Sunday, January 31, 2016

Download the truth on the Baltimore Catechism error

Church Militant TV (CMTV) program Download-Tradition Under Fire 1 was interesting and entertaining but superficial.CMTV keeps avoiding the real issue as to why there is  break with Tradition in the Church.Participants presented a positive picture when they all agreed that Pope Benedict XVI has ushered in a quiet revolution back to Tradition with the personal Ordinariate for the Anglicans and then  the 2007 Summorum Pontificum.CMTV  has once again not mentioned that Pope Benedict gave us the traditional liturgy without the old ecclesiology.He gave us the old Mass with a new theology.
The CMTV  panel  says now  the TLM  has canonical  approval and does not depend on the liberal  bishops, for permission.False. The liberal bishops still will not permit the old Mass with the old ecclesiology.CMTV itself will not be given permission to affirm the old ecclesiology. The Archbishop of Detroit and the Jewish Left would object.Pope Francis would call it 'ideological'.The pope would also consider  the Novus  Ordo Mass ideological if the old ecclesiology was affirmed.
Related image
Vatican Council II has to be interpreted with the irrational premise ( non Catholics are physically visible and known in Heaven) and inference ( they are objective exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the old ecclesiology). This premise and inference from the Baltimore Catechism was not discussed. It is as if the panel did not know of this Baltimore Catechism error and the link to the new ecclesiology and a non traditional interpretation of Vatican Council II.An important point with reference to Tradition, or even the New Ordo Mass, which would change the direction of the subject was left out.
CMTV affirms the new ecclesiology which is a break with Tradition.Like the Baltimore catechism, they assume that the baptism of desire is 1) a known and physically visible baptism like the baptism of water. 2) The effects of the baptism of desire is that of the baptism of water.It is as if they knew or could know of a particular case now in Heaven saved as such.
The 'desire for the baptism of water ', which is theoretical for all of us and 'the catechuman who dies before receiving it', is a hypothetical case.Yet CMTV treats it as if it is objective.
 It is objective like the baptism of water, for them.So the CMTV panel's theology says these cases are exceptions to the old ecclesiology. This is the new theology accepted by Michael Voris.It is magisterial  according to Pope Benedict  XVI. It's also non traditional and heretical for a discerning Catholic.
This was the theology  of the recent Vatican Document on dialogue with the Jews which was not commented upon by CMTV or even the SSPX.
The new theology, attached to the Traditional Latin Mass, comes from the false premise and inference.The error was there in the Baltimore Catechism and it has influenced CMTV's interpretation of Vatican Council II.The removal of the old ecclesiology, at the centre of Tradition, was effected with the Baltimore Catechism and then the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston.The Americans did it!
Could the Americans at CMTV now expose the error and bring the Church back to Tradition?
There are so many ways CMTV could approach this issue.
See the conversation  between Ross Douthat 2 and Fr. James Martin S.J.The irrational premise and inference from the Baltimore Catechism was used to interpret Vatican Council II.
Notice how the SSPX rejects the new theology and does not know that it is based on the Baltimore error. They can only interpret Vatican Council II with the Baltimore reasoning. The sedevacantists do the same.
See how Wikipedia assumes Lumen Gentium 16 is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.In other words, LG 16 refers to an objective case, like an  'objective' baptism of desire.In this way it becomes an exception.
All the Catholic encyclopedias have accepted  the theology of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.It assumes that the baptism of desire is objective like the baptism of water and so contradicts the Feeneyite, traditional interpretation of EENS.Is this rational?
The USCCB Doctrinal Committee under Cardinal Donald Wuerl, told Fr. Peter C.Phan  that all need to believe in Jesus for salvation and that the Church was necessary except for those saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance (the church was not necessary for this categoy. They knew of a few people who did not have to become formal members of the Catholic Church.) It is as if the USCCB knew of someone in the USA who is in Heaven without the baptism of water and so membership in the Church, after all,  was not necessary for some .Of course the USCCB liberals were in line with the Baltimore Catechism.
Related image
Michael Voris, once asked the liberal Fr.Jonathan Morris on a Vortex progam, who among us today does not need to enter the Church for salvation. The CMTV panel could ask this question with reference to the Baltimore Catechism.How could they at Baltimore, know of someone who did not need to enter the Church with 'faith and baptism' ? How could they know of someone saved with the baptism of desire and without the baptism of water ? They could not !
Ask this question with reference to the Baltimore Catechism, the Boston Case, the Ross Douthat and Fr.James Martin S.J conversation, SSPX and Vatican Council II, USCCB and Fr.Peter C.Phan, Wikipedia and the Catholic Encyclopedias, Catechism/Religion classes  at Michigan's Catholic schools...
I am sure the CMTV staff understand what I have said here.Will they be ready to bring this issue out in the open or will it be too controversial for them.
 The Download discussion remains, superficial, and even hypocritical if this issue is being intentionally not discussed. It is promoting a lie. 3 It is avoiding the real issue with reference to Catholic Tradition, which would make telephone and cell phones ring and buzz all over the world,if it was taken up.
-Lionel Andrades


Vatican Council II is 'hate' without an irrationality used in the interpretation : Fr. James Martin S.J will not affirm this Council
Ross Douthat needed to tell Fr.James Martin S.J that it is only with the use of an irrationality to interpret Vatican Council II that the Council 'develops doctrine'
Possibly Prof. Massimo Faggioli thinks Fr.S.Visintin, Dean of Theology at St.Anselm, Rome is a 'criminal' and does not know theology, like Ross Douthat
The text of Vatican Council II as it stands today does not contradict the dogma EENS.Dignitatis Humane does not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.The Council can be interpreted with Cushingism or Feeneyism.The conclusion is different


Petition needed calling attention to public lie

JUNE 4, 2014

Fischer More College and the Franciscans of the Immaculate have to accept these lies to be allowed the Traditional Latin Mass

Pope Francis, Cardinal Muller and Cardinal Ladaria are refusing to interpret Vatican Council II without the irrationality

Fr.Marco Hausmann FSSP in Rome says there are no exceptions while the Vicariate is teaching young lay Catholics that there are exceptions

When will Fr. Sabino Ardito SDB make an announcement on the Franciscans of the Immaculate doctrinal issue ?

The FSSP priests are not teaching the truths of the Catholic Faith for political reasons. They are teaching a lie.So what do we do ? We do not discuss it since they are priests?

Saturday, January 30, 2016



Historic Family Day Rally in Rome Draws 2 Million, With Support of Italian Bishops

by Church Militant  •  •  January 30, 2016   

Saturday's pro-family demonstration set a record in numbers

By Juliana Freitag
Cardinal Angelo Bagnasco, president of the Italian Episcopal Conference and archbishop of Genoa, has changed the direction of what has turned out to be a historic pro-family rally in Italy, held Saturday in Rome. Estimates say 2 million — a record number — showed up to pledge their support of the traditional family.
Since Cdl. Bagnasco's powerful statementearlier this month, where he said Family Day is "absolutely necessary," many other bishops have joined in support of the demonstration against the Cirinnà bill, which if approved will legalize homosexual unions and grant them the same legal benefits as marriage, including the right to adopt.
The committee that organizes Family Day saw such a surge of support for the rally it had to change the traditional rallying place from San Giovanni Square to Circo Massimo. Last year's Family Day gathered one million Italians; this year the number has doubled.
The declaration issued by Bagnaso maintained that the family should be defended, promoted and politically assisted. Bagnasco criticized the government for its lack of pro-family policies, and also called the Cirinnà bill "a serious  irresponsible distraction, considering the real problems in this country."
Not only did he confront the politicians who insist the Cirinnà bill is a priority, he also encouraged a nation of Catholics in one of the most difficult cultural battles of our time. Before Cdl. Bagnasco stepped forward, the newspapers were filled with ambiguous interviews from bishops who didn't clearly declare their support for Family Day, an initiative of the pro-family group "Difendiamo i nostri figli" ("We Stand for Our Children"), a lay organization sustained by donations and whose volunteers are constantly in the media defending traditional family values, andwho travel all over Italy to promote the teachings of the Church on the family.
The uncertain support from these bishops was being used by the press to discredit Catholic opponents of the gay unions bill. After Bagnasco's statements, however, even the progressive newspaper La Repubblica acknowledged that his attitude contrasted with those of other bishops, and that Bagnasco "is again wearing the helmet from his military days" and is "on the attack."

One of the bishops who had expressed a lukewarm opinion of Family Day is the archbishop of Perugia, Cdl. Gualtiero Bassetti. He gave an interview to national newspaper Corriere della Sera, where in the same fashion as the secretary of the Italian Episcopal Conference, Bp. Nunzio Galantino, his words conveyed approval of legalization of immoral unions.
"Listen, regardless of the rally, which I know nothing about," Bassetti said, "I'll say this: Civil unions should be recognized as such, homosexual civil unions included, but they shouldn't be made equal to marriage. As for adoptions, it takes a man and a woman."
When asked if the State should recognize homosexual unions, the cardinal said the State should provide for the common good of all of its citizens, and that there are rights that should be guaranteed to every couple. "This could be an advantage to the State, because to assist a single person costs double. But none of this should be mistaken for marriage." 
Immediately after Cdl. Bagnasco voiced his support for Family Day, Cdl. Bassetti invited his faithful to participate in the rally. From claiming he knew "nothing about" the rally to asking the faithful to take part was quite an about face for the cardinal. "I make mine the words of the committee spokesman, Massimo Gandolfini: We will not put up with it," he insisted. "We shall go and state what we believe in: our vision of family according to the Italian Constitution, the principles of anthropology and Christian ethics. Keep this statement in your hearts, as the good of the family is very dear to us all."

Even though the support of Church leaders for a public demonstration that may be decisive for Italy's future is of extreme importance, so is holding accountable a cardinal that shows sympathy for the gay agenda. While many argue that the media distorted his statements regarding his appreciation for the "Difendiamo i nostri figli" committee, his assertions about the recognition of homosexual couples by the State were his own quotes. He has made no follow-up remarks clarifying his earlier statement.

Among other bishops who've followed Cdl. Bagnasco in publicly pledging support for Family Day are Matteo Maria Zuppi, archbishop of Bologna, Massimo Camisasca, bishop of Reggio Emilia, Giancarlo Maria Bregantini, archbishop of Campobasso-Boiano, and the conferences of bishops of the regions of Umbria, Triveneto, Liguria and Piedmont.
But the note from the bishops conference Piedmont also includes an inclination for the legalization of homosexual unions: "Homosexual unions, like all couples in domestic partnerships, need a clear regulation of rights and duties. We certainly recognize this is an important and delicate subject that needs to be confronted and debated," the note reads.
The statement attracted criticism from Catholic periodical Corrispondenza Romana, which quickly reminded the bishops of Piedmont of the 2003 document from the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "Considerations regarding proposals to give legal recognition to unions between homosexual persons." The document, addressed to bishops and politicians, reminds them of their duty of "clear and emphatic opposition" to any legal recognition of homosexual unions. It also declares that "those who would move from tolerance to the legitimization of specific rights for cohabiting homosexual persons need to be reminded that the approval or legalization of evil is something far different from the toleration of evil." 

Meanwhile, Cardinal Angelo Bagnasco used his opening speech for the Italian Episcopal Conference winter meeting to reaffirm that the bishops remain "solid and united in sharing the difficulties and trials of the family: To suggest oppositions and divisions means a lack of love for the Church and a lack of love for the family."
"We are messengers and heralds of the Gospel of the family and marriage," he continued. "We don't only believe that the family is the 'Constitutional Letter of the Church,' but we also dream of a country of family dimensions."
The cardinal didn't directly mention the Family Day rally, but said "believers have the duty and the right to participate in the common good ... . [It's] expected of the laity that they inscribe divine law into the life of the earthly city."
He went on to say that children are never a "right," and "are entitled to grow up with a mother and a father; they need a complete microcosm with its most essential elements. The family is an anthropological fact, not an ideological one."
He again criticized politicians for their lack of interest in fostering the family.
The Cirinnà bill went up for debate in the Italian senate Tuesday, and the preliminary vote is being postponed until February 2. There's speculation the postponement was actually made in order to wait and evaluate the impact of Saturday's Family Day rally. There's no date set for the final vote, but political opposition to the gay unions law is strong, in spite of pressure from the European Union to promote gay rights in the country.

The Kohistan Story: Killing for Honor

Pakistan honour killing: warning - shocking content

The True Story of St. Christina the Astonishing, the Indestructible Miracle-Woman

The True Story of St. Christina the Astonishing, the Indestructible Miracle-Woman

via / ChurchPOP
So, Christina the Astonishing is sort of a saint.
She lived in the late 12th century and early 13th century, right around the time the Church was forming the modern canonization process, and she’s never been been formally canonized. Nonetheless, she was popularly considered a saint for centuries after her death. Her relics have been preserved, she was included in a version of Butler’s Lives of Saints, and was even honored on local liturgical calendars at various points. And apparently there remains a strong devotion to her in Belgium.
But what about that title? What made her so “astonishing”?
Just about everything. If anyone deserved such a title, it was Christina.
Born in 1150 in a small town in present day Belgium, Christina was orphaned as a teenager and worked as a shepherdess. Then, sometime in her early 20s, she suffered from a massive seizure. When the episode passed, she was lying on the ground completely limp. Unable to see breathing or hear a heartbeat, those with her pronounced dead. Soon after, a funeral was held at her local parish.
This is when things started to turn crazy.
A 19th century prayer card approved by a bishop. / Public Domain, Patrick3Lopez, Wikipedia / ChurchPOP
A 19th century prayer card approved by a bishop. / Patrick3Lopez, Public Domain, Wikipedia / ChurchPOP
In the middle of the funeral service, she suddenly woke up. Full of energy, she stood right up like nothing had happened. When she realized she was surrounded by a large group of people, she started levitating, and flew up to the roof!
This wouldn’t be the only time she levitated. She levitated often, she said, because she couldn’t bear the spiritually stinky smell of sinful people.
When she finally stopped levitating at the funeral, she explained she had in fact died. After her soul separated from her body, she was given a glimpse of the horrors of purgatory. God then gave her a choice: either remain dead and go to heaven, or return to earth and do penance for those in purgatory. Moved to zeal at the sight of those suffering in Purgatory, she chose the latter. The next moment, she came back to life.
And, my, did she take seriously her charge to do penance.
She voluntarily lived in extreme poverty, wearing only rags and living without a home. She avoided human contact as much as possible. But deprivation wasn’t enough: she also sought out suffering to increase her penance.
People watched her intentionally throw herself into fires and remain there for extended periods of time. She would appear to be suffering greatly, with terrible shrieking, but then  would exit the fire completely unscathed.
She allowed herself to be attacked by dogs and would intentionally run her body through thickets of thorn bushes.
And in winter, she would immerse herself in a nearby river and remain in the nearly freezing water for hours or even days on end. As if this wasn’t extreme enough, she would apparently even allow herself to be sucked into water wheels of nearby mills, getting spun around.
Again, as painful and harmful as these things seemed to be for her, she would always emerge seemingly unharmed.
Astonished, yet?
Her page in a 17th century calendar of saints. / Patrick3Lopez, Public Domain, Wikipedia
Her page in a 17th century calendar of saints. / Patrick3Lopez, Public Domain, Wikipedia
Public opinion was divided about her: Was she just insane? Was she a holy woman sent to warn people of the fires of purgatory? Or she was perhaps demon possessed? The latter possibility was taken seriously enough by some government officials she was jailed twice, though both times only briefly.
After being released the second time, she joined a Dominican monastery. Her prioress said that, despite her extreme behavior, she was always obedient. Her reputation spread across the region, and both rulers and other holy people sought her out for advice and spiritual aid.
Amazingly, despite all of her physical abuse, she died at the ripe old age of 74 of natural causes.
If this is all just too unbelievable for you, here are a few things to note: First, in addition to the many peasants who witnessed her behavior, the historian and Cardinal Jacques de Vitry claimed to have been a personal witness of her incredible behavior, such as going into fires and emerging unharmed. Second, as mentioned, some contemporary saints held her in high regard and sought her advice. Third, Thomas of Cantimpré – writer, theologian, and student of St. Albert the Great – researched her life within a few years after her death and wrote a report, with memories of her life still fresh in people’s minds.
Lastly, here’s what St. Robert Bellarmine, a Cardinal and Doctor of the Church, had tosay about her:
We have reason for believing [Thomas of Cantimpré’s] testimony, since he has for guarantee another grave author, James de Vitry, Bishop and Cardinal, and because he relates what happened in his own time, and even in the province where he lived.
Besides, the sufferings of this admirable virgin were not hidden. Every one could see that she was in the midst of the flames without being consumed, and covered with wounds, every trace of which disappeared a few moments afterwards. But more than this was the marvellous life she led for forty-two years after she was raised from the dead, God clearly showing that the wonders wrought in her by virtue from on high. The striking conversions which she effected, and the evident miracles which occurred after her death, manifestly proved the finger of God, and the truth of that which, after her resurrection, she had revealed concerning the other life.
But why would God have someone do these extreme things? Here’s what Bellarmine thought:
God willed to silence those libertines who make open profession of believing in nothing, and who have the audacity to ask in scorn, Who has returned from the other world? Who has ever seen the torments of Hell or Purgatory? Behold two witnesses. They assure us that they have seen them, and that they are dreadful. What follows, then, if not that the incredulous are inexcusable, and that those who believe and nevertheless neglect to do penance are still more to be condemned?
Let Christina the Astonishing serve as a warning: the fires of purgatory are real and terrible.

Sacrilege in the Vatican

This is monumentally bad. Heaven weeps.
According to many reliable reports (National Catholic RegisterLifeSiteNewsChristian Today) visiting Lutheran dignitaries were purposely given the Most Holy Eucharist at a Vatican Mass following ecumenical talks. The Lutherans approached with their arm crossed — even THEY knew that they were not properly disposed to receive (see my piece: The Body of Christ).
Sacrilege is in general the violation or injurious treatment of a sacred object. (The Catholic Encyclopedia calls this real sacrilege “the worst of all sacrileges”). IF priests knowingly gave the Eucharist to non-Catholics who could not possibly have been in a proper disposition to receive the Blessed Sacrament – then they profaned the Body of Christ, possibly incurred a latae sententiae excommunication and would be subject to possible dismissal:
A person who throws away the consecrated species or takes or retains them for a sacrilegious purpose incurs a latae sententiae excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See; moreover, a cleric can be punished with another penalty, not excluding dismissal from the clerical state.
Canon 1367
This is more serious than attempting to “marry” gays or attempting to ordain a woman. This is hugely scandalous to the faithful, a threat to unity and worse of all – a direct crime against God Almighty. We must not sugar-coat this.
There are many sects of Lutherans (they call synods) who, like many other Protestant denominations, believe different things from each other. This was a Finnish synod with which I am not familiar. In the United States, most Lutherans are in the largest synod here which is the ELCA. Among other things, they:
  1. do NOT have apostolic succession and thus no valid holy orders
  2. their worship service, while superficially similar those times when communion is offered, is not sacrificial as is our Mass
  3. their understanding of the real presence is very different than ours
  4. regardless of their belief, lacking valid holy orders, their hosts are unchanged
  5. there is no tabernacle or reservation of consecrated hosts
  6. all baptized may receive (Lutheran or non-Lutheran; state of grace only loosely)
  7. they do not recognize sacraments as Catholics or Orthodox do
  8. they have many women pastors and “bishops”
  9. they embrace open homosexuality even among their clergy (who are free to marry)
  10. divorce and “re-marriage” is completely accepted
  11. they use the abridged Protestant Bible
  12. they believe in sola scriptura (rejecting both Sacred Tradition and the Magisterium)
  13. their clergy health care plans include full abortion coverage
  14. becoming a Lutheran (like most Protestant denominations) is a snap
  15. many other differences from Catholicism
I in no way hope to demean Lutherans. My family and many relatives are Lutherans, as was I for almost 60 years. They sincerely hold their beliefs and dearly love the Lord. I pray that they may one day be fully reunited with Christ’s Church. The point is that Lutheran beliefs have become significantly separated from Catholicism. There is no valid analogy between the Orthodox and Lutherans. The Orthodox are very close to Catholicism while Lutherans are far. In fact, Lutherans move further and further away from Catholicism every year (see my piece: Protestantism trainwreck).
So, in what ways were they not properly disposed to receive?
  • they are not Catholic or even claim to be
That should completely suffice, but to expand on the obvious:
  • they are not in communion with the Church and do not profess all that the holy Catholic Church teaches, believes and proclaims to be revealed by God (not even close)
  • in this incident, they acknowledged improper disposition by crossing their arm
  • they do not believe the communion species have transformed (only taken on, possibly temporarily, a dual nature)
  • not having confession (sacramental or otherwise), they easily may not be in a state of grace
Some have already suggested that this represents a first step in officially recognizing Lutherans as “close enough” for inter-communion. That thought leaves me (and probably all other Lutheran converts) dumbfounded and alarmed. It would herald a very dark time of many serious consequences including to our unity. As a thought experiment, imagine we were to officially welcome Lutherans to communion. Consider, besides the grave, on-going sacrilege:
  • there would be little incentive for converts to bother with the RCIA process if their goal is to join us fully at Mass – becoming Lutheran is quick and easy, then come and celebrate the Most Holy Eucharist with us
  • “married” gay Lutherans, no problem
  • Lutherans on their third or fourth spouse, no problem
  • Lutheran and an abortion provider? no problem
  • don’t like Sunday obligation? become Lutheran and come when you like
  • opposed to Catholic moral theology in other ways? keep your favorite sins and come as a Lutheran (what Lutherans consider sins and what Catholics consider sins are not the same)
  • presumably Sacraments of Penance and Anointing the Sick would also be opened too
  • such a new “tier 2” Catholicism might appeal to cafeteria Catholics and others with objections to Church teaching
  • would Catholics currently unable to receive communion be able to simply become Lutheran?
  • if Lutherans, why not Episcopalians and all other Anglicans who are at least as “close”?
Our fervent hopes and prayers are that Lutherans become truly reunited with us at the Eucharistic table of our Lord. That happens when they become Catholic. This is what converts do, what I did, what Anglicans do en masse via the ordinariate. The purpose of true ecumenical dialog is to lead others to the fullness of the Christian faith. Affirming them where they are, with no need to change accomplishes exactly the opposite and fulfills Satan’s desires not God’s.

Family Day : Forza Nuova sarà in piazza

La mia intervista su "Il Tempo" di oggi riguardo il Family Day di sabato. Noi ci saremo come ci siamo sempre stati.

foto di Roberto Fiore.

Siano i bambini gli unici privilegiati
Le proposte di ‪#‎ForzaNuova‬ per la Famiglia, la sola che c'è:

Christian Martyrs Be prepared to CRY! YouTube

Christian Martyrs Be prepared to CRY! YouTube

The first Christian Martyrs

Professor at St.John Lateran University Rome critical of 'fanatical texts' in Pakistani school and university books

Related imageMobeen Shahid a professor of philosophy at the Pontificial John Lateran University, Rome is critical of 'fanatical texts' in Pakistani school books.He supports the Pakistani bishops who have asked for changes in text books in schools and universities.
He said that the National Commission for Justice and Peace of the Pakistani bishops has  analyzed a 100 school books, from primary school to university, in Pakistan.These books encourage fanaticism and religious hatred.The President and Prime Minister of Pakistan were asked to make changes in textbooks so that society, through education, could  grow in a culture of peace and peaceful coexistence between religions. Now there is a parliamentary committee charged with reviewing these books, he mentioned.
In a report on SIR, Mobeen Shahid said there are many bilateral economic agreements between countries for investment in education. These economic accords also seek to change the contents of some education texts which are radical.This education literature create a  culture of Islamic fanaticism,explains Mobeen.
The Catholic Church, which has many schools in Pakistan he said has to take security measures. In sensitive areas there are  walls, video surveillance and security personnel. It is an economic burden because the government does not help. He says the Church knows that only through education the country's future can be built.
It may be mentioned that it is common for the daily newspapers in Pakistan to criticize non-Muslims.Clerics also use loudspeakers at mosques during the prayers services to criticize Christians and Jews.Religious organisations like the Jamaat e Islami officially say there is no equality in religion and that non Muslims do not have equal rights as Muslims.They object to the presence of Christians and other non Muslims, working in certain professions. In Pakistan a non Muslim cannot be the head of the army or president.Permission is not given to build new churches.There are still  large churches and cathedrals in Pakistan which have been there before 1949, when Pakistan was separated from India and a new state was created.-Lionel Andrades