Thursday, March 26, 2015

Colloquium on Religious Liberty in Norcia : ignoring the irrational premise and inference

from Rorate Caeili
Colloquium on Religious Liberty in Norcia

We are pleased to share the following announcement of a conference to be held in Norcia,* the birthplace of St. Benedict, later this year. It is being organized by the Dominican theologian, Fr. Thomas Crean OP, who has written on the topic.

The problem of the relation of Dignitatis Humanae to previous tradition is the fundamental problem facing any attempt to read the Second Vatican Council with a hermeneutic of continuity. A solution of this problem would thus be an important step toward combating the hermeneutic of rupture that has caused so much harm to the Church.
Dignitatis Humanae is not the cause of the hermenutic of rupture.
A colloquium on religious liberty, to mark the 50th anniversary of Dignitatis Humanae, is scheduled to take place in Norcia, Italy from October 30th to November 1st. Cardinal Raymund Burke will be in attendance.
Cardinal Raymond Burke interprets Vatican Council II with an irrational premise and conclusion and so Vatican Council II has a hermeneutic of rupture. This is also the interpretation of SSPX ,FSSP and the magisterium. They are not aware of a choice. None of them want to affim Vatican Council II in line with the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus since it would be considered anti-Semitic, racist or whatever.So they are all churning out the old song on Vatican Council II.Welcome to another conference.
The aim of the colloquium is to clarify the meaning of the most controversial document of Vatican II, and its relation to the perennial teaching and practice of the Church. 
The following speakers have agreed to take part [list subject to final confirmation]
Mr James Bogle (president of the International Una Voce Federation)
 Michael Davis, Romano Amerio, Dietrich von Hildebrand were not aware of the irrational premise : Michael Mat, Chris Ferrara, John Rao, James Bogle, Joseph Shaw agree?
Michael Mat, Chris Ferrara, John Rao and James Bogle again spoke at a conference and did not mention that Vatican Council II can be interpreted without an irrational premise
Foederatio Internationalis Una Voce official has nothing to say
Mr Christopher Ferrara (president of the American Catholic Lawyers Association) 
There being exceptions is the irrational reasoning used to interpret Vatican Council II by John Vennari, Chris Ferrara, John Salza and Louie Verrecchio

Traditionalists reject Vatican Council II with heresy and accept the Letter of the Holy Office with heresy. They do not see how the two are connected

Response to Chris Ferrara on the Creative Minority Report

Fr Brian Harrison OS (author of Did Vatican II Contradict Traditional Catholic Doctrine?)

 Fr.Brian Harrison is revising for the community of Fr.Leonard Feeney ( a 33 page article which suggests there are known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus 
Rorate Caeili like Fr.Brian Harrison is protecting itself : Vatican Council II is traditional on the issue of other religions and ecumenism
Professor Roberto de Mattei (author of The Second Vatican Council: an Unwritten Story)

Dr John Rao (director of the Roman Forum)

Papers by Professor Thomas Pink and Dr John Lamont will also be presented, either in person or by proxy.
 The theologians John Lamont, Thomas Pink  and others are not using this paradigm when discussing Vatican Council II, since like the original professors at Boston College, they could lose their teaching authority, now given to them by bishops,for whom Fr.Leonard Feeney is in heresy.Even the Franciscans of the Immaculate have to accept Vatican Council II using the red hand side column. They make the Gherardini choice
Traditionalists will still be criticized but their opponents will not be able to use Vatican Council against them


Pope omits doctrine which is the basis for religious liberty
-Lionel Andrades

So when you hear an FSSP/SSPX priest talk about St.Emerentiana remember it is a lot of nonsense. He does want to affirm the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Vatican Council II ( premise-free) in public

Father....(FSSP priest USA ) said that we need a Syllabus of Errors on Vatican Council II when he really could not say, for political reasons, that Vatican Council II interpreted without the irrational premise and inference is in accord with the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
To please his superiors and to keep his career he will say that there are exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ( when he does not know of any) or that Fr.Feeney was condemned for holding the rigorist interpretation of the dogma ( when the FSSP priest does not know of any exceptions and no magisterial document before Fr.Feeney's time, claims there were exceptions).He will not comment on this and instead will call for a vague Syllabus of Errors on Vatican Council II which does not address these points he avoids.
This is all part of the deception. Organised lieing. In essence the priest , who is informed, does not want to affirm the centuries old interpretation of the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Church.Neither does he want to say that there no explicit exception to the dogma referred to in Vatican Council II. He is unable for personal reasons to say that Vatican  Council is Feeneyite and pro-Cantate Domino, Council of Florence 1441.1.
I don't  like writing on this subject. It is an unpleasant subject.However the priests are unable to discuss this subject in public. If they do they may have to live in poverty just like me ( and I don't ask for donations).
Even here in Rome the FSSP Pastor is teaching lies since this is officially expected of him by the Vatican and the Vicariate. If he does not teach ecclesiology with the irrational premise, he could be suspended etc. So to stay as Pastor and offer the Traditional Latin Mass, he chooses to teach what is pleasing to the Left.He can keep a comfortable life with annual vacations to Australia and other perks.However in obedience he has to teach these three irrational points:
These are the three irrational points (decoys) FSSP priests use to interpret Magisterial documents.
1.Someone in the past is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus on March 26, 2015.
2.Someone living will be an exception to the strict interpretation of the dogma today since he will be saved without faith and baptism.As if this can be known!
3.Someone in Heaven is an exception to the dogma on earth.As if we can see people in Heaven.
So they are unable to answer these TWO QUESTIONS honestly since it will expose all the sham.
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 2015 ?

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, or Ad Gentes 7,Vatican Council II which states 'all' need 'faith and baptism' for salvation ? 
These are good priests, good men but they have to compromise the Faith to remain priests in good standing with the Vatican.
Risultati immagini per Photo of Balamand Declaration
So they cannot say that Redemptoris Missio, Dominus Iesus, Catechism of the Catholic Church 1257 are using an irrationality, to assume that there is known salvation outside the Church. These documents infer that there is salvation outside the Church as if these cases are personally known or some magisterial document before 1949 claimed they were known.
Instead of correcting the error of Cardinal Francesco Marchetti Selvaggiani in 1949 they have promoted it and diluted Church teachings on mission, salvation, evangelisation etc.
They have changed part of the Nicene Creed, 'I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sin'.This was accomplished in Boston in 1949. The fault lies with the Vatican which still accepts it.
1) They (FSSP /Vatican) infer that there are non Catholics in Heaven saved without 'faith and baptism'.
2) These persons are known to us on earth.They are personally known to become explicit exceptions to the traditional, exclusivist ecclesiology.
3) Since they are personally known, there are living exceptions to all needing to convert into the Church for salvation.
This is the 'new ecclesiology' that the FSSP pastor goes along with.
Here is the pattern again:
1.False, irrational premise/proposition.
2.Irrational, non traditional conclusion.
3.Ecclesiology has changed. A new theology is presented based on the false premise/proposition.
The irrational premise on which the new ecclesiology is settled is : in the present times ( 2015) non Catholics are known who are in Heaven without the baptism of water and Catholic Faith.
So the irrational inference which makes up the new ecclesiology is : there is salvation outside the Church.
Conclusion: the dogma on salvation and Tradition in general are contradicted.
This is attributed to Vatican Council II when it really should be attributed to the premise and inference.This is taught by the FSSP priests since it is politically correct and the magisterium accepts it.
So when you hear an FSSP/SSPX priest talk about St.Emerentiana remember it is a lot of nonsense. He does want to affirm the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Vatican Council II ( premise-free) in public.
When he refers to Fr.Feeney it is an excuse for hiding the Truth which he cannot proclaim.-Lionel Andrades


2.Priestly Fraternity of St.Peter (FSSP) has changed Church teachings on family catechesis, religious education, salvation, mortal sin, ecclesiology...