Sunday, April 24, 2016

St. Catherine of Siena On Hell And Catholic Youth Selling Souls To Illuminati

God taught St. Catherine of Siena about heaven, purgatory and hell.  One thing that struck me as great truth, was how she was told that the devil is so horrible to look at, that just one sight of him, would torment them for all eternity because he is so horrible to look at.
I tell you, in hell there are four principal torments and all the others are offspring of these. 
The first is that these souls are deprived of seeing me. This is so painful for them that if they could they would choose the sight of me along with the fire and excruciating torments, rather than the freedom from their pains without seeing me. 
The first suffering revives the worm of conscience, and this is their second torment. For when they see that their sinfulness has deprived them of me and of the company of the angels and made them worthy instead of seeing the demons and sharing their fellowship, conscience gnaws away at them constantly.
The sight of the devil is their third suffering, and it doubles every other torment. At the sight of me the saints are in constant exaltation, joyfully refreshed in reward for the labors they bore for me with such overflowing love and to their own cost. But it is just the opposite for these wretched little souls. Their only refreshment is the torment of seeing the devil, for in seeing them they know themselves better: that is, they recognize that their sinfulness has made them worthy of him. And so the worm gnaws on and the fire of conscience never stops burning. 
Their suffering is even worse because they see the devil as he really is- more horrible than the human heart can imagine. You will recall that when I once let you see him for a tiny while, hardly a moment, as he really is, you said (after coming to your senses again) that you would rather walk on a road of fire even till the final judgment day than see him again. But even with all you have seen you do not know how horrible he really is. For my divine justice makes him look more horrible than still to those who have lost me, and this is in proportion to the depth of their sinfulness. 
The fourth torment is fire. This fire burns without consuming, for the soul cannot be consumed, since it is not material (such as fire could consume) but spiritual. But in my divine justice I allow my fire to burn these souls mightily, tormenting them without consuming them. And the tremendous pain of this tortuous burning has as many forms as the forms of their sins and is more or less severe in proportion to their sins.”  God to St. Catherine
Today, over and over again, I hear of youth playing around with the devil’s Illuminati.  They think it is so “cool” (till they get to the hot fires of hell) to get involve with the Illuminati because;
1) Their friends do and it is popular.
2) Because the stars do.
3) Because it will give them sex, money, power and fame.
I just looked at a few minutes of this Youtube on hell.  That is all it takes to remind me of how horrible hell real is.  Here is another; but be careful because it has really bad adds before you can see the movie on YouTube on Hell .
Hell_MEMLING, Hans (2)Yes, there is no worse thought than that just one person might be forever damned to burn in fire, be tortured by devils and lose heaven.  Try to have anyone you love watch this Youtube video.  I just cannot understand how Catholics do not worry about eternal damnation.  Many people in the Church today will “damned” you if you so much as to  happen to speak about it.
That is why we are traditional Catholics.  We believe that God really did show St. Catherine of Siena the reality of heaven, purgatory and hell.  Just because people today do not believe in it, does not make the reality go away.  Jesus teaches about it over and over again.  Mary has shown it to the children of Fatima and others.  The Church Fathers taught about it.  The saints saw it.  Yet we are still so prideful as know better than Jesus, Mary and the saints.  Why are we that stupid to ignore it?  Why would we ever risk going there?
Crucifixion_LIEFERINXE, JosseJesus died on the cross to save us from hell, the devil and eternal death.  Let us humbly remind ourselves of the real sacrifice He made to save us from our deserved damnation.  We are so blessed to be given the graces to be saved.
These graces that Jesus won for us on the cross and that are necessary to be saved are;
1) Have faith in the Father, The Son Jesus and The Holy Spirit.
2) Baptism.
3) Believe in and be a good Catholic Christian.
4) Believe in, obey and practice all the 2000 year old teachings of the Catholic Church.
5) Receive the Body and Blood of Jesus in Holy Communion.
6) Remain in His graces by not committing mortal sin.
7) If by any chance we may have committed a mortal sin, we make a good confession.
8) Practice our faith and do works of charity for others.
Meditate everyday on the reality that as we rush through our lives;
Death_Dance of_stained glass_detail21) Death is rushing towards us.  We will die some day, sooner or later, no one escapes it.
2) We will die and be judged alone, with no one but ourselves to answer for our eternal destiny.  All our family and friends who in this life told us there was no hell, that is not sin, we do not need to obey God’s commandments, we do not need to practice our Catholic faith, they will not be there to give excuses or help us from being damned.  It will only be between you and God; absolutely no one else.  Please do not fool yourself to think they will be their to help you.  NO NO NO.  Only you and God.
3) We will do everything possible to avoid damnation.   That means avoiding the occasion of sin like;
1) Family and friends that take us away from God and toward sin.
2) Places that lead us to sin.
3) Things that cause us to sin like the cell phone or computer.
Every minute, we humbly turn to God for His help, in prayer, to live a life pleasing to Him.

Video : Make Your Choice!

Scary Hell Movie (Part 1)

Traditionalists and sedevacantists need to affirm Catholic moral and salvation theology by avoiding the irrational inference, the mix up between what is visible and invisible.

Kasper: Pope Intends “Not to Preserve Everything as it has Been”  
On 22 April, Cardinal Walter Kasper gave yet another interview about Pope Francis and his reforms. This time, he spoke with the German regional newspaper Aachener Zeitung. In this interview, the German cardinal made some candid — indeed, bold — statements which are very important in the context of the current situation of the Catholic Church.
Kasper speaks about the further Church-reform plans of Pope Francis and his intention “not to preserve everything as it has been of old.”
'his intention “not to preserve everything as it has been of old.”
He can do this by assuming hypothetical cases are known exceptions to the traditional teaching on faith and morals.This is how the change was made in Vatican Council II and Amoris Laetitia.

The traditionalists and sedevacantists  need to affirm Catholic moral and salvation theology by avoiding the irrational inference, the mix up between what is visible and invisible.In this way they can preserve the old without rejecting Vatican Council II.

With Pope Francis, “things are not any more so abstract and permeated with suspicion, as it was the case in earlier times” within the Church. When asked whether there is also a new tone within the Church, Kasper answers: “Yes, a new tone.”
The traditionalists  need to re-interpret Vatican Council II.Lumen Gentium 16 ( invincible ignorance/conscience) as must refer to invisible and not visible cases.The content and 'tone' of Vatican Council II will then change.It could come as a helpless surprise for Cardinal Kasper.

The liberals then cannot use Vatican Council II as a whip.Instead Cardinal Kasper could be asked to affirm Vatican Council II rationally i.e LG 16 etc refer to invisible and not visible cases.So Vatican Council II would not be in conflict with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, according to the 16th century missionaries.

 He also responds in a more positive way to the question as to whether the German Bishops’ Conference now have a “tail wind” and says: “Certainly.”
Certainly since the conservative Catholic writers are also viewing Vatican Council II and mortal sin has having known exceptions, as being a break with the traditional teaching.
Imagine the surprise of the German cardinals if the SSPX or the sedevacantists announced :-
1. There is nothing in Vatican to contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) according to the 16th century missionaries. Since LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc refer to invisible for us cases and not visible people in 2016. So theories of situation ethics, subjectivism made objective and known exceptions to EENS should not be applied to LG 16 etc.They should not be applied to the interpretation of Vatican Council II.
So there is no change in the old ecclesiology according to the text of Vatican Council II with this rational interpretation, in which hypothetical cases are simply hypothetical, theoretical cases are not objectively visible.
2.There are no known exceptions to the traditional teaching on mortal sin.The conditions of mortal sin mentioned in the Catechism of the Catholic Church are hypothetical. They cannot be exceptions. Pastorally we cannot know of someone who is living in mortal sin , who will not go to Hell if he dies immediately. We cannot pastorally say that someone in mortal sin will not go to Hell for certain subjective or social reasons.

If Cardinal Kasper agrees and affirms that there are no known exceptions to the dogma EENS he would be saying Vatican Council II indicates all Jews and Muslims need 'faith and baptism' (AG 7, LG 14) to avoid Hell and there are no exceptions.This will be difficult for him! He would also be saying Catholics who marry non Catholics are living in adultery. Their spouse is outside the Church and  on the way to Hell .Since there is no known salvation outside the Church mentioned in Vatican Council II.It means Protestants cannot receive the Eucharist in even exceptional cases.The Masons will not accept all this. So Cardinal Kasper will not be able to say any more that doctrine has not changed. He will not be able to accept the old doctrine.

That a Protestant can receive the Eucharist in an emergency is an error of Cardinal Ratzinger as Prefect of the CDF.He did not beleve in the dogma EENS. He confirmed it as Pope Benedict in the interview with Avvenire when he said that EENS is no more like in the 16th century. It has 'developed' with Vatican Council II. He means it has developed for him and Cardinal Kasper, when they interpret hypothethical cases in Vatican Council II (LG 16, LG 8, UR 3 etc)  as referring to objectively and personally known persons.Persons saved without the baptism of water in the Cathoic Church.It is only with this irrationality, of being able to see people in Heaven who are exceptions,can there be a 'development of doctrine' for the both of them.So since there is salvation outside the Church for him,  Cardinal Ratzinger makes an exception for Protestants.A future pope can remove this insertion in canon law.

If Cardinal Ksper and the Vatican Curia says that there there are no known exceptions to the teaching on mortal sin this would contradict the moral theology being taught at Catholic universities and seminaries.It would contradict Amoris Laetitia.

A corretion would also have to be made with regard to Vatican Council II.When Lumen Gentium 14 refers to those who know about the Church and do not enter and who will be Condemned it is a mistake.It has come from the objective error in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr.Leonard Feeney.So much of Vatican Council II ( UR 3, LG 16, AG 11(seeds of the Word), LG 8 etc ) is based on the factual error in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 which mixes up what is invisible as being visible.The result is a new doctrine expressed in Vatican Council II.

We can preserve everything as it has been by:-
1.Avoiding the irrational inference in moral and salvation theology.
2.Reinterpret Vatican Council II without the irrational inference.
3.Affirm the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to the 16th century missionaries in agreement with Vatican Council II, interpreted without the irrational inference of known exceptions, subjectivism and situation ethics theories.-Lionel Andrades

Bishop Sanborn uses situation ethics, subjectivism and known exceptions to EENS, as a reasoning, to interpret Vatican Council II as a break with Tradition.The liberals do the same

Related imageThe same people who are now saying there are known exceptions in real life to manifest mortal sin once said there are known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS)  and Bishop Donald Sanborn and the sedevacantists accepted this hook, line and sinker.
The website 1 of Bishop Sanborn's Most Holy Family Seminary, Florida is similar to that of the liberals.He uses situation ethics, subjectivism and known exceptions to EENS, as a reasoning, to interpret Vatican Council II as a break with EENS and Tradition.The liberals do the same.He is affirming the Jewish Left policy for the Catholic Church, which the Vatican has already rubber stamped.
Instead with Feeneyism, I reject situation ethics, subjective-things-are- objective reasoning  and 'known exceptions' to EENS. So Vatican Council II is not a break with Tradition for me.I am not a Mason.
Bishop Sanborn's sedevacantism is based on accepting Vatican Council II with situation ethics, subjectivism seen as being objective, and so there are physically known exceptions to EENs, people seen in the flesh in 2016.People in Heaven saved outside the Church who are seen on earth!
His interpretation of Vatican Council II would be different with Feeneyism which says there are no known exceptions to EENS, we cannot see baptism of desire cases on earth, there are no situations when we can meet someone saved without faith and baptism  and there are no objective exceptions of persons saved with a good conscience but without the baptism of water.For the bishop there are such cases.His interpretation of Vatican Council II is based on such irrationality.Since this was the error of his religious formators when he was young.
Now it is difficult for him to break away from all this conditioning.He thinks it is magisterial.The irrational reasoning and new theology which he uses, is for him, part of the Deposit of the Faith.
His website does not state that Vatican Council II indicates Judaism and Islamism are not paths to salvation and their members are oriented to Hell without 'faith and baptism'(AG 7, LG 14). He's a liberal. So for him LG 16 ( invincible ignorance and good conscience) refers to known exceptions in the present times,to AG 7 and LG 14 and the dogma EENS.His seminary has a politically correct and non controversial website.
-Lionel Andrades


The sedevacantist Bishop Sanborn uses Cushingism to interpret Vatican Council II and seems unaware of the Feeneyite choice
Ave Maria University like the sedevacantist seminary in Florida uses irrational Cushingism instead of traditional Feeneyism to interpret Vatican Council II

Florida seminaries and universities unaware: Vatican Council II can be interpreted with the theology of Feeneyism or Cushingism


Vatican Council II and Islam : two interpretations

At the 'New Traditional College' will the faculty interpret magisterial documents with Feeneyism or Cushingism ?

The new theology of the sedevacantists and traditionalists like that of the liberals says all Muslims do not need to convert into the Catholic Church

Sedevacantists after months of discussions cannot answer if Lumen Gentium 16 is explicit or implicit and if it is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus 

Immagine correlata
Sedevacantists are teaching irrationality

Related image
Bishop Donald Sanborn like Bishop Fellay has made the same mistake : so have Reuters and AP correspondents

Immagine correlata

Sedevacantist seminary repeats the error of the Baltimore Catechism

Immagine correlata
Holy Trinity Seminary does not clarify if they refer to Vatican Council II in which LG 16, LG 8 is visible or invisible

Immagine correlata

Sedevacantist article on ecclesiology has the same connfusion as the Pontifical universities and seminaries which they call 'modernist'.

Immagine correlata
Sedevacantist and Roman bishops and clergy want to remain politically correct

Bishop Sanborn and Fr.Anthony Cekada do not have a single source to support their position. Not a single reference!

Four months and the sedevacantists will not answer if LG 16 is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus

Wikipedia and Most Holy Trinity,Florida sedevacantist seminary make the same error

Does BOD and I.I refer to visible or invisible cases in 2015 where you live? is a difficult question for a sedevacantist priest
 Sedevacantist seminary is not aware of superflous passages in Vatican Council II originating from the 1949 Marchetti error

Most Rev. Donald Sanborn, Fr. Cekada, Fr. Joseph Selway, Fr. Nicolas Désposito, Rev. Julian Larrabee.- ALL SILENT


There is a mistake on the webpage of the sedevacantist Most Holy Trinity seminary. No one issues a correction/clarification