Saturday, April 18, 2015

Vatican (CDF) had a lot to hide and so they kept those SSPX-CDF doctrinal talks secret

I think the Vatican had a lot to hide and so they kept those SSPX-CDF doctrinal talks secret, while at the same time saying Catholic doctrine has not changed.
Church Militant TV (CMTV) could help resolve the CDF-SSPX doctrinal issue by identifying the exact doctrinal error.They could do this by affirming what is common knowledge.Common sense. The problem is that the error is approved by the Archdiocese of Detroit.
The basic issue is that being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are not exceptions to the rigorist interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.The Archdiocese of Detroit expects them to say they are exceptions.
It is with this irrationality that CMTV has to interpret Vatican Council II.
If they do not use this irrationality CMTV would be saying the Catholic Church teaches that the Prophet Mohammad and Muslims of his time were oriented to Hell according to Vatican Council II. They would also be saying that all Jews in the present times will be lost forever unless they convert into the Catholic Church, according to Vatican Council II.
This was the basic issue at the Vatican-CDF doctrinal talks initiated by Pope Benedict XVI  in which the stacks were loaded against the SSPX.
At the talks the Vatican doctrinally accepted that there were known exceptions to the rigorist interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.Even though there are none.They approved Vatican Council II with this irrationality.
At the doctrinal talks the SSPX also accepted that there were known exceptions to the rigorist interpretation of the dogma .Even though there are none. They rejected Vatican Council II.
The SSPX position has been full of contradictions.. In a 2012 General Chapter Statement they affirmed extra ecclesiam nulla salus with no exceptions. While the SSPX USA is selling a book by Fr.Francois Laisney (Angelus Press) which says there are exceptions to the dogma.
They affirm the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 with the irrational premise and inference but reject the same thing in Vatican Council II. Being saved in invincible ignorance is accepted as an exception to the dogma in the Marchetti Letter but Lumen Gentium 16 ( invincible ignorance) is criticized for being an exception to the dogma.
Now if Vatican Council II is interpreted without the irrationality, it could be considered Crypto Lefebvre for some Vatican sources..Perhaps CMTV was been accused by the Archdiocese of being Crypto Lefebvre.So they affirm Vatican Council II with the irrationality and say that the SSPX is in schism. They mean to say that they are not like the SSPX!
To not be in schism the SSPX has to accept Vatican Council II, like CMTV, with the irrational premise and inference.Even Fr.John Zuhlsdorf is one of them. Without the irrationality they would be branded schismatic. With the irrationality they are not schismatic and are the same as CMTV.This is the offficial reasoning.The political reasoning.
No one from CMTV has been able to respond doctrinally to the reports on this blog in which I mentioned them with reference to the SSPX. They cannot!
Doctrinally CMTV has always been part of the doctrinal problem. It is a serious issue. Since the Archdiocese of Detroit has already faulted CMTV once before, asking them to change their name, without giving any reason.They could do it again.
If CMTV comes 'out of schism' and says there are no known exceptions to the rigorist interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus, they would be saying all Jews and Muslims need to convert into the Church according to Vatican Council II for salvation.
This was the basic doctrinal issue at the CDF-SSPX  talks.
The CDF has brought a foreign item into these talks.It is the error of Cardinal Francesco Marchetti in 1949. They are promoting this new doctrine and they want the SSPX  to accept it and interpret Vatican Council II with the hermeneutic of rupture. This doctrine is  not the  the Deposit of the Faith. So they kept the talks secret. They said there is no change in doctrine in the Catholic Church, when they really have changed the teachings on salvation and ecclesiology with a  new and irrational premise and inference.
Simon Rafe and Ryan Fitzgerald at CMTV cannot correct me.I would be surprised if they would discuss  this on the CMTV Facebook.It is easy to say that the SSPX is in schism. This is the political view of the Archdiocese of Detroit  where they are located.
-Lionel Andrades

“Oh crusaders, we are the lions of the Islamic State, the falcons of the caliph. Today we killed this Kansas lady Lobo…”

Debra Lobo

Muslim refugees throw Christian refugees overboard during crossing from Libya to Italy

Italy Europe Migrants
Muslim refugees throw Christian refugees overboard during crossing from Libya to Italy

Vatican overlooks LCWR promotion of reincarnation

Pope Francis meets representatives of Leadership Conference of Women Religious at Vatican (CNS photo/L'Osservatore Romano)

The Vatican has ended the seven year investigation of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious and has overlooked Sr.Ilia Delio's teachings on reincarnation.

Her views are acceptable for the Freemasons, International Theosophical Society and the political Left. They have been promoting  re-incarnation through the writings of Teilhard di Chardin.
The public libraries in Rome for example project meditation techniques from the East associated with differenct Eastern religions  while the books within the libraries,criticize the Catholic Church and Catholic doctrines. This is part of the emerging one world religion and new world order which will welcome an anti-Christ. So the LCWR are political comrades.
Pope Benedict XVI approved a conference at the Gregorian University on Teilhard di Chardin inspite of a monitium issued by the Catholic Church.The conference was held it would seem under political pressure from the Left.A cardinal officially participated.
The LCWR sisters do not affirm the dogma extra ecclesiam nullas salus, they have changed the meaning of the Nicene Creed and interpret Vatican Council II with an irrationality and yet they were allowed to receive the Eucharist. They are allowed to go free with heresy and mortal sin because of their political  backing, while the Franciscans Sisters of the Immaculate are still persecuted.Fr.Stefano Manelli , the founder of their  community remains 'under house arrest.'


Sr.Ilia Delio and Leadership Conference of Women Religious promote reincarnation

Excorcist : ISIS is Satan

Gavin D'Costa has not denied that he uses a false reasoning, which is factually and objectively incorrect

Gavin D'Costa does not deny any of the observations made in this report.1 The issue is not about his religous beliefs but his scholarship.His un-professional reasoning,  would be a lie even for academics.This is  theology with a deception.It is reasoning based on an objective error.
He has not denied that a rational professor of theology at an accredited British university in Bristol, infers that there is salvation outside the Church and this salvation is defacto known to us in the present times.In other words the dead now saved in Heaven are physically visible to us on earth, to become  exceptions to the traditional interpretation of the Catholic dogma on salvation.
This is not genuine scholarship. It is also unethical.He places this reasoning before students at the university.
He has not denied that as a professor of theology he uses the following irrational three points to reject the traditional teaching of the Catholic Church.Professionally this is unethical.This would not be accepted by non Catholic academics in England.It's so far out.
1. The physically dead for us, who are now saved in Heaven in invincible ignorance or with the baptism of desire are considered exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus,even though they are not known or visible to us in April 2015.This is not a joke! This is the theology he teaches.
Salvation in Heaven is objectively seen on earth for D'costa and others, to postulate these cases as living exceptions to the dogma.Ghosts are exceptions! Vatican Council II (LG 16,LG 8,UR 3, NA 2 etc ) cannot refer to exceptions since these cases would only be known to God.Yet they are exceptions for Gavin D'Costa. There is no denial here from him.
2. Similarly someone who allegedly died centuries back without the baptism of water would not be an explicit exception to the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church today in April 2015.A hypothetical case cannot be a defacto exception today.A theoretical case of the past cannot be objectively seen today.So Gavin D'Costa cannot consider a case of the past as being a defacto case and an exception in the present times.Yet he does.
He has not denied this.So on a video on  the website of the University of Bristol he says, "People are not damned if they are not Catholics" (5:09)
3.Similarly the University of Bristol faculty would not personally know of someone today in April 2015 who would be saved in future, without faith and baptism and so would not need to be a formal member of the Catholic Church.They cannot posit someone living today in Britain as being an exception to Ad Gentes 7 ( all need faith and baptism).They could not know any one who is an exception to Cantate Domino, Council of Florence 1441, which says outside the Church there is no salvation on extra ecclesiam nulla salus.Yet this irrationality is maintained by Gavin D'Costa.He does not deny this.
This is a profesional, academic issue.It is not just an issue of having a different opinion or religious belief.Since last year I have been asking Gavin and the University to do something about this.
It is unprofessional for a professor to claim :-
1) Those who are physically dead and who are now in Heaven are objectively visible to us on earth.
2) Someone who died centuries back under certain conditions are objectively visible to us on earth this month.
3) Someone alive today will die tomorrow without 'faith and baptism' and will go to Heaven.
This is factually incorrect. It is objectively wrong.
He uses this irrational reasoning to reject the traditional Catholic teaching on salvation.He also uses this irrational reasoning to interpret Vatican Council II.
-Lionel Andrades
Gavin D'Costa comes across as professionally unethical.His irrationality would not be accepted by academics in England