ecclesiology in a letter to Bishop Raymond Boland, of the diocese of Kansas City, USA. Yet the SSPX is using the same ecclesiology as the priests who offer the Novus Ordo Mass. If the SSPX priests assume that the baptism of desire contradicts the dogma then they also imply that the baptism of desire is visible for us and is as explicit as the baptism of water.I do not like to write all this since in many ways I admire the SSPX but it is unfortunate that they are using the same ecclesiology as in the Novus Ordo Mass.

Fr. Peter Scott and Fr. Francois Laisney of the SSPX assume in written reports on their website, and in a book by Fr. Laisney, that the baptism of desire is visible and explicit and so is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.The SSPX needs to issue a clarification on this subject-Lionel Andrades
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/sspx-imply-bapt…
Lionel Andrades

Petition to Pope Benedict XVI for a more in-depth examination of the Second Vatican Council

Thursday, November 24, 2011

ECCLESSIOLOGY OF ENGLISH BISHOPS HIT BY TWO ERRORS 1) VISIBLE BAPTISM OF DESIRE 2) FR.LEONARD FEENEY EXCOMMUNICATED FOR THE SAME VIEW AS POPES, SAINTS AND DOGMA OUTSIDE THE CHURCH THERE IS NO SALVATION

English bishops use an interpretation of Magisterial texts which contradict the Principle of Non Contradiction as taught to Catholic seminarian…More
Thursday, November 24, 2011

ECCLESSIOLOGY OF ENGLISH BISHOPS HIT BY TWO ERRORS 1) VISIBLE BAPTISM OF DESIRE 2) FR.LEONARD FEENEY EXCOMMUNICATED FOR THE SAME VIEW AS POPES, SAINTS AND DOGMA OUTSIDE THE CHURCH THERE IS NO SALVATION

English bishops use an interpretation of Magisterial texts which contradict the Principle of Non Contradiction as taught to Catholic seminarians.

It is assumed by the bishops that those saved among Christians and non Christians, in invincible ignorance, the baptism of desire, a good conscience, with ‘the seeds of the Word’ or in imperfect communion with the Church,are known to us in the present times and this is the ordinary way of salvation. They imply that this is an exception to the dogma outside the Church there is no salvation. So Protestants just have to believe in Jesus and they are saved in their religion through this ordinary means.This is a rejection of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Vatican Council II (Lumen Gentium 14, Ad Gentes 7).Vatican Council II indicates that the ordinary means of salvation is Catholic Faith and the baptism of water (LG 14, AG 7).

It is contradictory for the bishops to say:

De facto every one needs to be an explicit, visible member of the Church of salvation and defacto non Catholics in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire can be saved without the baptism of water.

It is not contradictory when they say:

Defacto every one with no exception needs to enter the Church as taught by ‘the dogma’, the ‘infallible statement’.(Letter of the Holy Office 1949 during the pontificate of Pope Pius XII)

De jure a person can be saved with the baptism of desire.(Letter of the Holy Office 1949 during the pontificate of Pope Pius XII)

It is contradictory when they believe:

De facto all people need to enter the Catholic Church with the baptism of water and Catholic Faith for salvation.(Vatican Council II, Lumen Gentium 14, Ad Gentes 7).

De facto some people can be saved in invincible ignorance.(Lumen Gentium 16).

It is not contradictory when they believe:

De facto all people need to enter the Catholic Church with the baptism of water and Catholic Faith for salvation. (Vatican Council II, Lumen Gentium 14,Ad Gentes7).

De jure some people can be saved in invincible ignorance.(Lumen Gentium 16).

English bishops use an interpretation of Magisterial texts which contradict the Principle of Non Contradiction as taught to Catholic seminarians.It is contradictory to common sense , even a lay man can notice, to imply that those saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are de facto known to us

Due to the contradiction in the interpretation young candidates with a religious vocation in England have to say everyone needs to enter the Church for salvation in the present times but there could be defacto exceptions like those saved with the baptism of desire. The baptism of desire is assumed to be visible and so is an exception to the dogma.The dogma indicates everyone needs to be an explicit, visible member of the church to go to Heaven.
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/vocation-direct…

If the baptism of desire was implicit for candidates it would not contradict the dogma, it would not be an exception. Since it is allegedly explicitly known, it is an exception to the dogma. It is an error for the bishops to interpret those saved with the baptism of desire as being de facto known to us.

Candidates with a religious vocation in England would also have to accept that Fr. Leonard Feeney was ‘condemned’ for holding the same view as the popes, including Pope Pius XII, who referred to 'the dogma', the saints and the dogma itself. Since the bishops assume that Fr.Leonard Feeney said that there are no exceptions to the dogma and that the baptism of desire etc are not exceptions. For the bishops the baptism of desire is defacto and explicitly known to us and so Fr.Leonard Feeney was wrong. So were the popes and saints.

(a) No one knows of a particular case of someone being saved with the baptism of desire even though it is being assumed as being visible (b) Fr.Leonard Feeney was not excommunicated for repeating the same teaching of the popes, Councils, saints and the thrice-defined dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. They were all saying that de facto every adult needs Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation. They did not consider the baptism of desire as explicit but knew that it was always implicit.

They imply that Vatican Council II has changed our concept of Church since those saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16) etc are visible and de facto known to us in the present times.
-Lionel Andrades

CATHOLIC BISHOPS CONFERENCE OF ENGLAND AND WALES SAYS THOSE SAVED WITH THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE, INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE ARE VISIBLE TO US
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/catholic-bishop…

ECUMENISM OF THE ENGLISH BISHOPS CONTRARY TO VATICAN COUNCIL II
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/ecumenism-of-en…
Lionel Andrades

Petition to Pope Benedict XVI for a more in-depth examination of the Second Vatican Council

Wednesday, November 23, 2011

ECUMENISM OF THE ENGLISH BISHOPS CONTRARY TO VATICAN COUNCIL II

According to the Home Mission Briefing on the website of the Conference of Catholic Bishops of England and Wales(1) there is a joint mission program with the liberal Protestant World Council of Churches.(2)

The English bishops who teach that those saved with the baptism of desire or in invinc…More
Wednesday, November 23, 2011

ECUMENISM OF THE ENGLISH BISHOPS CONTRARY TO VATICAN COUNCIL II

According to the Home Mission Briefing on the website of the Conference of Catholic Bishops of England and Wales(1) there is a joint mission program with the liberal Protestant World Council of Churches.(2)

The English bishops who teach that those saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance are visible to us (3)are suggesting that Christians, do not have to convert into the Catholic Church to avoid Hell. (Lumen Gentium 14, Ad Gentium 7, dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, Cantate Domino Council of Florence etc).

Vatican Council II says all Christians need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation. (4)

The Ecumenism policy of the English bishops is contrary to the Magisterium of the Church. It is a refutation of Catholic Tradition and the Church’s interpretation of the Bible.They have been evangelised by the Protestants.

They are unable to state that Vatican Council II and the dogma Outside the Church there is no Salvation teaches that all Protestants and Orthodox Christians are oriented to the fires of Hell unless they convert into the Catholic Church.

According to the Catholic Bishops, Protestants and other Christians can be saved in invincible ignorance etc just as in inter religious dialogue with non Christians it is assumed by the bishops that those saved in invincible ignorance among non Christians are known to us in the present times.They imply that this is an exception to the dogma.This is the rejection of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Vatican Council II (Lumen Gentium 14, Ad Gentes 7).

Young Catholics in England would have to say that everyone needs to enter the Church for salvation in the present times but there could be defacto exceptions like those saved with the baptism of desire. The baptism of desire is assumed to be visible and so is an exception to the dogma.The dogma indicates everyone needs to be an explicit, visible member of the church to go to Heaven.
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/vocation-direct…

If the baptism of desire was implicit for candidates it would not contradict the dogma, it would not be an exception. Since it is allegedly explicitly known, it is an exception to the dogma. Candidates with a religious vocation would be accepted who presumably could 'spot' these rare exceptional cases.Those who cannot do so will not be able to priests and nuns.

So candidates with a religious vocation in England would also have to accept also that Fr. Leonard Feeney was ‘condemned’ for holding the same view as the popes, including Pope Pius XII, who referred to 'the dogma', the saints and the dogma itself.

This is the teaching of the Catholic Bishops Conference of England and Wales on Ecumenism and inter faith dialogue. This is their policy when accepting candidates with a religious vocation and in teaching at Pontifical seminaries in Rome,the English and Beda College.

This new visible baptism of desire doctrine contradicts magisterial documents.It is also irrational. (a) No one knows of a particular case of someone being saved with the baptism of desire and (b) Fr.Leonard Feeney was not excommunicated for repeating the same teaching of the popes, Councils, saints and the thrice-defined dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.-Lionel Andrades

___________________________________________

1.Adult Formation and Catechesis.Home Mission Briefing June 2010. Ecumenism

2..www.oikoumene.org/…/mission-and-uni…

3..eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/catholic-bishop…

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

Therefore, all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church's preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door.-Ad Gentes 7

CATHOLIC LAY PROFESSOR AT UNIVERSITA EUROPA DI ROMA AFFIRMS DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/catholic-lay-pr…

LEGIONARY OF CHRIST PRIEST FR.RAFAEL PASCUAL AFFIRMS CANTATE DOMINO, COUNCIL OF FLORENCE
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/legionary-of-ch…

FR.TULLIO ROTONDO AFFIRMS CANTATE DOMINO, COUNCIL OF FLORENCE ON EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/frtullio-rotond…

CANTATE DOMINO, COUNCIL OF FLORENCE ON EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS IS DE FIDE AND NOT CONTRADICTED BY VATICAN COUNCIL II- Fr. Nevus Marcello O.P
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/cantate-domino-…

BRAZILIAN PRIEST SAYS VATICAN COUNCIL II DOES NOT CONTRADICT DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/brazilian-pries…

CATHOLIC PRIESTS IN ROME AGREE WITH FR.LEONARD FEENEY: THERE IS NO BAPTISM OF DESIRE THAT WE CAN KNOW OF
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/catholic-priest…

DAPHNE MCLEOD’S COMMENT SHOULD BE A WAKE UP CALL FOR SSPX, TRADITIONALISTS AND ENGLISH BISHOPS
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/daphne-mcleods-…
Lionel Andrades

Ugly Americanism (Real Catholic TV) Aug 22, 2011

Wednesday, November 16, 2011

JESUIT SUPERIOR GENERAL REVIEW THE FR.LEONARD FEENEY CASE : THERE IS NO KNOWN CASE OF A PERSON SAVED WITH THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE WHICH IS VISIBLE

In a prepared statement for the press the former Jesuit added: "The conscience difficulty is that the diocese of Boston, under the auspices of Archbishop Cushing, and Boston College, under the auspices of …More
Wednesday, November 16, 2011

JESUIT SUPERIOR GENERAL REVIEW THE FR.LEONARD FEENEY CASE : THERE IS NO KNOWN CASE OF A PERSON SAVED WITH THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE WHICH IS VISIBLE

In a prepared statement for the press the former Jesuit added: "The conscience difficulty is that the diocese of Boston, under the auspices of Archbishop Cushing, and Boston College, under the auspices of Father John J. McEloney, S.J., both notably ignorant in the field of Catholic theology ... are teaching that there is salvation outside the Catholic Church." - Father Feeney Is Dismissed From Jesuit Order by Rome

www.thecrimson.com/…/father-feeney-i…

We now know that the Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Richard Cushing and the Reverend John J. McEleney S.J. the former Provincial of the New England branch of the Society of Jesus were wrong in assuming that those saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance are explicitly known to us,that they are real and visible cases and so they contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Fr.Leonard Feeney.

Fr.Leonard Feeney was correct in saying that there is no baptism ofdesire or invincible ignornance cases that we know of and so they are not exceptions to the dogma defined three times.

Fr.Leonard Feeney was unjustly deprived of his faculties to offer Mass and hear Confession when he was only affirming the centuries old interpretation of the dogma.


The Archbishop of Boston and the Jesuit Superior General did not issue a clarification when the Boston newspapers reported that the Church had changed its ancient teaching on outside the Church there is no salvation.

Instead the Archbishop and the Jesuits began teaching that there was salvation outside the church for those saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire not mentioning that these cases were accepted only on principle de jure and so did not contradict the dogma which indicated that all non Catholics need to convert into the Catholic Church to avoid Hell.

Pope Pius XII in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 affirmed ‘the dogma’ the ‘infallible teaching’. The dogma CantateDomino, Council of Florence indicates that all non Catholics in Boston and the rest of the world need to convert into the Catholic Church. This was exactly the teaching of Fr.Leonard Feeney for which he was being transferred and silenced.

Even though the Letter of the Holy Office supported the priest the excommunication was not listed and the media was allowed to state that Fr.Leonard Feeney was condemned by the Hly Office.

Justice needs to be done by the present Superior General of the Jesuits Superior General is the Reverend Father Adolfo Nicolás..-Lionel Andrades

_____________________________________________________________________________

Father Feeney Is Dismissed From Jesuit Order by Rome

Refused to Take Holy Cross Post


By Brenton WELLING Jr.,

Published: Saturday, October 29, 1949

Father Leonard Feeney last night was dismissed from the Jesuit Order.

His discharge, the latest event in his dispute with the Catholic authorities, came in the form of a decree from Rome signed by The Very Reverend Jean Baptiste Janssens, S.J., General of the order,

The decree arrived at St. Benedict's Center at 6 p.m. in a registered letter from The Reverend John J. McEleney S.J. Provincial of the New England branch of the Society of Jesus.

Judicial Process

Father Feeney announced his own dismissal at a press conference last night. He translated from the Latin a sentence of the decree, which said: "Your dismissal from the Society of Jesus through judicial process has been approved."

Father Feeney, who is the chaplain of St. Benedict's commented, "The reason is because I will not leave St. Benedict's Center." He refused to do so in August, 1948, when he was ordered by the Jesuits to join the faculty of Holy Cross.

The reason for his disobedience, Father Feeney said last night, was a "conscience difficulty which Father McEloney will not listen to."

Explains Difficulty

In a prepared statement for the press the former Jesuit added: "The conscience difficulty is that the diocese of Boston, under the auspices of Archbishop Cushing, and Boston College, under the auspices of Father John J. McEloney, S.J., both notably ignorant in the field of Catholic theology ... are teaching that there is salvation outside the Catholic Church."

Archishop Cushing declined to comment on this statement last night, and Father MeEleney could not be reached.

Father Feeney's insistence that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church has been the cause of the con- troversy which has gene on between the Archbishop and the Jesuits, on the one hand, and Father Feeney, on the other, since October 1947. Last January Father Feeney was "deprived on his faculties" by Archbishop Cushing. This meant that he could no longer say Mass or hear confession.

Despite this and the more recent punishment, Father Feeney announced last night, "I shall continue as a Catholic priest, loyal and devoted to the Church and to the Pope, at St. Benediet's Center."

The faculty and students of St. Benedict's in a statement signed by the secretary of the School, said last night; "Many of us have at one time or another been associated with Jesuit institutions, and know that their policies of late are motivated more by political expediency than by Christian charity. -Harvard Crimson online.
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/jesuit-superior…
Lionel Andrades

P.G.Cavalcoli, OP: (4) Non vale più extra Ecclesiam nulla salus? (Sul dialogo interreligioso)

CATHOLIC HERALD, DAILY TELEGRAPH CENSORSHIP OF THE DOGMA CONTROVERSY: NO ADS ACCEPTED

The issue is the Eucharist-does every one with no exception need to receive the Eucharist to avoid Hell?

Does everyone need to receive the Eucharist to avoid Hell? Yes. The Sacraments are needed for all people for salvation. There could be some people in certain conditions and times who cannot …More
CATHOLIC HERALD, DAILY TELEGRAPH CENSORSHIP OF THE DOGMA CONTROVERSY: NO ADS ACCEPTED

The issue is the Eucharist-does every one with no exception need to receive the Eucharist to avoid Hell?

Does everyone need to receive the Eucharist to avoid Hell? Yes. The Sacraments are needed for all people for salvation. There could be some people in certain conditions and times who cannot receive the Eucharist. However in general this Sacrament is needed for salvation. (John 6).

Does every one need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water with no exception ?Yes, everyone with no exception.( Vatican Council II, Dominus Iesus, Council of Trent, Council of Florence etc).

The Eucharist is only given to those who have received the Sacrament of baptism and the other necessary Sacraments. Non Catholics and Catholics in mortal sin are not given the Eucharist. They are on the way to Hell if they die immediately.

This teaching was not accepted by the Staff of the Catholic Herald, U.K about the time the pope visited England.It was not even accepted as a paid announcement (Daily Times, U.K). It was a difficult teaching for Damian Thompson, Editor of Telegraph Blogs and a leader writer for the Daily Telegraph.They could not even believe that this was the teaching of the Catholic Church. Now Daphne McLeod, Chairman of Pro Ecclesia et Pontefice, England has said that there can be non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance and with the baptism of desire and this is not an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam null salus.

No one is commenting on her statement at the Catholic Herald or the Daily Telegraph,U.K. It is easier to pretend that non Catholics can be saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire and these cases are explicitly known to us and so they contradict the dogma. It is much easier to say that these theoretically acceptable cases are the defacto ordinary means of salvation for all non Catholics. This is no threat to the bank balance.

The Church has not changed its teaching on extra ecclesiam nulla salus as Catholics in the media would conveniently like us to believe. If it had changed, it would be changing the Church’s teaching on the Eucharist.

Daphne McLeod is saying that the Church still teaches as in the 1930’s and 40’s when she was in school, that outside the Church there is no salvation and there is the need of missionaries. This is still the teaching of magisterial texts in Vatican Council II and after Vatican Council II. So the Catholic journalists are denying the Faith and a Catholic dogma and they consider it a virtue, important for peace. Irenicism, is the sin of denying the truth or giving up principles for the sake of peace and survival.-Lionel Andrades

Photo of Damian Thompson, Editor of Telegraph Blogs and a leader writer for the Daily Telegraph.

TIMES U.K BLOCKS ‘CATHOLIC CHURCH TEACHES ROWAN WILLIAMS ON WAY TO HELL’ ADVERTISEMENT


eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/times-uk-blocks…

eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/catholic-herald…
Lionel Andrades

P.G.Cavalcoli, OP: (4) Non vale più extra Ecclesiam nulla salus? (Sul dialogo interreligioso)

Wednesday, November 2, 2011

CATHOLIC HERALD, U.K: IS IT STILL CATHOLIC?

Reporting on the dogma controversy is not good for business.

Damain Thompson and Luke Coppen at the Catholic Herald, U.K are avoiding a fundamental Church teaching and a controversial situation in the Catholic Church.

They want to be a newspaper which represents Catholics in the U.K but the Church’s teachings on other …More
Wednesday, November 2, 2011

CATHOLIC HERALD, U.K: IS IT STILL CATHOLIC?

Reporting on the dogma controversy is not good for business.

Damain Thompson and Luke Coppen at the Catholic Herald, U.K are avoiding a fundamental Church teaching and a controversial situation in the Catholic Church.

They want to be a newspaper which represents Catholics in the U.K but the Church’s teachings on other religions pose a difficulty for them.

Daphne McLeod, Chairman, Pro Ecclesia et Pontefice, England has said that those saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are not exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

The editors of Catholic Herald would prefer to close their ears and look the other side.

She is saying that the Catholic Church teaches before and after Vatican Council II that all non Catholics with no exception need to convert into the Catholic Church to avoid Hell. This was also what she was taught as a young girl.

Does the Catholic Herald agree or disagree with her?

The Conference of Catholic Bishops of England and Wales on its website indicate that now Catholics can be saved in invincible ignorance (Lumen Gentium 16).Also the ‘seeds of the Word’ are present in other religions and so non Catholics can be saved in general.

If this is all the English bishops can say then it should be clear to the Catholic Herald that the Church has not retracted the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and that there are no defacto exceptions that we know of- we do not know any case of a non Catholic saved in invincible ignorance or the ‘seed of the Word’.

Will the Catholic Herald mention and discuss this issue in England?-Lionel Andrades

NON CATHOLICS CAN BE SAVED IN INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE, BAPTISM OF DESIRE AND IT DOES NOT CONTRADICT THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS- Daphne McLeod, Pro Ecclesia et Pontifice, England

eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/non-catholics-c…

Archbishop Emeritus Kevin McDonald of Southwark implies the 'seeds of the Word' in other religions is the ordinary means of salvation and these exceptions are explicitly known
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/archbishop-emer…

DAPHNE MCLEOD’S COMMENT SHOULD BE A WAKE UP CALL FOR SSPX, TRADITIONALISTS AND ENGLISH BISHOPS
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/daphne-mcleods-…

DAPHNE MCLEOD COMMENT A BOMBSHELL FOR ENGLISH BISHOPS?
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/daphne-mcleod-c…

CATHOLIC PRIESTS IN ROME AGREE WITH FR.LEONARD FEENEY: THERE IS NO BAPTISM OF DESIRE THAT WE CAN KNOW OF
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/catholic-priest…

BISHOPS CONFERENCE OF ENGLAND AND WALES SAYS LUMEN GENTIUM 16 REFERS TO EXPLICITLY KNOWN CASES OF NON CATHOLIC SAVED IN INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/bishops-confere…

NORMS FOR THE TRIDENTINE RITE MASS VIOLATED ?
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/norms-for-tride…

Michael Voris Hits the Jackpot…that is, “the dogma”- Brother André Marie MICM :RealCatholicTV affirms the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/michael-voris-h…

CATHOLIC LAY PROFESSOR AT UNIVERSITA EUROPA DI ROMA AFFIRMS DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/catholic-lay-pr…

LEGIONARY OF CHRIST PRIEST FR.RAFAEL PASCUAL AFFIRMS CANTATE DOMINO, COUNCIL OF FLORENCE
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/legionary-of-ch…

FR.TULLIO ROTONDO AFFIRMS CANTATE DOMINO, COUNCIL OF FLORENCE ON EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/frtullio-rotond…

CANTATE DOMINO, COUNCIL OF FLORENCE ON EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS IS DE FIDE AND NOT CONTRADICTED BY VATICAN COUNCIL II- Fr. Nevus Marcello O.P
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/cantate-domino-…

BRAZILIAN PRIEST SAYS VATICAN COUNCIL II DOES NOT CONTRADICT DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/brazilian-pries…

CATHOLIC PRIESTS IN ROME AGREE WITH FR.LEONARD FEENEY: THERE IS NO BAPTISM OF DESIRE THAT WE CAN KNOW OF
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/catholic-priest…

ANGELICUM UNIVERSITY IS CHURNING OUT THEOLOGY DEGREES FOR THOSE WHO SAY FR.LEONARD FEENEY WAS EXCOMMUNICATED FOR REJECTING THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/angelicum-unive…

CATHOLIC LAY PROFESSOR AT UNIVERSITA EUROPA DI ROMA AFFIRMS DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/catholic-lay-pr…

eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/catholic-herald…
Lionel Andrades

La mia esperienza con i pentecostali - riflessioni in difesa della Chiesa cattolica

Saturday, October 8, 2011

I LEGIONARI DI CRISTO SACERDOTE DON RAFAEL PASCUAL AFFERMA CANTATE DOMINO CONCILIO DI FIRENZE

Venerdì 7 ottobre 2011

Decano della facoltà di Filosofia, Università Pontificio Regina Apostolorum, Roma oggi mattina ha detto nel suo ufficio che aveva conosciuto il testo di dogma Cantate Domino, Concilio di Firenze e lo avrebbe firmato in pubblico.

Don Rafael …More
Saturday, October 8, 2011

I LEGIONARI DI CRISTO SACERDOTE DON RAFAEL PASCUAL AFFERMA CANTATE DOMINO CONCILIO DI FIRENZE

Venerdì 7 ottobre 2011

Decano della facoltà di Filosofia, Università Pontificio Regina Apostolorum, Roma oggi mattina ha detto nel suo ufficio che aveva conosciuto il testo di dogma Cantate Domino, Concilio di Firenze e lo avrebbe firmato in pubblico.

Don Rafael Pascual ha detto che lui ed altri Legionari di Cristo hanno preso un giuramento in la Chiesa per essere fedeli al Magistero della Chiesa. E mi ha mostrato sul suo computer il testo di questo giuramento.

Ha preso obiettare ad un e-mail (1)cioè spedetto a lui quale dove indicato che i Legionari di Cristo non hanno affermato il dogma extra eccleisam nulla salus .

Don Rafael Pascual il direttore dell'Istituto di Fede e di Scienza ha saputo che il dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus Cantate Domino (2) era d'accordo con il Concilio Vaticano II (LG 14, AG 7) (3), Dominus Iesus 20 (4) e gli altri testi di Magistero.

La Chiesa inoltre la afferma, può essere accennata, che i non Cattolici possono essere salvati nell'ignoranza invincibile e nel battesimo di desiderio. Tuttavia i Padre della Chiesa , i papi ed i Concili della Chiesa sempre conoscono che questi casi erano impliciti ed in modo da non hanno contraddetto il dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.Sono conosciuti soltanto al Dio e non incontreremmo in persona qualsiasi caso. Inoltre nessun testo Magistero sostiene che sono conosciuti esplicitamente. - Lionel Andrades
__________________________________________

1.

LEGIONARIES OF CHRIST PRIESTS IN ROME DO NOT DENY THAT THEY AFFIRM AND TEACH THE SECULAR, LIBERAL INTERPRETATION OF EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA

SALUS

eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/legionaries-of-…

2.
Pope Eugene IV, Cantate Domino (1441): "The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the "eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels" (Matthew 25:41), unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church."-, Wikipedia, extra ecclesiam nulla salus

3.
Esso, basandosi sulla sacra Scrittura e sulla tradizione, insegna che questa Chiesa peregrinante è necessaria alla salvezza. Solo il Cristo, infatti, presente in mezzo a noi nel suo corpo che è la Chiesa, è il mediatore e la via della salvezza; ora egli stesso, inculcando espressamente la necessità della fede e del battesimo (cfr. Gv 3,5), ha nello stesso tempo confermato la necessità della Chiesa, nella quale gli uomini entrano per il battesimo come per una porta. .-Lumen Gentium 14

È dunque necessario che tutti si convertano al Cristo conosciuto attraverso la predicazione della Chiesa, ed a lui e alla Chiesa, suo corpo, siano incorporati attraverso il battesimo (39). Cristo stesso infatti, « ribadendo espressamente la necessità della fede e del battesimo (cfr. Mc 16,16; Gv 3,5), ha confermato simultaneamente la necessità della Chiesa, nella quale gli uomini entrano, per così dire, attraverso la porta del battesimo.-Ad Gentes 7

4.
Innanzitutto, deve essere fermamente creduto che la « Chiesa pellegrinante è necessaria alla salvezza. Infatti solo Cristo è il mediatore e la via della salvezza; ed egli si rende presente a noi nel suo Corpo che è la Chiesa. Ora Cristo, sottolineando a parole esplicite la necessità della fede e del battesimo (cf. Mc 16,16; Gv 3,5), ha insieme confermato la necessità della Chiesa, nella quale gli uomini entrano per il battesimo come per una porta ». Questa dottrina non va contrapposta alla volontà salvifica universale di Dio (cf. 1 Tm 2,4); perciò « è necessario tener congiunte queste due verità, cioè la reale possibilità della salvezza in Cristo per tutti gli uomini e la necessità della Chiesa in ordine a tale salvezza ». -Dominus Iesus 20

Friday, October 7, 2011
LEGIONARY OF CHRIST PRIEST FR.RAFAEL PASCUAL AFFIRMS CANTATE DOMINO, COUNCIL OF FLORENCE
eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/…/legionary-of-ch…