Monday, July 20, 2015

Italians block migrants all over Italy

Un'inquilina protesta sotto la palazzina

Hail Queen of Heav'n, the Ocean Star - Catholic Hymn

While walking I found myself humming and then singing this hymn in English. So I thought I'd search for it on the Internet and I found this lovely version. There were other Marian hymns here.'remember them as a kid.-Lionel

The truth can be costly even for Michael Voris

There is a controversy going on between Michael Voris and Louie Verrechio and they both are still not addressing the basic question : can there be known exceptions to the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus in the present times?
If there cannot be known exceptions to the dogma in the present times , then did the Catholic Church make a mistake in the Fr.Leonard Feeney case ?
They both refuse to even comment or discuss this issue which is related to the SSPX doctrinal issue.
If there cannot be exceptions to the dogma in the present times and if the Church did make a mistake, as I believe they have, then our concept of Vatican Council II changes.
Immagine correlata
Our concept of the Council of Trent, Mystici Corporis, Quanto Conficiamur Moerore and other traditional documents being an exception to the rigorist interpretation of the dogma changes.
It would mean Vatican Council II does not change the traditional dogmatic teachings. The Council is still pastoral.
If Fr.Leonard Feeney was wrong and there are known exceptions to his concept of the dogma, then it means the Council is not just pastoral, but it is also dogmatic. It has changed the dogmatic teaching  according to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
Now for Michael Voris and Louie Verrecchio  Fr.Leonard Feeney was wrong. This was the position of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.
For both of  them there are known cases of people in  the present times saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church. Who are these known persons? No one knows.
If Michael Voris does agree that there are no known exceptions to the dogma and that Fr.Leonard Feeney was correct and the Holy Office 1949 was factually wrong, he will be opposing the Jewish Left. He will be opposing the Archbishop of Detroit. He will be opposing Pope Francis.
There could be a financial threat to Church Militant TV.
So is he willing to go through all this.
Louie Verrecchio at least would say No.
The truth, which Michael speaks about often, could be costly.
So in the Mic'd Up program on extra ecclesiam nulla salus, CMTV held the position that the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance , mentioned in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949, were really exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. They were exceptions to Cantate Dominio, Council of Florence 1441 which Christine Niles quoted on that program.
This is far from the truth. It is far from rationality. It is heresy and if they were really aware of what they were saying, it would be expediency.
-Lionel Andrades

No response from Fraternita Sacerdotale San Pio X (SSPX Italy) : doctrinal mess

Convegno 2014  They have all the resources, time and personell but they are staying low, bent in the bunkers at Albano, crouched in silence.They know they made a mistake and expect flak coming their way, so they are not  saying anything.May be they hope that another year or two will pass away and no one will notice.They made a doctrinal error.Doctrine, which they are so proud of otherwise and for which they are constantly criticizing Pope John Paul II and other popes. Their doctrinal mistake was originally made in the past by the Holy Office 1949.It was picked up innocently by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, their founder, and it was promoted by the SSPX bishops.The District Superior of the SSPX Italy, Fr. Pierpaulo Petrucci, actively promoted the error at a conference in Rimini, Italy. It was published in a book of collected papers at Rimini, and was made available at 16 euros for Italians who frequent the SSPX chapels.
When the error was pointed out to them over a year back through this blog there was no response.There was no press statement from them even though it was posted on the Internet and copies sent to Albano and other traditionalists.Otherwise the Fraternita Sacerdotale San Pio X are quick to respond to reports.
Now there is silence. It is calculated silence.
Foto di gruppoTheir position on Vatican Council II is now a political one without citations available from the text of the Council. It is clear that they have no doctrinal or factual support, for their position.They have used an irrational premise and inference, like the rest of the Church, to interpret Vatican Council II and other magisterial documents.

The Council of Trent, Mystici Corporis, Quanta Cura etc are interpreted by Albano, with a peculiar reasoning. They  assume people in Heaven are visible on earth in the present times.Then it is inferred that these invisible cases are exceptions to the 'strict interpretation' of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.So the Council of Trent, Mystici Corporis etc become a break with the traditional interpretation of the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. This is an error since there is no connection between the dogma on salvation and being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire.Theoretical cases cannot be exceptions. This was the original mistake made by the Italian Cardinal Francesco Marchetti Selvaggiani in 1949.
This connection was further made by the liberal theologians, the Jesuits in Boston and Cardinal Richard Cushing , the Archbishop of Boston. It was supported by the secular media and Pope Pius XII did not issue a correction. The SSPX Italy and Econe accept it until today.It is irrational. Yet this is how they interpret doctrine.
Lumen Gentium 16 and Unitatitis Redintigratio 3 for example , are neutral .If one assumes that they refer to persons visible, known seen in the flesh, who are in invincible ignorance and without the baptism of water, then LG 16 and UR 3 become a break with the centuries old interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.(EENS)
If one assumes that these cases are invisible for us, and known only to God, then LG 16 and UR 3 do not contradict the traditional Feeneyite version of EENS. Vatican Council II is not a break with the Syllabus of Errors and the dogma.
The SSPX Italy has chosen the irrational alternative and so wrongly condemns Vatican Council II and Fr.Leonard Feeney of Boston, when the fault is with their interpretation. Their theology becomes fantasy since it is based on a factual error, that of being able to see people in Heaven.
 -Lionel Andrades

July 5, 2015
Fr.Pier Paolo Petrucci, the SSPX District Superior acts as if all is normal

Fr. Pier Paolo Petrucci, SSPX District Superior,Italy keeps silent over this issue for over a year : no clarification

JUNE 29, 2015 Fr. Pier Paolo Petrucci, SSPX District Superior,Italy keeps silent over this issue for over a year : no clarification

FEBRUARY 5, 2014
If Fr.Leonard Feeney was correct or wrong, still imperfect communion with the Church (UR 3) and the baptism of desire are not explicit for us : no clarification still from SSPX Italy
 Bishop Fellay has said that doctrinal questions must be clarified. SSPX USA should clarify this issue. Did Marchetti make an objective error?

February 3, 2015

This is an error from the pontificate of Pope Pius XII whom the SSPX respects.They do not call him a modernist pope.