Thursday, September 18, 2014

Did Cardinal Raymond Burke enter where Cardinal Pell and Mons.Leuzzi feared to tread ?

I had asked Cardinal George Pell,in writing, two questions which he would not answer.1 The same two questions on the Catholic Faith Mons.Leuzzi, an auxiliary bishop in Rome would refuse to anwser.Both of them had time to review the two questions and they chose not to answer them.
Those two questions were at the centre of the appeal to Cardinal Raymond  Burke (Sept.5,2014) .Here is link to the original post on this blog Eucharist and Mission.
 
September 5, 2014
Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate appeal to the Signatura with the following facts
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/09/franciscan-sisters-of-immaculater.html

Did Cardinal Burke read the blog post and then disuss the issue with Cardinal Gerhard Muller, Prefect of thet Congergation for the Doctrine of the Faith ? Or did he consult Cardinal Joao Braz de Aviz ,Prefect of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life and Fr.Fidenzio Volpi Ofm.Cap, the Apostolic Commissioner of the Franciscans of the Immaculate ?
 
Was Cardinal Burke asking them for an answer to the two questions ? Since it was related to Vatican Council II which the Franciscans of the Immaculate have to accept to offer the Traditional Latin Mass and have their situation regularised.
Did someone ask Pope Francis to put an end to this issue and remove Cardinal Burke from the influential office?
Cardinal Burke had already given a decision on an appeal made by the Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate limiting the power of the Apostolic Visitator.The decision was favourable for the Sisters.
Now if Cardinal Burke answered to the two questions, or had them answered by some Vatican official it would mean that years of propaganda on Vatican Council II would be undone.Catholics would see through the lies, the hyporcisy and the farce.It would mean Cardinal Richard Cushing, teh Archbishop of Boston and the Jesuits there were in heresy and an injustice was done to Fr.Leonard Feeney and the St. Benedict Centers.It would mean that the 'magisterium' made an objective mistake. The Holy Office 1949 got it wrong.
Most important of all it would mean that the Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate could accept Vatican Council II ( without an irrational premise) and still affirm the ecclesiology of the Traditional Latin Mass.Vatican Council II would be traditional on other religions and Christian communities and this would not be acceptable to the Jewish Left.
Here are the two questions which Cardinal Pell refused to answer.
TWO QUESTIONS
1) Do we personally know the dead now saved in invincible ignorance, a good conscience (LG 16) etc,can we see them, are they physically visible to us in 2014 ?

2) Since we do not know any of these cases, in real life, they are not visible for us, there are no known exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, or Ad Gentes 7 which states 'all' need 'faith and baptism' for salvation ?
These two questions can be seen in the original  appeal.
Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate appeal to the Signatura with the following facts
The Franciscan Sisters made an appeal to the Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura against an arbitrary attribution of power and the Signatura admitted they were right by limiting the Apostolic Visitator’s power .
The Visitators told the nuns... they urgently needed a “re-education” program according to the criteria of Vatican II.-Rorate Caeili
 
 Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate appeal to the Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura with the following facts.

1. The Excommunication of Fr.Leonard Feeney, if it was for Catholic doctrine, was a mistake since cases of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance are not known in real life. They are invisible for us. Invisible cases cannot be exceptions to all needing the baptism of water for salvation in 2014. They are irrelevant to the literal and traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. It is common knowledge that we cannot see the dead who are now in Heaven.Even a non Catholic will tell you that if something does not exist it cannot be an exception.
 2. So there was an error in the Catechism of the Catholic Church(1257) when it says with reference to the necessity of the Baptism of Water that 'God is not limited to the Sacraments'. Upon this error the Balamand Declaration of the International Theological Commission (ITC) says there is no more an ecumenism of return (N.30).While Christianity and the World Religions and The Hope Of Salvation for Infants who die without being baptized of the ITC wrongly infers that there are known exceptions to the literal interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney.
 3.The Letter of the Holy Office 1949, during the pontificate of Pope PIus XII, was wrong when it inferred that the baptism of desire/ implicit desire and being saved in invincible ignorance were exceptions to the traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.It was an error when they expected Fr.Leonard Feeney of Boston to claim that he could see persons saved with the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance. He correctly refused to state that there was known salvation outside the Church i.e there was someone who did not need 'faith and baptism' for salvation.
4.Similarly those saved with ' a ray of the Truth'(NA 2), imperfect communion with the Church(UR 3), invincible ignorance(LG 16), elements of sanctification and truth (LG 8),substitit it (LG 8), seeds of the Word (LG 8) etc are invisible for us. So they cannot be exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Ad Gentes 7 which says all need faith and baptism for salvation.
So Ad Gentes 7 supports Feeneyism and NA 2 etc are not exceptions to Feeneyism.
Vatican Council II is traditional on other religions and Christian communities.
Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, Muslims etc need faith and baptism (AG 7) to avoid Hell and go to Heaven and Orthodox Christians,Protestants etc need Catholic Faith, which include the Sacraments through which Jesus saves, and the faith and moral teachings of the Catholic Church to avoid mortal sin and preserve Sanctifying Grace.
Cardinal Joao Braz de Aviz ,Prefect of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life and Fr.Fidenzio Volpi Ofm.Cap, the Apostolic Commissioner of the Franciscans of the Immaculate, must be asked to affirm a rational Vatican Council II.Ask them to clarify that this is the Vatican Council II which they expect the Franciscans of the Immaculate to accept.
They must be asked to clarify that they do not expect the Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate, to accept Vatican Council II in which all references to salvation are considered to be visible for us instead of invisible.
According to Canon Law they are expected to accept all the teachings of the Catholic Church. Cardinal Joao Braz de Aviz and Fr.Fidenzio Volpi must accept Vatican Council II in agreement with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was interpreted over the centuries, by the Church Councils, popes and saints.-Lionel Andrades 




 The Vatican Curia, would  have opposed a public discussion of the two questions and the appeal of the Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate.For years they have avoided commenting on this blog. Cardinal Burke was different.Cardinal Raymond Burke is known to have  announced that the US presidential candidate John Kerry would not be allowed to receive communion because of his pro-abortion stance. He also  excommunicated two women who claimed they were ordained by another woman who was a bishop of the Catholic Church.So, Cardinal Burke must have read the appeal and with his honesty and sense of justice could have reviewed it.For him the teachings of the Church cannot change and the appeal above is clear.The  Sisters were being asked to accept a new and irrational version of Vatican Council II and other magisterial documents.Cardinal Joao Braz de Aviz was violating Canon Law.
Where Cardinal Pell and other bishops would fear to tread Cardinal Burke would not be afraid.-Lionel Andrades

1.

CARDINAL GEORGE PELL FINALLY SAYS HE CANNOT ANSWER IN ROME TWO QUESTIONS ABOUT THE CATHOLIC FAITH  http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/05/cardinal-george-pell-finally-says-he.html#links

2
 

Did Cardinal Burke decide in the Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate appeal that Cardinal Joao Braz de Aviz and Fr.Fidenzio Volpi must accept Vatican Council II in agreement with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus?

Cardinal Raymond Burke,Prefect of the Apostolic Trubunal (Signatura) lost his office  since he saw  the truth  ? He decided that:
1.The excommunication of Fr.Leonard Feeney, if it was for Catholic doctrine, was a mistake since cases of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance are not known in real life. This is related to the Franciscans of the Immaculate's acceptance of Vatican Council II.
2. So there was an error in the Catechism of the Catholic Church(1257) when it says with reference to the necessity of the Baptism of Water that 'God is not limited to the Sacraments'. While Christianity and the World Religions and The Hope Of Salvation for Infants who die without being baptized of the ITC wrongly infers that there are known exceptions to the literal interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney. It is with this irrational inference that the Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate have to accept Vatican Council II.
3.The Letter of the Holy Office 1949, during the pontificate of Pope PIus XII, was wrong when it inferred that the baptism of desire/ implicit desire and being saved in invincible ignorance were exceptions to the traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.No one at the Vatican is admitting this.
4.Similarly those saved with ' a ray of the Truth'(NA 2), imperfect communion with the Church(UR 3), invincible ignorance(LG 16), elements of sanctification and truth (LG 8),substitit it (LG 8), seeds of the Word (LG 8) etc are invisible for us. They cannot be exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Ad Gentes 7 which says all need faith and baptism for salvation.
So Ad Gentes 7 supports Feeneyism and NA 2 etc are not exceptions to Feeneyism.Vatican Council II is traditional on other religions and Christian communities.
Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, Muslims etc need faith and baptism (AG 7) to avoid Hell and go to Heaven and Orthodox Christians,Protestants etc need Catholic Faith, which include the Sacraments through which Jesus saves, and the faith and moral teachings of the Catholic Church to avoid mortal sin and preserve Sanctifying Grace.
Cardinal Joao Braz de Aviz ,Prefect of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life and Fr.Fidenzio Volpi Ofm.Cap, the Apostolic Commissioner of the Franciscans of the Immaculate, were asked to affirm a rational Vatican Council II and clarify that
this is the Vatican Council II which they expect the Franciscans
of the Immaculate to accept.
 
They were asked to clarify that they do not expect the Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate, to accept Vatican Council II in which all references to salvation are considered to be visible for us instead of invisible.
According to Canon Law Cardinal Joao Braz de Aviz and Fr.Fidenzio Volpi  are expected to accept all the teachings of the Catholic Church. Cardinal Joao Braz de Aviz and Fr.Fidenzio Volpi must accept Vatican Council II in agreement with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was interpreted over the centuries, by the Church Councils, popes and saints.
Here is the original report on this blog Eucharist and Mission.
September 5, 2014
Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate appeal to the Signatura with the following facts
-Lionel Andrades
 
 
September 17, 2014






Homosexual Acts Cannot be Approved or Celebrated by the Church – Here’s Why - Msgr. Charles Pope

In recent years, homosexuality has frequently been in the news. An increasingly nationwide effort to make homosexual acts something to celebrate has gained great ground and sowed serious confusion even among those who describe themselves as Christian and Catholic. Hence, it is necessary once again to instruct on this matter and to reassert what Scripture plainly teaches and why the Church cannot affirm what the world demands we affirm.
An essential fact is that the Scriptures are very clear in unambiguously, uncompromisingly declaring homosexual acts as a serious sin and as disordered. “Disordered” here means that they are acts that are not ordered to their proper end or purpose. Sexual acts are, by their very nature, ordered to procreation and to the bonding of the mother and father who will raise the children conceived by their sexual intimacy. These ends or purposes have been intrinsically joined by God, and we are not to separate what what God has joined. In the Old Testament, Scripture describes the sinful and disordered quality of homosexual acts by the use of the word “abomination,” and in the New Testament, St. Paul calls homosexual acts “paraphysin” (contrary to nature).
Attempts by some to reinterpret Scripture to mean something else are fanciful, at best, and use theories that require twisted logic and questionable historical views in an attempt to set aside the very plain meaning of the texts.
Likewise in the wider culture, among those who do not accept Scripture, there has been an increasingly insistent refusal to acknowledge what the design of the human body plainly discloses: that the man is for the woman, and the woman is for the man. The man is not for the man, nor the woman for the woman. This is plainly set forth in the design of our bodies. The outright refusal to see what is plainly visible and literally built into our bodies is not only a sign of intellectual stubbornness and darkness (cf Rom 1:18, 21), but it also leads to significant issues with health, even to deadly diseases.
And we who believe in the definitive nature of scriptural teaching on all aspects of human sexuality are not merely considered out-of-date by many in our culture, but are being increasingly pressured to affirm what we cannot reasonably affirm. Cardinal Francis George recently expressed the current situation in this way:
In recent years, society has brought social and legislative approval to all types of sexual relationships that used to be considered “sinful.” Since the biblical vision of what it means to be human tells us that not every friendship or love can be expressed in sexual relations, the church’s teaching on these issues is now evidence of intolerance for what the civil law upholds and even imposes. What was once a request to live and let live has now become a demand for approval. The “ruling class,” those who shape public opinion in politics, in education, in communications, in entertainment, is using the civil law to impose its own form of morality on everyone. We are told that, even in marriage itself, there is no difference between men and women, although nature and our very bodies clearly evidence that men and women are not interchangeable at will in forming a family. Nevertheless, those who do not conform to the official religion, we are warned, place their citizenship in danger [1].
Whatever pressures many may wish to place on the Church to conform, however they may wish to “shame” us into compliance by labeling us with adjectives such as bigoted, homophobic, or intolerant, we cannot comply with their demands. We must remain faithful to scriptural teaching, to our commitment to natural law, and to Sacred Tradition. We simply cannot affirm things such as fornication and homosexual acts and reject the revelation of the body as it comes from God.
What some call intolerance or “hatred” is, for us who believe, rather, a principled stance wherein we see ourselves as unable to overrule the clear and unambiguous teaching of Holy Scripture. And this teaching exists at every stage of revelation, from the opening pages right through to the final books of Sacred Writ. The Church has no power to override what God has said; we cannot cross out sentences or tear pages from the Scripture. Neither can we simply reverse Sacred Tradition or pretend that the human body, as God has designed it, does not manifest what it clearly does.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church announces this principled stance with eloquence and with an understanding of the difficulties encountered by those with same-sex attraction:
Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.” They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.
The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.
Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection (CCC 2357-2359).
We can speak no other way. We do not detest those of same sex-attraction, but we as a Church owe them the same truth we have always proclaimed as coming from God, and out of respect we must hold them to the same standards of chastity by which all must live.
There can be no sexual intercourse for any who are not in a valid heterosexual marriage. We cannot give approval for it; we do not have the power to do this, no matter how insistent, forceful, or even punitive the demands that we do so become. This will not change because it cannot change.
Homosexuals are not being singled out in this matter. As we saw in yesterday’s post, fornication (pre-marital sex) is also set forth by scripture and tradition as a very serious mortal sin (cf Eph 5:5- 7; Gal 5:16-21; Rev 21:5-8; Rev. 22:14-16; Mt. 15:19-20; 1 Cor 6:9-20; Col 3:5-6; 1 Thess 4:1-8; 1 Tim 1:8-11; Heb 13:4). It cannot be approved no matter how widespread its acceptance becomes. One standard of sexual norms applies to all people, whatever their orientation.
Sadly those of unalterable same-sex attraction have no recourse to marriage. But all of us bear burdens of one sort or another, and not everyone is able to partake in everything life offers. For the sake of holiness, heroic witness is necessary, and many of those with same-sex attraction do live celibately and give admirable witness to the power of grace.
God must have the final word in this. And so I present to you here some selections from Sacred Scripture that clearly teach against homosexual acts. The witness of Scripture in this regard is very consistent across all the ages of biblical Revelation. From the opening pages of Holy Writ to the final books, homosexual acts, along with fornication and adultery, are unambiguously forbidden and described as gravely sinful. In addition, homosexual acts, because they are contrary to nature and to the revelation of the body and the nature of the sexual act, are often described as acts of depravity or as an “abomination.” Some consider such words unpleasant or hurtful. I understand, but they are the words that Scripture uses. Here is a sample of Scriptural teaching against homosexual acts:
  1. You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination (Leviticus 18: 22).
  2. If a man lies with a male as with a female, both of them have committed an abomination (Lev 20:13).
  3. Likewise, the story of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah depicts, among other things, the sinfulness of homosexual activity. It is too lengthy to reproduce here in its entirety, but you can read about it in Genesis 19.
  4. For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and wickedness of men who by their wickedness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them…in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse; they became futile in their thinking and their senseless minds were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools…For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a base mind and to improper conduct (Romans 1:18ff).
  5. Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanders nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God (1 Corinthians 6-9).
  6. The law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, the sexually immoral, for those who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine, in accordance with the gospel of the glory of the blessed God with which I have been entrusted.(1 Timothy 1: 8-11).
And this is the testimony of Sacred Scripture. To these could be added other passages, along with a long list of quotes from the Fathers and from Sacred Tradition, with Councils and other teaching documents from the earliest days of the Church until today.
To those who like to object that Jesus himself never spoke of homosexual acts, I would give these three responses:
  1. It was not a disputed matter among the Jews to whom he preached.
  2. Jesus said to his apostles, “He who hears you hears me.” And therefore Jesus does speak through St. Paul and the other epistle writers.
  3. The same Holy Spirit that authored the Gospels also authored the Epistles. There are not different authors or levels of authority in Sacred Writ. What St. Paul says is no less authoritative or inspired than what the evangelists recorded.
The teaching of the Church regarding the sinfulness of homosexual acts, fornication, and adultery cannot change, attested to as they are in Sacred Scripture and Tradition. The Church can only offer the truth to all the faithful and to all in this world, along with her promise of God’s mercy to those who seek repentance and who now desire to live chastely. To those who refuse, she continues to give warning and to pray both for conversion and for rescue from the deceptions of the world and the evil one.
Cardinal George summarized well both the reason we cannot approve homosexual acts and the solution of celibacy for those of same-sex attraction: The biblical vision of what it means to be human tells us that not every friendship or love can be expressed in sexual relations [2]. Clear and concise. Thank you, Cardinal George.
For more information and support for those who have same-sex attraction, see here: Courage


 
 
 

Catholic Divine Retreat Centre, Kerala,India draws hundreds of thousands of pilgrims every year

Immagine di copertina
https://www.facebook.com/mariojoseph33

Mario Joseph, ex Muslim Imam speaking to pilgrims.



https://www.facebook.com/DivineRetreat#!/DivineRetreat/photos/a.209389805832039.37930.125735650864122/209389812498705/?type=1&theater


The Divine Retreat Centre is the largest Catholic retreat centre in the world. Over 10 million pilgrims from all over the world have attended retreats here since 1990. It is an achievement possible only through the grace of God. The centre which started as a preaching ministry, has now evolved into a home of love by the providence of God. May God's grace be with you.
Fr. Augustine Vallooran VC
http://www.drcm.org/contact-us/enquiries

Blackfen parishioners ask the bishop to accept Vatican Council II

Make it known to the bishop and others that Vatican Council II without the irrational inference is pro extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Keep Ad Gentes 7 1 before you which says all need faith and baptism for salvation .It  is pro-extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
Then tell the bishop that Nostra Aetate 2 , i.e being saved with 'a ray of the Truth' and allegedly without the baptism of water, does not refer to known cases in 2014. So NA 2, LG 16,LG 8, UR 3 etc are not explicit exceptions to all Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, Muslims and others needing 'faith and baptism'(AG 7) to go to Heaven and avoid Hell-fires.
Tell your bishop and Fr.Steven Fischer that you affirm Vatican Council II (AG 7) as you do the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.Ask him to also do the same in public.Inform your non Catholic friends about what the Catholic Church actually teaches. Tell them that your bishop is afraid to speak the truth.
Those who attend the Traditional Latin Mass or the Novus Ordo Mass in Southwark,England can endorse Vatican Council II (AG 7) and also the Syllabus of Errors and the Catechism of the Pope Pius X knowing that Vatican Council II is Feeneyite.
Tell your bishop that you affirm the Feeneyite Catechism of the Catholic Church (1994) since we do not know any of case of 'God not being limited to the Sacraments' (CCC 1257) in 2014. CCC 1257 would agree with you,  when it states 'God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism'.
So when the Catechism (1257) says 'God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments' there is no contradiction for you. Since you do not know any one this year or in the past years who was saved without the baptism of water.
Tell your bishop that all salvation in Heaven is not physically visible to you on earth. It is with this principle that you interpret magisterial texts.
Of course you accept being saved with invincible ignorance (LG 16) as a hypothetical possibility known only to God. There  may not have been a single such case over the last 200 years or more. The saints tell us that God has sent people back to earth only to be baptized with water. They were not sent to Hell. So St.Emerentina and the martrys who allegedly died without the baptism of water, could have come back to earth to be baptised with water.Any way St. Emerentina and the martryrs of the past are not exceptions this year for all needing the baptism of water in the Catholic Church for salvation.
Everyone saved with invincible ignorance, baptism of desire, a ray of the Truth, good and holy things in other religions(NA), imperfect communion with the Church (UR 3) seeds of the Word (AG 11) etc would be saved with  the baptism of water.Any way they are hypothetical so they do not contradict extra ecclesiam nulla salus or Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II.They are irrelevant to the dogma. This was the confusion which has come into the Church with the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.
IMG_5072Make this known to all that this is the official teaching of the Catholic Church, not only according to Tradition, but according to the text of Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church.Affirm the official and traditional teaching of the Church after Vatican Council II and ask your bishop to also do the same  in public.
This is how I affirm Vatican Council II. You can quote me.I simply cite  Ad Gentes 7 and say that Nostra Aetate 2 etc are no exceptions to Ad Gentes 7, since we do not know of any of these cases in 2014.Neither does Vatican Council II say that we know any one saved  without the baptism of water.
The Jewish left is encouraging the closure of the TLM.Since they interpret Vatican Council II in which NA 2,LG 16,LG 8,UR 3 etc are assumed to refer to visible cases on earth who are exceptions to AG 7. They assume that those who attend the TLM reject the new ecclesiology based on there being known exceptions outside the Church; the irrational theory of the dead-saved being visible to us on earth and are living exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.This would contradict their ecumenical and one world religion agenda.
You have to show them,  that Vatican Council II without the irrational premise of NA 2 etc being physically visible to us, affirms the traditional understanding of Church.They may oppose it but this is the official teaching of the Catholic Church according to the text of Vatican Council II, interpreted rationally.So even those who attend the Novus Ordo Mass at Blackfen can be traditional on Vatican Council II doctrine.To assume otherwise is irrational.
-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, Vatican Council II
 
2
1257 The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation. He also commands his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all nations and to baptize them. Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament. The Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude; this is why she takes care not to neglect the mission she has received from the Lord to see that all who can be baptized are "reborn of water and the Spirit." God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments.-Catechism of the Catholic Church
 

Franciscans of the Immaculate at Benevento suppressed

The Franciscans of the Immaculate Institute at the Church of San Pasquale in Benevento,Italy has been closed  according to information received at Messainlatino.

The Franciscans of the Immaculate had for many years been permitted the Traditional Latin Mass at Benevento followed in recent times with daily Eucharistic adoration.
 
They were stopped from offering the Traditional Latin Mass but now even the presence of the religious community at Benevento has been removed.
The Franciscans of the Immaculate were there at Benevento since  June 22, 1990, the Solemnity of the Sacred Heart of Jesus. They were installed there by  Archbishop Carlo Minchiatti with the approval of the Holy Father who signed the decree establishing the Institute of Diocesan Right of the Franciscans of the Immaculate. On the feast of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, there was the profession of  vows of about 30 religious.
-Lionel Andrades