Thursday, December 31, 2015

Dave Armstrong liberal Catholic apologist who interprets magisterial documents with an irrationality

Image result for dave armstrong catholic
from the blog Vox Cantoris
Dave Armstrong says: 

 I have twenty officially published books with six different publishers, including most of the largest Catholic ones (including four bestsellers in the field).
Lionel: 
Dave Armstrong is a liberal on the issue of salvation.He rejects the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. He interprets it with the objective error of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.It is no surprise that the publishers accept his books.
_______________________________
Fr. Hardon Guild table
 My first book has a Foreword by Servant of God, Fr. John A. Hardon, SJ, who was Blessed Mother Teresa's catechist and a close adviser to Blessed Pope Paul VI.
Lionel:



Cardinal Raymond Burke approved the article. Fr.Hardon like Cardinal Marchetti makes this wrong inference in the article.
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/03/cardinal-raymond-burke-approved-article.html

Rome made a mistake in 1949 and Fr.John Hardon did not notice it 
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/03/rome-made-mistake-in-1949-and-frjohn_3.html

The Catechumen you refer to is a hypothetical case for you and me. So it is not an explicit exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus : Fr.John Hardon too did not notice this.

____________________________
Related image
 My second book has a Foreword by Dr. Scott Hahn. I've been endorsed by virtually all of the leading apologists, have been interviewed on Catholic radio over 20 times, including twice on "Catholic Answers Live". 
Lionel: 
He is endorsed by the liberal Catholic apologists who interpret magisterial documents using Cushingism instead of Feeneyism. If they interpreted Vatican Council II with Feeneyism they would not be allowed to appear on EWTN. The local bishop, to protect himself from the political Left, would disown them .This would affect their income as apologists. So they change Church doctrines to remain politically correct."Why not?", they may say, since "Popes, cardinals and bishops are also doing it".
Jimmy Akins, Catholic Answers present an irrational version of Catholic salvation
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/07/jimmy-akins-catholic-answers-present.html

Would Catholic Answers apologists Tim Staples and Jimmy Akin be approved by Bishop Robert H.Brom in the diocese of San Diego if they did not lie ?
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2013/06/would-catholic-answers-apologists-tim.html


Catholic Answers calls being a full fledged member of the Catholic Church extremism: imprimatur from the Bishop of San Diego, USA http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2013/06/catholic-answers-calls-being-full.html

LUMEN GENTIUM 14: FUTILE DISCUSSION ON CATHOLIC ANSWERS
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/10/lumen-gentium-14-futile-discussion-on.html
_____________________________________
Image result for Photo of a liberal
I have Imprimaturs, including from my own bishop, a column every other week for "The Michigan Catholic," worked for The Coming Home Network for three years, but I am merely self-appointed and not even entitled to use the title "apologist" to describe myself. What the heck am I, then? 
Lionel:  
'What the heck am I, then?' asks Dave. A liberal Catholic apologist who like liberal bishops and the political Left reject the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) with an innovation. They all interpret Vatican Council II as a break with the dogma EENS, the Syllabus of Errors and Tradition, by using the irrational Cushingite  innovation.
They refuse to interpret Vatican Council II and the dogma EENS with traditional Feeneyism,with the exclusivist ecclesiology.Their innovative tool is assuming invisible cases are visible and these 'ghosts' are living exceptions to exclusivist interpretation of the dogma.
Many do this out of ignorance but Dave Armstrong has been informed over these years.
_______________
Related image
I've made my living by writing apologetics these past 14 years. Oh, I forgot: I'm just one "of these sorts." That's what I'll put on my tax form, for occupation]

[I am an apologist; see the above.
Lionel: 
A liberal  and heretical apologist like Mark Shea.They reject a defined dogma of the Church by reinterpreting it with an irrationality. They then change the Nicene Creed with that same irrationality . Vatican Council II is presented with the same irrationality to produce a non traditional and heretical conclusion.They are supported by the contemporary liberal magisterium, especially the bishops of the USCCB.
________________________

 I have attended a traditional Latin Mass since 1991, attended the Tridentine Mass at midnight on Christmas (obviously because I hate it so much) and was in favor of widespread access to it 16 years before Pope Benedict XVI decreed it.
Lionel:
Yes it is the Tridentine Mass with the new ecclesiology, interpreted with Cushingism.This is also the common ecclesiology of the Novus Ordo Mass.
________________________

 I've also written many articles favoring liturgical positions taken by mainstream traditionalists: one of whom -- a person with a major traditionalist website: Unam Sanctam Catholicam -- I invited to my house a few weeks ago to give a talk on the TLM.
Lionel:
He also supports the Tridentine Mass with the new ecclesiology. He is a Cushingite.With him it is the old Mass with the new ecclesiology and he does not seem to know what is the exact cause,  the basis of the new ecclesiology.
He sees the result in Vatican Council II and assumes the Council is the cause.For him it is Vatican Council II interpreted with Cushingism. If he interprets Vatican Council II with Feeneyism ( there are no known exceptions to the exclusivist ecclesiology of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus they will not approve of it at the Angelicum University. Also his bishop will not approve it. Boniface is a good person and means well but he is following the general confusion on this issue.
_________________________

Dave Armstrong pulls down all comments and does not answer questions http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/03/dave-armstrong-pulls-down-all-comments.html




Dave Armstrong let me ask you what I have asked Fr.Angelo Geiger F.I
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/03/dave-armstrong-let-me-ask-you-what-i.html#links


Dave Armstrong interprets Vatican Council II and accepts the Novus Ordo Mass using the irrational premise

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/03/dave-armstrong-interprets-vatican.html

-Lionel Andrades
__________________________________



Dave Armstrong, Mark Shea adjust Church doctrine to serve their financial interests

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/12/dave-armstrong-mark-shea-adjust-church.html
  


http://voxcantor.blogspot.it/2015/12/dave-armstrong-responds-on-fb-vox-is.html

FEMINISTS CLASH WITH PRO-LIFERS IN BOLOGNA

Feminists Clash With Pro-Lifers in Bologna

by Church Militant    •  December 27, 2015   

By Juliana Freitag
Feminists clashed with pro-lifers December 19 in Bologna, Italy. The pro-life group calls itself "No. 194" — a reference to the 1978 Italian Law 194 that allows women to abort their children up to three months into the pregnancy, and up to five months if it's a therapeutic abortion.
The group had originally requested a permit to pray the Rosary for nine hours in front of Bologna's biggest hospital, Hospital Maggiore — one of Italy's most important healthcare centers. It took more than six months before they got their permit, and even then the group was only allowed to pray for four and a half hours, and on a date different from the one requested, in a small square practically hidden in the Bologna center. 
"Bologna is like North Korea," says Pietro Guerini, president of the group. "They stop us from praying. We pray in front of so many hospitals in Italy. Only in this city, in this North Korean enclave, we have problems."
It's the second time the group had their request to pray directly in front of Maggiore denied. Their first public sit-in occurred last June, this time in the much more open and spacious San Domenico square. In both demonstrations they had to be protected by police, which has become the standard in Bologna for any conservative — particularly Catholic — rallies.
In June, the secretary of Bologna's Democratic Party — Italy's biggest center-left party — wrote a letter demanding the vigil be banned. "The manner in which the group chooses to manifest and the decision to do so in front of a public hospital, a secular place of healing, is offensive to the citizens and is an expression of intolerance," he wrote.
Regardless of the group's confinement to a small square not visible from the street, the group attracted the rage of the feminist collective "Mujeres Libres" ("Free Women") and their far-left sympathizers, who organized a counter-demonstration on the same day next to the group. Theirwebsite read
We will be there on the 19th to throw them out, to defend Law 194 and to say that this law as it is isn't enough: We want the elimination of Article 9, which gives doctors the right to deny an abortion if their consciences are against it. We want hospitals with no priests. We want to kick the asses of anyone who thinks it's their right to step on our liberty. There's no space in Bologna for pro-lifers and fascists, and there will never be. 
The activists cornered the pro-lifers with their megaphones and slowed down the inflow of people arriving for the public prayer. Many had travelled long distances from multiple cities in Italy to participate.
A member of the pro-life group wrote an indignant letter afterwards to the local newspaper demanding the resignations of both the mayor and police commissioner of Bologna for considering praying in front of a hospital a disturbance to the public order and depriving people of their constitutional right to rally and pray, while allowing these same people to be harrassed by the feminists. 
Not only was the vigil on the hospital grounds denied, but it also seemed impossible for the authorities to find any other place for us on any other day. They finally did find us an 'alternative' place in a completely isolated and inaccessible square, where no one besides the residents ever pass through. ... On the other hand, the police allowed a group of 'wannabe' dictators to assemble in the only spot where we could stand, with their megaphones pointed at us — and the police observed and tolerated all of it. Many people who witnessed the situation have told us that they thought the guards were there to protect the agitators instead of us.
The letter received no response.
On the next day, Sunday, the pro-family group "Sentinelle in piedi" ("Standing Sentinels") gatheredon the same spacious square the pro-life group had originally prayed on on June 7. San Domenico square — home to the Bolognese Dominican convent and the Basilica of San Domenico — was again guarded by heavily armored police, owing to a counter-demonstration from an LGBT group.
The hallmark of the Sentinels' protests — a French movement born in 2013 and which has quickly spread all over Europe — is silent, peaceful witness consisting simply of standing still and reading a book. The conduct is in striking opposition to the behavior of their leftist opponents, who attacked the group in 2014 so violently that since then, every one of the Sentinels' vigils have been accompanied by heavy security. What was originally intended to be a peaceful and serene gathering has become a source of tension in the city owing to the extreme reaction of the LGBT community and their inability to brook any dissent. 

http://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/feminists-clash-with-pro-lifers-in-bologna

Traditionalists need to identify the cause of the old ecclesiology.Ecclesiology should not be identified with the Mass. It is independent of the Mass.

Traditionalists need to identify the cause of the old ecclesiology.Ecclesiology should not be identified with the Mass. It is independent of the Mass.
There can be the old ecclesiology based on the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.So with this old ecclesiology a Catholic can attend Mass knowing that the Church teaches that Jews and other non Catholics need to convert for salvation.
While there can be Catholics who attend the Traditional Latin Mass who affirm the new ecclesiology, the new theology, which comes from the objective mistake made in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 which was not known even to Archbishop Lefebvre.
When the Jewish Left are aware of this they would probably consider Vatican Council II Anti-Semitic.

The Letter made a mistake. Archbishop Lefebvre did not notice it.
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/12/the-letter-made-mistakearchbishop.html

False reasoning from the Letter is all over Vatican Council II: Abp Lefebvre did not notice it -1
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/12/the-false-reasoning-from-letter-is-all.html

False reasoning from the Letter is all over Vatican Council II:Abp Lefebvre did not notice it -2
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/12/the-false-reasoning-from-letter-is-all_30.html
-Lionel Andrades

http://www.lmschairman.org/2015/12/prayer-for-jews-letter-in-tablet.html?showComment=1451507085061#c7151237006196112231


http://www.thejc.com/comment-and-debate/columnists/150713/why-i-have-faith-pope

False reasoning from the Letter is all over Vatican Council II: Abp Lefebvre did not notice it -3

This is the one Church of Christ which in the Creed is professed as one, holy, catholic and apostolic, which our Saviour, after His Resurrection, commissioned Peter to shepherd, and him and the other apostles to extend and direct with authority, which He erected for all ages as "the pillar and mainstay of the truth". This Church constituted and organized in the world as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church, which is governed by the successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him, although many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside of its visible structure. These elements, as gifts belonging to the Church of Christ, are forces impelling toward catholic unity.-Lumen Gentium 8, Vatican Council II
LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE 1949
Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it is necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing.-Letter of the Holy Office

CONCLUSION
it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member

WHY ?
Since 'one may obtain eternal salvation' also 'by desire and longing'.
SO WHAT?
And these cases are known, they are explicit in the present times and so they are exceptions to the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).

HOW CAN THEY BE EXPLICIT FOR US?
Since someone has seen these cases in Heaven saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
Someone knows of persons who will be saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
 
False premise: There are people in Heaven saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church and they are known to us in the present times.
False inference : These persons are known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.So it is not always required that a person be incorporated into the Church actually as a member.
____________________________

LUMEN GENTIUM 8

I
 'although many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside of its visible structure. These elements, as gifts belonging to the Church of Christ, are forces impelling toward catholic unity.'-Lumen Gentium 8, Vatican Council II
FALSE PREMISE: 'among persons known to us'
'many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside of its visible structure. These elements, as gifts belonging to the Church of Christ, are forces impelling toward catholic unity'  (and they are among persons known to us).
 
FALSE INFERENCE : 'so all do not need to convert formally into the Church for salvation'.
These are persons known to us, these 'many elements of sanctification and of truth' who ' are found outside of its visible structure.'   So it is concluded that all do not need to convert formally into the Church for salvation, there is salvation outside the Catholic Church.
_______________________________
 
II
 
'although many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside of its visible structure. These elements, as gifts belonging to the Church of Christ, are forces impelling toward catholic unity.'-Lumen Gentium 8, Vatican Council II
 
CONCLUSION
it is not always required that he ( a non Catholic, a non baptised person ) be incorporated into the Church actually as a member
 
WHY ?
Since 'one may obtain eternal salvation' also 'by desire and longing'. Or being one of the 'elements of sanctification and of truth...found outside of its visible structure', 'gifts belonging to the Church of Christ', 'impelling toward catholic unity'.
 
SO WHAT?
And these cases are known, they are explicit in the present times and so they are exceptions to the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).We personally know non Catholics saved with  'elements of sanctification and of truth...found outside of its visible structure', 'gifts belonging to the Church of Christ', 'impelling toward catholic unity'. We know of cases now already in Heaven, , as such, who do not have 'faith and baptism'. This is the reasoning here.

HOW CAN THEY BE EXPLICIT FOR US?
Since someone has seen these cases in Heaven saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
Someone knows people who will be saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.

Explicit cases? They are seen in the flesh with 'elements of sanctification and truth', outside the Church ?
Yes, since if they are not explicit cases how can they be relevant to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ? They would also have to be objective cases, personally known to be exceptions or relevant to the passage above( in orange), which is  in agreement with the dogma on exclusive salvation.So invisible cases were assumed to be visible and this passage was placed in Vatican Council II. This is the common wrong inference accepted even today.
See the pattern. See how passages referring to speculative, hypothetical cases, known only to God if they existed, are placed in Vatican Council II.Then people are allowed to infer that they are visible cases in the present times. So with the inference they become exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesium nulla salus, the Syllabus of Errors, and the old ecclesiology. They become exceptions to the old understanding of ecumenism and the need for non Catholics to convert into the Church fornally, with faith and baptism.
We see the same pattern of error in Nostra Aetate 2, Unitatis Redintigratio 3, Ad Gentes 7 , Lumen Genttium 8, and so many other passages in Vatican Council II.
The error was not known to Fr. Daniel Couture, Superior General of the SSPX, Canada. He has issued a statement critical of the Vatican Document on Christian-Jewish Dialogue issued recently by the Vatican,under pressure from the Jewish Left. Fr. Couture in his statement has not used the traditional exclusivist ecclesiology, based on the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Since for him NA 2, UR 3, AG 7, LG 8 etc refer to explicit cases which are exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.This is his error and that of the SSPX bishops.
I have shown here how there are no exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus in Vatican Council II only if the text is interpreted with NA 2, UR 3, AG 7, LG 8 referring to invisible and not visible cases.
NA 2, UR 3, AG 7, LG 8 seen with Feeneyism ( there are no known, explicit, objective exceptions to the dogma EENS) are not a break with Tradition. However seen with Cushingism ( there are known, explicit, objective exceptions to the exclusivist intepretation of the dogma EENS) they are exceptions to Tradition, a break with the past.
_________________________________
-Lionel Andrades
 

False reasoning from the Letter is all over Vatican Council II: Abp Lefebvre did not notice it -2 http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/12/the-false-reasoning-from-letter-is-all_30.html

False reasoning from the Letter is all over Vatican Council II: Abp Lefebvre did not notice it -1 http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/12/the-false-reasoning-from-letter-is-all.html

The Letter made a mistake. Archbishop Lefebvre did not notice it

Fr. Daniel Couture, the District Superior of Canada issues a controversial statement critical of the Vatican Document on the Jews http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/12/fr-daniel-couture-district-superior-of.html


Wednesday, December 30, 2015

Dave Armstrong, Mark Shea adjust Church doctrine to serve their financial interests.


Dave Armstrong is a liberal on the issue of salvation.He rejects the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) and the old ecclesiology associated with the Traditinal Latin Mass. Mark Shea is the same.They know their position is irrational but they want to remain politically correct with the Jewish Left.They do not want to be considered anti-Semitic so they adjust Church doctrine to serve their financial interests.They earn a living writing on the Catholic Church.

Dave Armstrong rejects the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus since for him there are known exceptions to the traditional interpretation. For him the baptism of desire and blood and being saved in invincible ignorance refer to cases known in the present times, who have been saved/ going to be saved, without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.

Since there are known exceptions to the strict interpretation of the dogma on exclusive salvation, he and Mark Shea, assume LG 16 (saved in invincible ignorance), refer to objective cases in 2015-2016. So LG 16 and Vatican Council II is a break with EENS and the Syllabus of Errors. So there is NO tension with the Jewish Left.This is also Patheos' position on Vatican Council II and the dogma EENS.Expedient. Convenient. Selfish.

They will not comment or support me, when I say I interpret Vatican Council II and the dogma without known exceptions. I use Feeneyism, and not their Cushingism as a theology.
They do not want to discuss this. Since it would be frightening for them to affirm an anti-Semitic version of Vatican Council II, even if it is rational, traditional and non heretical.-Lionel Andrades

http://voxcantor.blogspot.it/2015/12/dave-arrmstrong-stop-you-hypocritical.html

False reasoning from the Letter is all over Vatican Council II: Abp Lefebvre did not notice it -2

14. 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 and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church. Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.
They are fully incorporated in the society of the Church who, possessing the Spirit of Christ accept her entire system and all the means of salvation given to her, and are united with her as part of her visible bodily structure and through her with Christ, who rules her through the Supreme Pontiff and the bishops. The bonds which bind men to the Church in a visible way are profession of faith, the sacraments, and ecclesiastical government and communion. He is not saved, however, who, though part of the body of the Church, does not persevere in charity. He remains indeed in the bosom of the Church, but, as it were, only in a "bodily" manner and not "in his heart."All the Church's children should remember that their exalted status is to be attributed not to their own merits but to the special grace of Christ. If they fail moreover to respond to that grace in thought, word and deed, not only shall they not be saved but they will be the more severely judged.Catechumens who, moved by the Holy Spirit, seek with explicit intention to be incorporated into the Church are by that very intention joined with her. With love and solicitude Mother Church already embraces them as her own.-Lumen Gentium 14, Vatican Council II

LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE 1949
Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it is necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing.-Letter of the Holy Office 

CONCLUSION
it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member

WHY ?
Since 'one may obtain eternal salvation' also  'by desire and longing'.

SO WHAT?
And these cases are known, they are explicit in the present times and so they are exceptions to the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).

HOW CAN THEY BE EXPLICIT FOR US?
Since someone has seen these cases in Heaven saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
Someone knows of persons who will be saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.

False premise: There are people in Heaven saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church and they are known to us in the present times.
False inference : These persons are known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.So it is not always required that a person be incorporated into the Church actually as a member.

LUMEN GENTIUM 14

I
 Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.- Lumen Gentium 14, Vatican Council II

FALSE PREMISE: 'among persons known to us'
Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved  (and they are among persons known to us

FALSE INFERENCE : 'so all do not need to convert formally into the Church for salvation'.
These persons known to us,  'who know that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, and have refused to enter or to remain in it' , are known to us , they are among persons known to us, and so they are exceptions to  all needing  to convert fornally into the Church for salvation. So all do not need to formally enter the Church, but only those who 'know'.
_______________________________

II

Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.- Lumen Gentium 14, Vatican Council II

CONCLUSION
it is not always required that he ( a non Catholic, a non baptised person ) be incorporated into the Church actually as a member
WHY ?
Since 'one may obtain eternal salvation' also  'by desire and longing'. Or by being in invincible ignorance of the Gospel through no fault of one's own. A person in invincible ignorance can be saved according to the Holy Office 1949 without the baptism of water. So all do not need to enter the Church for salvation but only those who 'know ' and who are not in invincible ignorance .This was their reasoning.

SO WHAT?
And these cases are known, they are explicit in the present times and so they are exceptions to the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).We personally know non Catholics in invincible ignorance and who are not baptised in the Church and they will be saved. Or we know of cases now already in Heaven, who are in invincible ignorance, and do not have 'faith and baptism', is the reasoning here.

HOW CAN THEY BE EXPLICIT FOR US?
Since someone has seen these cases in Heaven saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
Someone knows of persons who will be saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.

Apply the same irrational reasoning to the other passage in Lumen Gentium 14.
There are 'catechumens who, moved by the Holy Spirit, seek with explicit intention to be incorporated into the Church ' and they are known to us in the present times, they can be known to us, they are visible and not invisible for us.  These cases who are personally known, whose names are known to us, ' by that very intention' are ' joined with her. With love and solicitude Mother Church already embraces them as her own'.
Explicit cases?
If they are not explicit cases how can they be relevant to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ? They would also have to be objective cases, personally known to be exceptions or relevant to  the passages above( in orange) which are in agreement with the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Church.So invisible cases were assumed to be visible, and this is the common wrong inference accepted today.
_________________________________
-Lionel Andrades


DECEMBER 30, 2015


The false reasoning from the Letter is all over Vatican Council II and Archbishop Lefebvre did not notice it -1

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/12/the-false-reasoning-from-letter-is-all.html