Saturday, June 25, 2016

Cardinal Gibbons and the Baltimore Catechism

Cardinal Gibbons and the Baltimore Catechism

The Baltimore Catechism came into this world in 1884 during the Third Plenary Council of American Bishops, headed by Cardinal Gibbons. In 1869, Bishop Gibbons had gone to Rome as the youngest prelate at the First Vatican Council. In 1872 he was named bishop of Richmond, VA and on April 15, 1877 he was appointed Co-adjutor Bishop of Baltimore. Gibbons, considered by some an Americanist Liberal and all-around concilator commented that the BC contained “not a single line which might offend Protestantism.” It was published in 1891, and that first edition contained 100 questions.
Pope Francis' joint ecumenical commemoration of the Reformation is possible theologically for Catholics since the Baltimore Catechism infers there is known salvation outside the Church, a person can be saved without the baptism of water

The Baltimore Catechism error is not just a theoretical oversight it had practical consequences, penalites were placed on Fr.Leonard Feeney and the St.Benedict Center. There was an excommunication.

Download the truth on the Baltimore Catechism error
Since the Baltimore Catechism said 'the desire'(Council of Trent) was a baptism like the baptism of water Vatican Council II is interpreted as a break with the dogma EENS

You cannot say that the magisterium at Baltimore made a mistake in the Baltimore Catechism, even though you know that no one in Baltimore could have seen or known a baptism of desire case in real life

Jewish Left rabbis interpret Vatican Council II with the Baltimore Catechism error : factually wrong
Inline image 1
Development of an error in the Catholic Church

Accepting Vatican Council II should no more be a problem for the SSPX : they need to avoid the error in the Baltimore Catechism

This error is all over Vatican Councl II and it should be enough for any one to reject the Council if they wanted to :its also there in Amoris Laetitia
-Lionel Andrades

"This is Calvary-this is where the innocent is unjustly killed just as Jesus was on Calvary"- Bishop Thomas Olmsted

Omelia sulle Unioni Civili 28 Maggio 2016 Don Massimiliano Pusceddu Apostoli di Maria

Friday, June 24, 2016

Archbishop Sacrifices Priest Who Cites Saint Paul to the Homo-Zeitgeist

Brother John Paul Mary(Paddy Kelly)

The Kelly Family - Amazing Grace (paddy crying)

Catholic theology has not changed for me

Theology is our understanding of God, our faith,based on the teachings of the Church and rationality.There are different aspects of theology.There is theology related to morals, salvation(soteriology) , Our Lady (Mariology) and our  understanding of the Church ( ecclesiology) etc.

For centuries our understanding of the Church( ecclesiology) and salvation (soteriology) has been the same.The teaching was there is no salvation outside the Church.Every one needs to be  formal member of the Church for salvation.All need faith and baptism to avoid Hell.This was the exclusivist understanding of what is Church,it was the exclusivist ecclesiology.Every one needed the baptism of water in the Catholic Church was the doctrine.It was a dogma defined by three Church Councils.This was the traditional teaching of the Church until ecclesiology was gradually changed.There was a new doctrine.

Over the centuries various societies campaigned to have the baptism of desire be considered an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).Popes and saints responded with goodwill.They mentioned the baptism of desire with reference to EENS.

The campaign had its first real succhess in the USA.The writers of the Baltimore Catechism(1891) assumed that the desire for the baptism of water in a theoretical case of a catechumen who dies before receiving it was a baptism like the baptism of water.The Baltimore Catechism considered this 'desire' of a hypothetical catechumen, as being a baptism.It was placed in the Baptism Section of the Baltimore Catechism and Cardinal Gibbons approved it.The Catechism of Pope Pius X accepted the error.Over the years liberal theologians wrongly assumed that the new baptism of desire was visible and known it was repeatable physically like the baptism of water.This was false since there are no known cases of the baptism of desire.The baptism of desire is always hypothetical for us. It is something theoretical expressed with goodwill.

In 1949 however the Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr.Leonard Feeney used the Baltimore Catechism as a precedent.It inferred that the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance,existed without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church and it was an explicit exception to the Feeneyite interpretation of EENS, it was an exception to exclusivist ecclesiology.

So in 1949 there was an exception to the old ecclesiology, there was an exception to the defined dogma EENS.Fr.Leonard Feeney was criticized and excommunicated since the new understanding of ecclesiology, said not every one needed to enter the Church for salvation.So theology had changed. There was a new salvation theology.There was a new ecclesiology.

The new ecclesiology was based on a non traditional premise physically known cases of the baptism of desire) and conclusion( these are explicit exceptions, known cases of people saved without the baptism of water).It  was made part of Vatican Council II.Cardinal Ratinger allowed Redemptoris Missio, Dominus Iesus and the Catechism of the Catholic Church to reflectit.Church documents were no more Feeneyite like the Council of Trent.

The baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance of the Gospels, referred to objective and not subjective cases.They were visible and not invisible, explicit and not implicit.Before the Baltimore innovation the baptism of desire etc referred to invisible and not visible cases,hypothetical and physically known persons in the present times.This was a big change in perspective in the Catholic Church. It had become magisterial.It was officially accepted by popes and cardinals. Even the traditionalits accepted it. They did not notice the error.

The Jesuit Fr.Leonard Feeney said there was no known salvation outside the Church, this was Catholic theology but the Rector of Boston College, the Jesuit Provincial,the Archbishop of Boston and liberal theologians of that time did not want to listen to him.He was dismissed from the Jesuit community, his faculties as a priest removed by Archbishop Cushing and later excommunicated with the support of Rome.

The new theology which I call Cushingism was born.It says there are are known exceptions to the dogma EENS as opposed to the what I call Feeneyism, which says there are no known exceptions to EENS, there cannot be known exceptions and the baptism of desire is not an exception to EENS.
Today we can interpret EENS, Vatican Council II and the Cetechism of the Catholic Church (1995) with Cushingism or Feeneyism.Since the first part of the Letter(1949) is Feeneyite and the second part Cushingite.

So with Feeneyism, for me, Vatican Council II(Feeneyite) does not contradict the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS( Feeneyite).
While for just about everyone, Vatican Council II ( Cushingite-LG 16, LG 8 etc refer to explicit cases) contradicts the dogma EENS (Feeneyite).It does not contradict the dogma EENS ( Cushingite).

So for me a Feeneyite there is no change in the ecclesiology of the Catholic Church before and after the Baltimore Catechism.No Church  document for me, could refer to explicit exceptions to the dogma EENs.If it did it was a mistake.Personally I could not know of an exception. I cannot meet someone on the streets saved or about to be saved with the baptism of desire and without the baptism of water.There is no new  theology for me since there are no exceptions.
In Vatican Council II, Ad Gentes 7 and Lumen Gentium 14 ( all need faith and baptism for salvation) affirm EENS(Feeneyite) and LG 16, LG 8, UR 3,NA 2 etc are not explicit.They cannot be objectively known in personal cases.So they are not exceptions to AG 7, LG 14 or the dogma EENS(Feeneyite).

In the Catechism of the Catholic Church, EENS(Feeneyite) is affirmed with CCC 1257( necessity of baptism) and CCC 846( all need faith and baptism-AG 7).There are no known cases of when 'God is not limited to Sacraments'(CCC 1257).
Like CCC 1257, CCC 846 does not contradict the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS.
Since Cardinal Ratzinger was a Cushingite CCC 846 accomodates explicit for us baptism of desire and so states that all who are saved are saved through Jesus and the Church. This is the new theology.
We can still interpret CCC 846 with Feeneyism.Even though all who are saved are saved through Jesus and the Church all need to formally enter the Church. There is nothing in CCC 846 to contradict EENS (Feeneyite).
When CCC 848 states all who are saved are saved through Jesus and the Church it accomodates the new theology of Cardinal Ratzinger and Fr.Karl Rahner.

I know that there is an error in two theological papers of the Vatican's International Theological Commission(ITC).In 
'Christianity and the World Religions '(1997) and  The Hope of Salvation for Infants Who Die Without Being Baptized (2007),ITC's theology on Vatican Council II and EENS was Cushingite.I reject it since it is irrational.It cannot be Catholic theology.

Similarly I reject the second part of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 and accept the first part.The second part (Cushingite) contradicts the first part( Feeneyite).
For me salvation theology and ecclesiology which reflect the Gospel teachings has not been changed.It cannot change.EENS and the old ecclesiology is still based on Mark 16:16(those who do not believe will be condemned), John 3:5( all need the baptism of water in the Catholic Church) and Matthew 7:13-14( for wide is the road to Hell and most people take it).

The Eucharist (John 6) and the Sacraments of the Catholic Church are necessary for salvation.The Catholic Church is the new people of God.Catholics are the Chosen People, the Elect(Nostra Aetate 4).They have the new and everlasting Covnenant which Jesus made with his Supreme Sacrifice on the Cross.Catholics have the Promised Messiah of the Jews.They have the old sacrifice in the temple, with the Sacrifice in the Mass.They have the Jewish tabernacle, the Holy Of Holies in the Eucharist.They accept the Jewish prophets and the last of them was St.John the Baptist..The Catholic Church is the continuation of the Jewish religion, the religion of Yahweh.
-Lionel Andrades