Saturday, May 18, 2013

Rorate Caeili like Fr.Brian Harrison is protecting itself : Vatican Council II is traditional on the issue of other religions and ecumenism

The correspondents of Rorate Caeili like Fr.Brian Harrison need to believe that the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance are visible to us otherwise they could be targeted under anti Semitism laws.

So even after being informed it is prudent to say that there are exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus, which is the liberal position and that of the Jewish Left media.

Rorate Caeili has had to pull down reports which expose the lie of the baptism of desire etc being visible and known exceptions to the dogma. In one particular case they received a phone call from the Reformed Rabbi who teaches ecumenism at the Angelicum University, Rome, according to a report posted on Rorate.

He is teaching ecumenism based on the theory that Vatican Council II contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus on the issue of other religions and Christian communities.For him it is the dogma of the Left that invincible cases (LG 16) are visible to us in the present times and so are known exceptions to the literal and traditional interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney.

Rorate posted reports on the International Theological Commission and in particular the Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Luiz Ladaria S.J saying that there were known exceptions to Fr.Leonard Feeney's concept of the dogma.In other words there were some visible cases in the present times of persons saved in invincible ignorance.They quickly had to pull those reports off the website and not expose the leftist media lie.

Rorate Caeili also pulled down a report on Cardinal Kurt Koch, President of the Council for Christian Unity.He had alleged that Vatican Council II had changed the Church's understanding of our relations with the Jews and especially their need to convert into the Church as it was traditionally taught.

Again to avoid being hit under some leftist law, Rorate had to make believe that there were known exceptions to Ad Gentes 7 saying all need faith and baptism for salvation.This would include the Jews. Rorate had to accept the lie and remove the report which exposed it.

All to protect itself, to protect its website.

Similalry Fr.Brian Harrison had at one time affirmed the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.Then he was defending himself as not being a sedevancatist. The liberals could easily assume that he was a sedevancantist since for them invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are known, visible, seen in the flesh exceptions to all needing to convert into the Church.

Until today Fr.Brian Harrison cannot defend himself by saying that one can hold the literal interpretation of the dogma on salvation along with invisible to us baptism of desire and invincible ignorance. This is not contrary to the Principle of Non Contradiction. This is also in accord with Vatican Council II (AG 7 and LG 16) and Tradition in general.

However to hold this rational postion would mean having to accept criticism from those whom he works with. Would the university where he teaches understand or just assume he is a sedevacantist...? Then would there be charges of anti Semtism against him ?

So it is all very convenient to speak the lie and say there are known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and to Ad Gentes 7.

This is being done for a long time by Rorate Caeili correspondents and now Fr.Brian Harrison does not want to accept the truth which may affect his career.

Similalry the traditionalist Mons.Ignacio Barreiro admits there are no exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus; we do not know any one saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire, he says - but he will not support the traditional interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.This is being prudent, for him.

So on the issue of Vatican Council II being traditional and in agreement with the traditional teaching on other religions and ecumenism there is a big silence among the traditionalists- all to protect themself.

The Rector of the FSSP church in Rome,the Australian,Fr.Joseph Kramer says "there are too many people against us".So he denies the faith on the issue of the salvation dogma.In doing so he protects himself, his career and lifestyle.If he did affirm the faith the Vicariate in Rome, which wants to protect itself, would call for a substitute FSSP Rector.-Lionel Andrades

Communicazione-2

Questo e communicazione con Fra.Aless. Seconda parte.
 
Aless:
Caro Lionel,
attraverso i link al suo blog presenti nella mail che mi ha mandato, mi sono affacciato a fare una visita al blog, e devo dire che, nonostante io sia di vedute piuttosto tradizionali, non mi sono sentito per nulla a mio agio.
 
Lionel:
Caro Fr.Aless
Non sono tradizionali. Sono credo in Concilio Vaticano II (Ad Gentes 7) chi e in accordo con dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
Anche credo in Concilio Vaticano II (invincibile ignoranza). Invincibile ignoranza non e un eccezione per il dogma perche non conosciamo nessuno in 2013, che had ricevuto salvezza cosi. Ho ecceto di possibilita di salvezza con invincibile ignoranza e implicite desiderio ecc. Ma questi casi non contradurre il dogma sulla salvezza, neanche Ad Gentes 7 ,Concilio Vaticano II che dire tutti (all) bisogna 'fede e battisma' per salvezza.
Tutti significa tutti i Christiani che non hanno fede Cattolica e tutti non Cattolici che non hanno fede e battisma.
In questo senso, sono in accordo con Concilio Vaticano II chi e in accordo con Tradizionale.
 
Aless:
Nel suo blog lei non fa altro che criticare Papi e Cardinali, perché è convinto che contraddicano la tradizionale dottrina dell'Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus.
 
Lionel:
Sono non criticare i papi. Sono in accordo con papi e Concili di passato. Papa Francesco e mio papa. Ho aspettare. Forse in futuro lei dire che non conosciamo nessuno in 2013 che ha ricevuto salvezza con invincible ignorance ecc. LG 16 non contradurre AG 7 neanche extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
 Aless:
Mi permetta di farle notare che è alquanto imprudente criticare persone del calibro del Card. Kasper, definendolo un 'liberal' o addirittura insinuando che sia un eretico, solo perché la sua interpretazione della massima Extra Ecclesiam nulla salis non coincide con quella del Cardinale o dei Dicasteri Vaticani che lei menziona.
 
Lionel:
Cardinal Walter Kaspar assume che noi conosciamo persone che ha ricevuto salvezza con implicite desiderio o invincibile ignoranza. Questo e un errore di fatto.Noi non posso vedere persone che e morto e addesso e in Paradisio. Lui non e rationale.Lui rigetto il dogma anche Concilio Vaticano II (AG 7).
Aless:
I documenti di quei Dicasteri sono sempre approvati per la pubblicazione dal S. Padre, per cui criticare quei documenti è come criticare il Papa, cioè il fondamento visibile dell'unità della Chiesa di Cristo, quella Chiesa che, come le piace ricordare, è necessaria per la salvezza.
 
Lionel:
Non c'e documenti magisteriale che dire che noi posso vedere gli morti in Paradisio.
Quando non c'e questi casi (sulla terra) come possibile che questi casi e eccezione per il dogma. Questo e un errore di fatto(factual error).
 Aless:
Stia attento che, a forza di criticare i membri qualificati di questa Chiesa visibile, non finisca lei con l'escludersi dalla comunione con questo necessario mezzo di salvezza. Certo quanto dicono i Dicasteri vaticani non è dogma di fede, ma la prudenza vuole che sia opportuno prestare un ossequio rispettoso a quanto viene da quella Sede, non a torto definita Santa. Non so che studi lei abbia fatto per poter criticare cardinali che hanno dottorati nelle discipline teologiche e anni di proficuo insegnamento alle spalle.
Lionel:
So, non e una autorita. Ma conosco che noi non posso vedere i morti in Paradisio.
Aless:
Nonostante i suoi distinguo dalle posizioni della SSPX o dai sedevacantisti, mi pare che lei scivoli pericolosamente nei loro stessi atteggiamenti di critica verso tutto ciò che non rientra nei loro canoni, che non sempre coincidono con quelli della Chiesa.
 
Lionel:
Ho credo in Concilio Vaticano II.Sono non e un membro di SSPX neanche un sedevacantiste.
Ad Gentes 7 supportare me e Lumen Gentium 16 non e un
eccezione.
Aless:
Non ho certo visionato ogni articolo del suo blog, per cui spero che le mie impressioni siano sbagliate, ma da quel poco che ho visto sono rimasto sfavorevolmente colpito.
In Christo
Lionel

Difficult choice for Fr.Brian Harrison

It is difficult for Fr.Brian Harrison to accept the position of Fr.Leonard Feeney but now he has no choice.
 
Fr.Brian Harrison has been writing on the subject of extra ecclesiam nulla salus but full of confusion.
 
He would affirm the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and also endorse exceptions.How can you agree with the literal interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney and at the same time say there are exceptions ? To accommodate this irrationality he created a theory. He says that the exceptions are part of the dogma.Whatever that means!?
 This is false. Since the baptism of desire has nothing to do with the dogma.It is irrelevant to Fr.Leonard Feeney.
 
When the Letter of the Holy Office is critical of Fr.Leonard Feeney( in the final passages) it was for disobedience and not heresy.The earlier passages of the Letter of the Holy Office  supported Fr.Leonard Feeney on doctrine.
If the Letter was crtical of Fr.Leonard Feeney for heresy,as the leftist media allege, then it means  the Letter has made the same error as Fr.Brian Harrison and Robert Sungenis.It would have been an oversight of the cardinal who issued the Letter.Then of course the Letter and Vatican Council II would contradict Traditon. It would contradict the dogma on salvation and the Syllabus of Errors.

Fr.Brian Harrison would reject Tradition and he would deny that he held the literal interpretation of the dogma on salvation.He would also deny that he was anti-Semitic.
 
In his writings on the Internet he has made the same fundamental error,as Robert Sungenis and other apologists, in assuming that the 'exceptions' are exceptions because they are physically visible to us.
Only because the dead-saved-and-now-in-Heaven are real for him; personally known in Heaven and on earth;physically visible to him in 2013, that there are exceptions to the interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney. Now he is in a difficult position. If he accepts that there cannot be known exceptions to the dogma; that we do not know any such case in the present times, then he would have to endorse the literal interpretation of the dogma, on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.

He would rather discuss if the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance are exceptions to the dogma instead of the real issue : are the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance visible for us, for them to be exceptions ?
 
Here begins the problem for him.With no known exceptions it means the Church; the Letter of the Holy Office 1949, Vatican Council II etc, is affirming the 'rigorous interpretation' of Fr.Leonard Feeney.This he rejects, including any charge of anti-Semitism.So now what is he to do ?
 
Just say that all this is confusing and come across to his community and others, as a liberal, who accepts visible-to-us baptism of desire ? Or does the  theological magazine with which he is associated with now support Fr.Leonard Feeney ?
 
Does he go back  to his politically correct position and not make any big change in his life ? Will he affirm the irrational and the falsehood?
He will claim that he can see the dead -saved. And he is not a 'feeneyite'. Is this what is important for him ?.-Lionel Andrades

Robert Sungenis has no response : errors on his video recorded talks

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2013/05/robert-sungenis-has-no-response-errors.html#links

Brian Harrison OS (born 1945 in Sydney, Australia) is an Australian-born Roman Catholic priest and theologian. Harrison is a prolific writer on religious issues and an emeritus professor of theology at the Pontifical Catholic University of Puerto Rico (1989–2007). He is also an associate editor of "Living Tradition", a publication of the Roman Theological Forum hosted by the Oblates of Wisdom in St Louis, Missouri, United States, where Harrison currently lives at the order's study center. The forum's website contains many articles by Harrison, including one of the very few serious theological analyses carried out so far regarding biblical and Catholic teaching on torture and corporal punishment.-Wikipedia