Wednesday, November 4, 2015

Father Zakaria Botros Claims Christ as Lord

Father Zakaria Botros Claims Christ as Lord


Whatever be the reason for the saints and popes mentioning Baptism of Desire ( pressure from lobbies or ignorance) BOD is always invisible for us .This is something objective and not just a personal theory.

If the sedes and trads accept BOD as being invisible then it means they made a mistake in the interpretation of the Boston Case.It also means there is a mistake in Vatican Council II (AG 7, LG 14)  which they have not noticed yet.There should have been no reference to BOD and invincible ignorance in Vatican Council II.
On the sedevacantist blog Introibo Ad Altare Dei (IAAD) comments which ask the blog owner to define his terms and make the distinction between visible and invisible  baptism of desire (BOD)  are not posted.Instead he says that I must accept BOD as leading to salvation as if it has something to do with BOD being invisible or visible for us.
I am saying there are no BOD cases on earth for us humans since they are invisible.They are not visible to  us humans.IAAD will avoid an answer. He will not agree or disagree with me.  Four months and the sedes will not answer this simple, rational question.
If for arguments sake I say, " O.K I accept BOD leading to salvation, now please tell me is BOD invisible or visible for us human beings ?" There will be no answer from him.
Related image
They all know the answer. The sedes, trads, liberals and the Magisterium know what I am getting at.They will not answer since then they will have to admit that they were all wrong about Vatican Council II and Feeneyism, which they now condemn.
So IAAD will repeat the same nonsense he was taught about Vatican Council II and BOD.
 He cites St. Thomas Aquinas' reference to  BOD.Her  will say something like, "See Aquinas says BOD is an exception.It has to be accepted along with the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus ". 
How can St. Thomas Aquinas  say BOD is an exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus when BOD is an invisible case? Anyway where in the text does he say this?.
Where does the Council of Trent say that BOD is explicit or an exception to the dogma? No where. It is all inferred as if it is there.IAAD makes the inference. Fr. Cekada and Bishop Sanborn make the inference. Cardinal Ratzinger makes the inference. The Jewish Left make the inference.
 Whatever be the reason for the saints and popes mentioning BOD ( pressure from lobbies or ignorance) BOD is always invisible for us .This is something objective and not just a  personal theory.
If the sedes and trads accept BOD as being invisible then it means they made a mistake in the interpretation of the Boston Case.It also means there is a mistake in Vatican Council II (AG 7, LG 14)  which they have not noticed yet.There should have been no reference to BOD and invincible ignorance in Vatican Council II.
 These are zero cases according to John Martignoni, the U.S apologist.
 They do not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus says Archbishop Thomas E. Gullickson.
Fr.S.Visintin OSB, the Dean of Theology at the San Anselm University, Rome agrees with them.They are clear on this subject as are some  priests in Rome.They talk on the subject  the trads, sedes and liberals are avoiding .
The  Magisterium made a mistake and no one wants to talk about it.
Also the trads and sedes made the same mistake and they don't want to talk about it. They don't want their supporters to know about it.
When I ask IAAD  is BOD ' a zero case', is is not invisible for us and when he will not answer, I wonder if another sede could tell him that he accepts his theology on BOD but would still want to know if BOD is ' a zero case' in our reality? He will keep quiet, of course.
Fr. Paul Kramer, sedevacantist, was directly asked this question by a sedevacantist.He would not answer.How could he say that all these years he made a big mistake on Vatican Council II and also the Fr. Leonard Feeney case?
 The religious formation of seminarians at traditional, sedevacantist and pontifical seminaries  is based  upon this error.For them BOD refers to known cases and not 'zero cases'. 
Related image
One does not need to know theology to admit that we cannot know anyone saved with BOD.The simple person can understand  this. Yet the Vatican Curia and ecclesiology professors at pontifical universities in Rome, who know the answer too, are going to carry on teaching the error.They don't want to be labelled 'Feeneyites'.It would result in persecution for them.They would lose their jobs.
Image for the news result
Michael Voris says every one does not need to be a card carrying member of the Church for salvation and protects himself like the U.S bishops whom he criticizes.Fr.John Zuhlsdorf says BOD is an exception to the Feeneyite version of the dogma.Michael Voris goes a step ahead, and like Phillip Pullela and Nicole Winfield of Reuters and AP says the SSPX is in schism.This  pleases the Jewish Left and so they did not give Voris and Fr. Z the  persecution Robert Sungenis received.They all know that to affirm Feenyism and the dogma EENS is a threat to their careers and media.
Related image
 The Jewish Left will not tolerate Feeneyism.The sedes and trads who own property,know that they cannot affirm the dogma by saying there are no known exceptions.So like CMTV and Fr. Z they will not answer if BOD is invisible or visible.They will let Catholics be duped on Vatican Council II. 
They are all changing doctrine since it is convenient and expedient and yet last month they all said that the Synod should not change doctrine.
-Lionel Andrades