Wednesday, August 5, 2015

There is a mistake on the webpage of the sedevacantist Most Holy Trinity seminary. No one issues a correction/clarification

Bishop Dolan during an ordination

Lionel Andrades

There is a mistake on the Most
Holy Trinity seminary of the sedevantists.
 No one issues. a correction/clarification.

'The Seminary professes that Vatican II 
and the doctrinal, disciplinary and liturgical
 reforms...' states the webpage of 
the seminary.

The seminary
 assumes LG 16 is refers to an explicit
 case which is an exception to EENS
 so Vatican Council II is a break
The Most Holy
 Trinity Seminary(Florida) is making the 
same error as Wikipedia , the liberals 
and the Jewish Left.
-Lionel Andrades

Wikipedia and Most Holy Trinity,
Florida sedevacantist seminary make 
the same error

2. The Seminary professes that Vatican II and the 
doctrinal, disciplinary and liturgical reforms which
 have proceeded from it are substantial  
alterations of the Catholic Faith. It professes 
that these heretical, evil, and blasphemous
 reforms can in no way proceed from the 
Roman Catholic Church, since she is 
infallible in her doctrines,
The seminary faculty and students assume LG
 16 refer to known and visible cases. They use
 this irrational premise to infer that there are
 known exceptions to the rigorist 
intepretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam
 nulla salus.

 since she is infallible in her doctrines
The dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus was 
an infallible teaching and it was uphold by 
the magisterium until 1949. Before 1949 
no magisterium inferred that the baptism 
of desire and being saved in invincible 
ignorance were known and explicit 
to be exceptions to the rigorist 
interpretation of the dogma.
So the seminary holds the post 1949
 position initiated by the Letter of 
the Holy Office. This is a contradiction
 of the pre-1949 teaching on the
 infallible teaching.The pre 1949
 magisterium teaching is accepted
 by the liberals and the Vatican Curia.
This is a mistake. Since how can
 unknown cases be known 
exceptions to the traditional 
interpretation of the dogma?
Where were the exceptions
 in 1949 to the Feeneyite
 version of the dogma? 
What were their names?
Who at the Holy Family
 Monastery, Florida knows 
of an exception to the 
Feeneyite version of the
 dogma in 2015?-Lionel Andrades

No comments: