Thursday, November 12, 2015

Sedevacantist decides not to answer if LG 16, LG 8, UR 3 etc refer to explicit or implicit cases.

Sedevacantist(IAAD)decides not to answer if LG 16, LG 8, UR 3 etc refer to explicit or implicit cases.
Once again a sedevacantist refuses to answer a simple question about Catholic teachings. It's four months for this dialogue. In another comment posted on his blog,IAAD  instead of discussing this specific point which is the basis for his  irrational reasoning and new doctrine on salvation, has begin mentioning his reasons for sedevacantism.
The issue is :  LG 16 etc are not visible for us on earth just as he says that the baptism of desire is not visible to us humans.So being saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16) and the baptism of desire, not existing in our practical reality, cannot be any exception in Vatican Council II to the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS). This is common sense.
Vatican Council II is traditional on other religions and ecumenism.Yet this is not the position held by traditionalists and sedevacantists.They infer that they can see the dead, that the deceased now in Heaven, are  part of their visible reality on earth and they are not aware of this irrationality.
They should be affirming Vatican Council II and the strict intepretation of the dogma EENS along with the old ecclesiology.
Here are Introibo Ad Altare Dei's(IAAD) latest comment on every thing else but the original point being discussed :

Sedevacantist will still not answer if LG 16 also refers to a visible for us case in 2015 - 2

Introibo Ad Altare Dei  November 11, 2015
To my readers,
The illogical and irrationality typical of Fenneyite heretics continues with Lionel Andrades:
I had written:The First Vatican Council infallibly taught: " Divine and Catholic Faith, all those things are to be believed which are contained in the written word of God and in Tradition, and those which are proposed by the Church, either in a solemn pronouncement or in Her Ordinary and Universal teaching power, to be believed as divinely revealed." (See DENZ. 1792)
Lionel: t does not say here, specifically, that I have to believe that BOD is explicit and so relevant and an exception to the dogma.
It does not say that three Church Councils which gave us the dogma EENS and did not mention BOD were in heresy....
Introibo: The First Vatican Council was not enumerating everything taught by the universal and Ordinary Magisterium;
Lionel: Fine. So then there should not be a problem if you agree that not everything was being enumerated.
 Related imageRelated image
 it declared that when it teaches something to be believed of Divine and Catholic Faith it is infallible. The Universal and Ordinary Magisterium has so declared BOD and BOB without BOW to be of Faith. Therefore, it must be believed.
Yes after 1808.This was not true before 1808. I support the pre 1808 position. The post 1808 position became irrational and heretical. It reflected an anti- Catholic lobby.
I cited theologian Van Noort:
"The Church's infallibility extends to the general discipline of the Church. ...But if the Church could make a mistake in the manner alleged when it legislated for the general discipline, it would no longer be either a loyal guardian of revealed doctrine or a trustworthy teacher of the Christian way of life." (Dogmatic Theology 2:114-115) Therefore all of what the Church legislates with papal approval is infallible; it cannot be evil or in error.
Lionel: Yes before 1808. However an objective error was made by the Magisterium in 1949. This happened when it assumed that BOD etc referred to known cases.So they became relevant and exceptions to the interpretation of the dogma EENS according to Fr. Leonard Feeney and the St. Benedict Center.
They were criticised for not saying that BOD etc referred to objective cases for them to relevant, in other words the Magisterium in 1949 wanted Fr. Leonard Feeney to say that he could see and know BOD cases for them to be exceptions to his traditional interpretation of EENS.
Introibo: So for Lionel, the Magisterium started teaching error in 1808! The Holy Ghost left the Church in error. Yet, these heretics continue to hold office as popes and bishops! Lionel:
The same error is being made by the sedevacantists. They assume LG 16 is explicit and not implicit, it is visible and not invisible. Then they use this irrationality to reject the traditional strict intepretation of the dogma.
Ecclesiastical power was misused in the Church to excommunicate Fr. Leonard Feeney.


Introibo Ad Altare Dei
Lionel: I accept BOD and BOB even though it is not an infallible teaching. The dogma is an infallible teaching.The dogma is de fide.However I make the distinction between explicit and implicit for us BOD and you do not.I accept theoretical BOD as a possibility.I reject BOD as being explicit.You wil not make a comment on this either way.
Introibo: It is infallible. The First Vatican Council tells us that the Universal and Ordinary Magisterium is as infallible as the extraordinary Magisterium. (I cited this above)
 I have said that I accept BOD and BOB.I repeat I accept them.
 I accept them as being implicit. I reject them as being explicit. There will be no comment from you on this point.You will not make the distinction. Since for you these cases are explicit and so an exception to the dogma EENS.
What teachings comprise the univerasal and Ordinary Magisterium?
According to theologian Ott: The promulgation by the Church (of dogma)may be made either in an extraordinary manner through a solemn decision of faith made by the Pope or a General Council (Iudicium solemne) or through the ordinary and general teaching power of the Church (Magisterium ordinarium et universale). The latter may be found easily in the catechisms issued by the Bishops." (See Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, TAN reprint from 1955, pg. 4)
Therefore, when the universal and ordinary Magisterium approves the Catechism of Trent (promulgated by St. Pius V) or The Catechism of St. Pius X (promulgated by that same saintly pontiff) teaches BOD and BOB, they are infallibly true. You deny this because you are a Feeneyite heretic.
Are you not a sedevacantist who believes the popes and their catechisms and Vatican Council II is in error?
Introibo: No. I believe that they are in error therefore they are not legitimate popes and V2 is not a legitimate council. It is a new and false religion.
So you believe they are in error. The catechisms are also in error. So why are you complaining when I say the same thing?

I give specific references. I do not say in general they are in error.
Also I know that the specific error to which I refer to can be corrected.
This was taught before V2 as something that could happen should the pope profess heresy as an individual, he would lose his office. All his official pronouncements would no longer be protected by the Holy Ghost since he would no longer be pope.
St. Robert Bellarmine (1610) “A pope who is a manifest heretic automatically (per se) ceases to be pope and head, just as he ceases automatically to be a Christian and a member of the Church. Wherefore, he can be judged and punished by the Church. This is the teaching of all the ancient Fathers who teach that manifest heretics immediately lose all jurisdiction.” De Romano Pontifice. II.30.
St. Alphonsus Liguori (†1787) “If ever a pope, as a private person, should fall into heresy, he would at once fall from the pontificate.” Oeuvres Complètes. 9:232
For a complete list of pre-Vatican II theologians (as well as canon law citations) on loss of papal office, please see Traditionalists, Infallibility, and The Pope by Fr. Cekada at

Related image
Fr. Cekada ? For him LG 16 is explicit and an exception to the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS. How can people now in Heaven, be exceptions to the Feeneyite version of the dogma?
And if the members of Fr. Leonard Feeney's communities in the USA do not accept BOD and BOB as being explicit; if they claim they cannot see these deceased now in Heaven, Fr. Cekada says they  are in mortal sin!
He cannot objectively, in his writings discern objective and subjective cases. Could he also be wrong on other issues?

Introibo Ad Altare Dei
Lionel: I include Pope Pius XII in this error but you excluded him and consider the other popes in error.
Introibo: BOD/BOB are not "errors." denial of them without needing BOW is an error.
BOD and BOB are not errors.They are not even part of the issue for me.
They are hypothetical cases known only to God so how can you make a rule that someone in 2015 will die without the baptism of water and will go to Heaven ?
How would you know?
How could there be an exception, for you or any one,  to all needing the baptism of water for salvation in 2015 ?
Why should I accept your new doctrine when it contradicts the dogma and is all irrational.
 Pope Pius XII never taught atheist can go to Heaven like Frankie.Lionel:
But you were a sedevacantist before the time of Pope Francis.
 He never signed a document claiming Protestant SECTS with their false teachings and pseudo-sacraments are a "means of salvation" He never kissed the blasphemous Koran like JPII as a sign of "respect and reverence" for false teachings about the false "god" Allah.
Pope Pius XII made a factual error in the Boston Case but for me he still is the pope.
Lionel attempts to attack my syllogism:
Major premise: The Church cannot teach error.
The Holy Spirit cannot teach error. We humans can.
Introibo: Dear Lionel, your lack of understanding of Catholic theology combined with your illogical thinking is why you are a Vatican II sect Feeneyite!
An opinion conditioned by years of irrationality in the interpretation of Vatican Council II and Feeneyism.
Humans protected by the Holy Ghost cannot make errors in official teachings! Do you deny this of the Church? Lionel:
Humans, popes, cannot make error ex cathedra on faith and morals.So there is no error on the issue of salvation and the dogma before 1808. After 1808 due to an oversight a particular doctrinal error has come into the Church. Also due to political pressure, humans ( popes, cardinals) overlooked the error or allowed it in the ordinary magisterium.
If so, your whole Feeneyite case falls apart. You claim BOW is necessary without exception. How do you know this is true? Lionel:
Since this is the dogmatic teaching by three Church Councils. This was the teaching held by the popes and saints until 1808.It is mentioned in the Bible.
Cantate Domino was written by the bishops at the council of Florence (humans) and promulgated by Pope Eugene IV (human). How do you know they didn't make an error?Lionel:
They did not infer that we could see the dead who are now Heaven.
They did not infer that these cases were visible exceptions to all needing to formally enter the Church.
Upon these deceased but visible in Heaven cases they did not create a new theology.
They did not reject the old ecclesiology by saying there is known salvation outside the Church etc, etc.

 Isn't the very definition of "infallibility" the incapacity to teach error because the Holy Ghost (Who cannot teach error) ensures that the Pope and Councils can't make errors too?Lionel:
Yes only in ex cathedra teachings in agreement with tradition.
If Pope Francis and the cardinals and bishops present a new teaching which is a rupture with Tradition and a previous ex cathedra teaching  then it is not from the Holy Spirit. I would reject it and hope he makes the correction and does what is needed to remove the scandal and its effect.

Minor premise: The Vatican II sect Catechism teaches numerous errors.
Lionel: The major one is shared by the sedes and trads.It can be re-interpreted and avoided in future. The present inference is irrational. We can avoid this inference.The same text then becomes rational.
Introibo: The errors regard the nature of the Church, the ability of false sects to effectuate salvation, etc. BOD and BOB are not errors!
This is your interpretation of Vatican Council II and not mine.
Conclusion: The 1992 catechism did NOT come from the Catholic Church but from men who lost their office through the profession of heresy as the Church has always taught. Lionel:
The traditional teachings in the Catechism (1992) are also those of the Council of Trent. They are inspired teachings.
There is one oversight which has come from human error and the sedes and trads are still not aware of it. The SSPX is still not aware of it.
-Lionel Andrades ( to be continued in the next blog post)

Sedevacantist will still not answer if LG 16 also refers to a visible for us case in 2015 - 2