Saturday, September 5, 2015

Inexplicable Censorship -- Vatican Publisher Presents Transcript of Proceedings on Emperor Constantine the Great

Inexplicable Censorship -- Vatican Publisher Presents Transcript of Proceedings on Emperor Constantine the Great

In Hoc Signo Vinces - censorship in the Vatican against Constantine the Great
(Rome) "The impudence of those who are obviously moved, to
 the detriment of the truth by an ideological schema, is always
 worrying," said Corrrispondenza Romana.  During proceedings 
at the Vatican publishing house,  the conference transcript 
about the Emperor Constantine the Great and the Constantinian 
Shift has recently appeared. It's a transcript with curious surprises,
 revealing an alarming censorship.
From the 18th-21st April 2012 on  the occasion of the 1700th
 anniversary of the Battle of the Milvian Bridge, an international 
meeting of historians took place on the figure of Emperor 
Constantine the Great. The meeting had been initiated by 
the reigning President until 2009 of the Pontifical Committee
 for Historical Sciences, Cardinal Walter Brandmüller. 
Renowned speakers discussed  key issues that ranged 
from the conversion of the emperor, to the relationship
 between Christians and the Roman Empire, and 
Constantine's vision before the decisive  victory of
 October 28th, 312.

Speech by Professor de Mattei disappears

Recently, the Vatican publishing house will publish the 
title "Constantine the Great.  On the Roots of Europe,"  
as the conference's volume and which will be 
presented  in the Augustinianum in Rome. Among the 
"most important experts in the field", as the acting 
President of the Pontifical Committee for Historical 
Sciences writes, there was also the  historian 
Roberto de Mattei, who illustrated in a highly regarded
 paper, the "archetypal significance of the Battle of 
the Milvian Bridge." The presentation by Professor de
 Mattei is, however, gone. It is not found in the 
conference proceedings in which the papers were
 published. De Mattei was also not invited to the
 presentation of the volume, which can be 
assessed as an additional personal rebuff by t
he publisher.
"How is such an inexplicable censorship possible?" 
asked Corrispondenza Romana. To many it may 
have caused some upset  that Professor de Mattei
 regarded the Vision of Constantine, with its luminous
 signs in form of a cross on the sun with the words
 "In Hoc Signo Vinces," as genuine.   In a time in 
which even Catholic theological faculties of 
priest-professors deny the authenticity of the miracles 
of Jesus, "because they are  scientifically impossible,
"  someone may have felt provoked.

Vision and Victory of Constantine of

 "Archetypal Meaning"

Constantine the Great
The upset stomach of many must have grown,
 as de Mattei pointed out that in the vision of 
the emperor and its consequences  became 
a model for the following centuries, can be 
seen, and therefore taken up by Saint
 Pius X which he testified in the Apostolic 
Exhortation Universi christifidelibus, with 
which he announced the Constantinian
 Jubilee in commemoration of the historic 
event announced on 8 March 1913:
"At that time the Church Militant finally obtained 
the first of those triumphs which was relieved 
from previous epochs of all kinds of persecutions
 and stood ready on that day in the company of the 
human race for ever greater deeds."
What is significant to the battle of Saxa Rubra as
  "military and political triumph," says Professor 
de Mattei in his speech, is "not separate from
 the wonderful intuition of Constantine." 
He continues: "Christ himself called 
on Constantine and his legions to fight on
 His behalf. Thus, He established the
 principle that it is lawful to fight on behalf 
of God, when the cause is just and the war 
is declared a holy war. The battle of 28 October 
proved not only the legality of Christians to 
serve in the army, but was declared instinctu
 divinitatis the first holy war of the Christian era."

"In Hoc Signo Vinces" means not 

only "internal victory over sin, but 

also public, armed victory"

So the motto "In Hoc Signo Vinces," the "Signum 
Crucis, binds the symbol of the cross to a victory
 that is not only the inner victory over the
 disordered passions and sin, but also a 
public, armed, military victory."
Although these statements by Professor de 
Mattei were covered in detail by the sources, 
they seem not to have fit the picture of 
someone in the Vatican, whether the 
Pontifical Committee for Historical Research,
 the Vatican publishing house or even someone 
in a high position. To invite a speaker as a 
designated expert to a meeting and then to 
dismiss his paper without any justification, 
without even mentioning the name of the 
speaker, is not only a personal affront, and 
not just a violation of all intellectual 
and academic practice, but pure 
censorship. It's a manipulation behind 
which hides a falsification of history.
Corrispondenza Romana provides the 
additional question: "Who is afraid of 
Constantine the Great?"

Second Lecture also Disappears

It was not only de Mattei's lecture which 
has disappeared. But  the presentation 
by Professor Gianluigi Falchi from the
 Lateran University also can not be
 found in the conference proceedings. 
Professor Falchi talked about freedom
 of religion and the baptism of 
Constantine. In this case, there was
 no "plausible" explanation either,  as 
the historian had died in the meantime
 and thus his text could no longer see 
the printing. However,  a complete 
eradication is still not justified.
 Propriety entirely demands the 
publication of  papers in such cases 
with a note.
The case of Professor de Mattei, however, 
offers no "plausible" explanation.  
Therefore, there remains only the assumption
 that the contents of the lecture were not
 in fitting with the picture of that hasty distancing 
from the "Constantinian shift" matches in 
which to practice numerous church 
When emerged from the Battle of the 
Milvian Bridge, as the chairman of the 
Pontifical Committee for Historical Sciences, 
the French Premonstratensian Bernard 
Ardura, writes in his foreword to the conference
 proceedings, really a "new world" and a Europe 
"in which the values ​​of human dignity, freedom
 of conscience, freedom of religion and
 freedom of worship flourished ", it is difficult 
to understand that all this is depressed at
 the same time in connection with this meeting
 through censorship with feet that
 just wanted to emphasize these principles.

Fr.John Zuhlsdorf and Michael Voris remain politically correct

According to Fr.John Zuhlsdorf  the SSPX 's licit and valid Confession in the  Year of Mercy is only a privilege which could cease at the year end if there is no full canonical acceptance.
He means the SSPX has to compromise like him and Michael Voris and give up their Lefebvrist image.
For example Michael Voris projects himself as independent media and dissociates with the SSPX  and also in an about face  says every one does not need  to be a card carrying member of the Church. In other words, like Fr.Jonathan Morris whom he once criticized  for saying every one does not need to enter the Church, Michael is now saying the same thing.
With political correctness he is saying that being saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance  refer to explicit cases and not just possibilities known to God which will be followed with the baptism of water, since there are only Catholics in Heaven.
So he does not affirm extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the hawks do not come swooping down on him.Recently Christine Niles kept the wolves away when she cited the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 on the Mic'd Up program on extra ecclesiam nulla salus.How can the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance be an exception to the dogma? Where were the known cases of the baptism of desire in 1949 or before? How can invisible cases be relevant to the dogma according to Fr.Leonard Feeney? Yet she had to cite these cases...
At one time Michael affirmed extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to Mother Angelica and supported the SSPX.The image has changed.
Similarly Fr.John Zuhlsdorf in the past made the distinction between the Confession of the SSPX being licit and valid  when he quoted John Allen of the National Catholic Reporter.Now he suggests that the validity of the SSPX confession depends on their being approved by the Vatican and the Vatican will only approve them if they intepret Vatican Council II with an irrationality and a break with the past ecclesiology which was licit and valid at one time.
Then recently Fr.Zuhlsdorf denied the rigorist interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam  nulla salus.For him being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire is also explicit, as it is for Michael Voris.So these are not invisible but visible cases for both of them.
Again Fr.Zuhlsdorf remains politically correct and avoids another threat to his blog and career as a priest.
Where are the priests who will speak the truth on the salvation issue and be willing to live on the streets if need be?
 Fr.Zuhlsdorf like Michael Voris wants to support the Magsiterium and so he suggests that there are known exceptions  to extra ecclesiam nulla salus  in the present times.This is a break with the magisterium and ecclesiology  of the past.
They are supporting the contemporary  magisterium  which rebelled against the magisterium of the past.For instance, Lumen Gentium 16, Vatican Council II is clearly implicit and invisible for us but for both of them LG 16 is explicit and so Vatican Council II becomes a break with the Syllabus of Errors, the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Athanasius Creed, the Nicene Creed...
They are no more interested in projecting the truth on the salvation issue  and 'trapping lies and falsehoods.'
-Lionel Andrades

An injustice was done to Fr.Settimo Mannelli F.I

Today morning it has been raining here and the weather and view was beautiful in front of the church Santa Maria di Nazareth , Boccea, Rome.Too bad the land developers are building apartments and by  next year the peaceful and solitary view  will not be there.

An injustice was done to Fr.Settimo Manelli F.I, the young Rector at the Franciscans of the Immaculate seminary, who was not teaching heresy, yet Pope Francis closed down the seminary."There was no heresy being taught at the seminary ",says Corrado Gnerre, noted apologist and a professor at a pontifical seminary in Rome.
Immagine correlata

 There was no heresy being taught by Fr.Settimo but Pope Francis wanted the seminarians to go to the other seminaries in Rome.
Fr.Settimo Manelli and his brother Fr.Giovani Manelli F.I would offer the Traditional Latin Mass and Novus Ordo Mass.They are good priests.
Canonically there was no reason to remove the Rector and close down the seminary.
Fr.Settimo was also the Parish Priest of the church Santa Maria di Nazareth, Boccea, which has become polarised with 'two groups' of Friars.
A few months back a visiting F.I priest ended his homily saying the real enemies of the Church are those who want to go back to the past.( Goodbye St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Augustine!).
The seminary building lies mostly vacant.There are a few lay men staying there.One of whom is allegedly a Mason according the blog The Eponymous Flower. He's still there.
The lay men and few seminarians at Boccea will have to vacate soon it is learnt, as the Lay Association, faithful to Fr.Stefano Manelli F.I, the founder of the community, take over the building.
A new church had to be built by the diocese at Santa Maria di Nazareth as the old church building is owned by the Association coordinated by the Manelli family.
The seminarians under the Commissar Fr.Sabino Ardito SDB do not have a seminary building to house them all and their new formaters.Meanwhile the old seminary building in the parish will be vacant soon and they cannot use it.
The Commissar I am told is wanting to reconcile the community. Hopefully he will succeed where Fr.Volpi failed.
Fr.Settimo Manelli and the Franciscan of the Immaculate priests who want to offer only the Traditional Latin Mass are not disobedient and rebelling against the pope as it is made out to seem by some.They are really opposed to interpreting Vatican Council II with a nonsense premise. The nonsense premise is : there are persons in Heaven visible and known on earth saved allegedly without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church,and these persons are exceptions to all needing to enter the Catholic Church for salvation in 2015, on earth.So Vatican Council II, because of these visible-dead cases it is inferred, is a break with the past.
This is contrary to common sense and common knowledge.Yet this reasoning has to be used by the Franciscans of the Immaculate ( and the SSPX) to be accepted by the magisterium, which is politically Left.
The priests who want to offer the old Mass with the old ecclesiology and without this irrational new ecclesiology of course are correct.They should continue to reject this dead man walking and visible theory in the interpretation of Vatican Council II which is being supported by popes Benedict and Francis.Instead they should offer to accept Vatican Council II in agreement with the traditional interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus. It would mean LG 16, LG 8 etc refer to invisible cases on earth and not visible in the flesh people.So they are not exceptions to the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.
The Commissar could make the first doctrinal move and announce that Vatican Council II can be accepted in agreement with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ( Cantate Dominio, Council of Florence 1441) and the Syllabus of Errors.
Otherwise it would be expecting Fr.Settimo Manelli to accept heresy.
Fr.Settimo could ask the Commissar to affirm Vatican Council II with LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc as being implicit and not explicit, invisible and not visible.Let the Commissar confirm that Vatican Council II has not changed the old ecclesiology of extra ecclesiam nulla salus ;the ecclesiology of the Church is still exclusivist and the contemporary magisterium has made a mistake, when it breaks with the magisterium of the past.
-Lionel Andrades