Tuesday, June 24, 2014

Fr. Paul Kramer infers cases of the baptism of desire are visible for us.So they are exceptions to the dogma for him

Fr.Paul Kramer:
Refutation of the Heresy of Feeneyism 1

Dear Feeneyite,

You argue as one who has passed through Alice's looking glass into the irrational realm of the fairies. You stubbornly insist that doctrine of Baptism of Desire & Baptism of Blood is a "common error",
Lionel:
Yes, when it is inferred that the baptism of desire is objectively visible to us and then assumed to be an explicit exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.This is a common error.
No,when it is reasoned that the baptism of desire is not objectively visible to us.Since there are no known cases it cannot be an exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.It does not contradict Fr.Leonard  Feeney.
 
 Fr.Paul Kramer:
and "heresy", that it offends against the dogma of nulla salus extra Ecclesiam (EENS), and has been infallibly condemned by the Council of Trent.
Lionel:
To infer that there are known exceptions to the thrice defined dogma is heresy.
Then to infer that these cases, invisible for us, are visible, is irrational and a falsehood.
 Fr.Paul Kramer:
If that were indeed the case, then what would be the source of this heresy? The source of this "heresy" would be the writings of the Fathers & Doctors of the Church!
 
Lionel:
None of the Fathers and Doctors of the Church have said that the baptism of desire is explicit for us. Reason tells us that it is subjective, theoretical, accepted in principle or faith, only.
No Father or Doctor of the Church has said that the baptism of desire is an exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus. It is a possibility but not an exception to the dogma.
 
 Fr.Paul Kramer:
The worst propagators of this heresy would be the Doctors of the Church, -- and the popes who have either, 1) taught it explicitly, 2) formally approved of it by declaring the authors of this heresy to be Doctors of the Church, 3) by authorizing this heresy to be officially taught by the ordinary & universal magisterium throughout the world (especially in the catechisms and the sacred liturgy), and 4) by never having issued any explicit condennation of it...
Lionel:
They have not said that the baptism of desire is explicit.
-Lionel Andrades
 
1.

DEATH OF LONG ISLAND MAN TIED TO ALLEGED SPANISH APPARITIONS PUTS ACCENT ON A HOST OF MYSTERIES

DEATH OF LONG ISLAND MAN TIED TO ALLEGED SPANISH APPARITIONS PUTS ACCENT ON A HOST OF MYSTERIES


http://www.spiritdaily.com/lomangino.htm

'Successor of St.Peter' interprets Vatican Council II with irrationality : magisterium still makes a factual error

Pope Francis has recommended the interpretation of Vatican Council II according to Archbishop Agostino Marchetto who uses the visible dead inference.

The deceased saved with 'a ray of the Truth'(NA 2) are supposed to be visible-in-the-flesh exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So the traditional ecclesiology, is rejected. It is ideological for the pope.It is 'triumphalism'. This is the pro-Left, masonic term.

In his last meeting with some of the Franciscans of the Immaculate on June 10 ( without the founder Fr.Stefano Mannelli and most of the Friars), the pope indicated that the Franciscans of the Immaculate seminary is to remain closed. The seminary was not accepting Vatican Council II with the visible-dead inference. It rejected the heretical version of Vatican Council II, the one with the false premise.The inference produces an irrational, non traditional conclusion.This is the version of Vatican Council II approved by the 'orthodoxy of the successor of St.Peter' .It is also approved by the Jewish Left rabbis.

It may be mentioned that during the pontificate of Pope Pius XII it was assumed that the baptism of desire/ implicit desire referred to cases, visible in the flesh.Then it was inferred that these visible-deceased were exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.This is a factual error. We cannot see the dead.So how can they be exceptions? Yet this error is inferred in the text of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.

Pope Francis is using this factual error in the interpretation of Vatican Council II. It is a break with the past and is appreciated by the political Left whom the pope supports.It is also considered ideologically correct.It is a permit to offer the Traditional Latin Mass for a Catholic priest during this pontificate.It is the denial of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
This traditional version of extra ecclesiam nulla salus resulted in Fr.Leonard Feeney being maligned and excommunicated by the Holy Office, and the Archbishop and Jesuits of Boston. Since this former Jesuit priest had to tell a lie.He did not.He was expected to say, that he knew of  known exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma on salvation.

-Lionel Andrades
http://catholicforum.forumotion.com/t1239-pope-meets-franciscans-of-the-immaculate-seminary-to-remain-closed



July 2, 2010

ROBERT KENNEDY ASKED RICHARD CUSHING TO SUPPRESS FR.LEONARD FEENEY

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2010/07/robert-kennedy-asked-richard-cushing-to.html