Thursday, August 4, 2016

The 'wrong definition of church' the new ecclesiology has come from the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 error which was approved by Archbishop Lefebvre, the traditionalists of his time and the SSPX bishops and priests

An Open Letter to Confused Catholics
His Grace Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre

10. Ecumenism

If this is the case, then the Church is merely useful; she is no longer indispensible. She is only one of the means of salvation.
We must say it clearly: such a concept is radically opposed to Catholic dogma. The Church is the one ark of salvation, and we must not be afraid to affirm it.
Lionel: Yes -but the Archbishop accepted hypothetical cases as being exceptions to the Catholic dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus( EENS).
For him the baptism of desire(BOD)  for example is explicit, visible with the naked eye in personally known cases. Otherwise how could BOD be an exception to the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma EENS. The Archbishop did not object to the second part of the Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston(1949).Instead he affirmed that text.
So theologically there is salvation outside the Church for him and the Church is no more indispensable.

  You have often heard it said, “Outside the Church there is no salvation”--a dictum which offends contemporary minds. It is easy to believe that this doctrine is no longer in effect, that it has been dropped. It seems excessively severe.
Lionel: It has been dropped since the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance are considered relevant to the dogma EENS. So it is inferred that there are known cases of BOD and I.I in the present times.
This is an innovation in Catholic salvation theology. A dogma cannot be eliminated and that too with an irrational premise i.e being able to see people in Heaven.These people 'visible in Heaven' are also supposed to be seen without the baptism of water.

Yet nothing, in fact, has changed;  nothing can be changed in this area.
Lionel: It was changed in his life time.The change was expressed in Vatican Council II. LG 14 ( catechumen saved with the desire for the baptism of water) and LG 16 ( saved in invincible ignorance) should not have been mentioned in Vatican Council II. They are unknown cases in our reality.The Archbishop did not notice this error.
It cannot be said that the Holy Spirit inspired the Church to include LG 14 and LG 16 in the text of Vatican Council II. This is an objective, human error from the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.

 Our Lord did not found a number of churches: He founded only One.  There is only one Cross by which we can be saved, and that Cross has been given to the Catholic Church. It has not been given to others.  To His Church, His mystical bride, Christ has given all graces.  No grace in the world, no grace in the history of humanity is distributed except through her.
Does that mean that no Protestant, no Muslim, no Buddhist or animist will be saved? 
Lionel: Here we go again!

No, it would be a second error to think that. Those who cry for intolerance in interpreting St. Cyprian's formula, “Outside the Church there is no salvation,” also reject the Creed, “I confess one baptism for the remission of sins,” and are insufficiently instructed as to what baptism is. 
Lionel: Correct!

There are three ways of receiving it: the baptism of water; the baptism of blood (that of the martyrs who confessed the faith while still catechumens) and baptism of desire.
Lionel: O.K .No problem here.

Baptism of desire can be explicit. Many times in Africa I heard one of our catechumens say to me, “Father, baptize me straightaway because if I die before you come again, I shall go to hell.” I told him “No, if you have no mortal sin on your conscience and if you desire baptism, then you already have the grace in you.”
Lionel: Baptism of desire is explicit! No further comment here!

The doctrine of the Church also recognizes implicit baptism of desire.  This consists in doing the will of God. God knows all men and He knows that amongst Protestants, Muslims, Buddhists and in the whole of humanity there are men of good will. They receive the grace of baptism without knowing it, but in an effective way. In this way they become part of the Church.
Lionel: O.K but they are known only to God. They are hypothetical cases for us. So this should not be linked to the Catholic dogma EENs. Since the baptism of desire can never ever be explicit for us. I can never tell someone ,'No, if you have no mortal sin on your conscience and if you desire baptism, then you already have the grace in you.”

The error consists in thinking that they are saved by their religion.  They are saved in their religion but not by it.
Lionel: And whoever they are they are unknown to us. This is the important point that the Archbishop does not notice.They are always theoretical cases.I can speculate and hope that a person will be saved in another religion, but I cannot precisely name any person.There cannot be any specific case.I cannot say that any person will be saved with the baptism of desire etc and without the baptism of water.

 There is no Buddhist church in heaven, no Protestant church. This is perhaps hard to accept, but it is the truth. I did not found the Church, but rather Our Lord the Son of God.  As priests we must state the truth.
Lionel: Agreed!

But at the cost of what difficulties do people in those countries  where Christianity has not penetrated come to receive baptism by desire! Error is an obstacle to the Holy Ghost. 
Lionel: May be the Archbishop recognises here that the concept of receiving the baptism of desire is an error!
The baptism of desire cannot be given to any one. It is a grace of God.It cannot be physically seen like the baptism of water.It does not exist in our reality.

 This explains why the Church has always sent missionaries into all countries of the world, why thousands of them have suffered martyrdom. If salvation can be found in any religion, why cross the seas, why subject oneself to unhealthy climates, to a harsh life, to sickness and an early death? From the martyrdom of St. Stephen onwards (the first to give his life for Christ, and for this reason his feast is the day after Christmas), the Apostles set out to spread the Good News throughout the Mediterranean countries.
Lionel: Yes. 

Would they have done this if one could be saved by worshipping Cybele or by the mysteries of Eleusis?  Why did Our Lord say to them, “Go and preach the Gospel to all nations?”
It is amazing that nowadays certain people want to let everyone find his own way to God according to the beliefs prevailing in his own “cultural milieu.” A bishop once told a priest who wanted to convert the little Muslims, “No, teach them to be good Muslims;  that will be much better than making Catholics of them.”
Lionel: Since Vatican Council II suggests there is salvation outside the Church. LG 14 and LG 16 refer to known salvation.
So why convert when there is known salvation outside the Church, this bishop too ,may  have been asking?
For the last 50- plus years this has been the interpretation of Vatican Council II.

 I am assured and know for certain that before the Council the Taizé community wanted to abjure their errors and become Catholics. The authorities said to them, “No, wait. After the Council you will be the bridge between Catholics and Protestants.”  Those who gave this reply took on a great responsibility before God, because grace comes often only at a given moment; it may perhaps not come again. At the present time the brethren of Taizé are still outside the Church, sowing confusion in the minds of the young people who visit them.
Lionel: They are told that there is salvation outside the Church and the Church corrected the 'error' of Fr. Leonard Feeney. So there is no need to convert into the Church.
Recently Pope Benedict XVI confirmed this when he said that the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus is no more like it was for the 16th century missionaries. He said that there was a development with Vatican Council II. He meant LG 14 and LG 16 referred to explicit cases and so this was why LG 16 and LG 14 etc were mentioned in Vatican Council II relative to the dogma EENS i.e all need faith and baptism for salvation(LG 14, AG 7).

I have spoken of the conversions which have abruptly fallen in countries like the United States--where they used to amount to 170,000 a year--and Great Britain and Holland. The missionary spirit has faded away because of the wrong definition of the Church and because of the conciliar declaration on religious liberty of which I must now speak.
Lionel: The 'wrong definition of church' the new ecclesiology has come from the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 error which was approved by Archibshop Lefebvre, the traditionalists of his time and the SSPX bishops and priests.
-Lionel Andrades

Circa 80 giovani italiani del Regnum Christi alla Giornata Mondiale della Gioventù a Cracovia

«Un giovane potrebbe chiedersi» scrive Giosuè da Cracovia, «dove è Dio nella mia vita? Gesù esiste? A Cracovia vi assicuro che si vedeva nel sorriso di tanti giovani, nell'entusiasmo della loro fede, nella gioia dei loro occhi. In migliaia siamo arrivati a questa GMG e torniamo con una sicurezza che ci sconvolge la vita: Cristo, e solo Lui, è ciò che ricolma il nostro cuore e lo rende capace di grandi cose! Grazie Papa Francesco che ci hai radicati ancor più nella fede, grazie per le tue parole cariche di speranza!».

Queste parole ben sintetizzano le emozioni degli ottanta giovani italiani del Regnum Christi che sono partiti da Firenze, Milano, Padova, Palermo e Roma per partecipare alla Giornata Mondiale della Gioventù a Cracovia, dal 26 al 31 luglio 2016.

Con loro c’erano i Legionari pp. Nicola Tovagliari, Fredi Durán, Riccardo Garzari, Alberto Zanetti, Daniel Mauricio, LLCC; i Consacrati Cecilia Bayón, responsabile organizzativo per il Regnum Christi, Maria Cereceda e Carlos Abad. Si stima che abbiano partecipato alla GMG circa 2300 membri del Regnum Christi provenienti da tutto il mondo.

Sabato 30 luglio, tutti i membri del Regnum Christi si sono riuniti per la messa, indossando una maglietta rossa con scritto MERCY (misericordia). Ha presieduto la concelebrazione eucaristica p. Andreas Schöggl, L.C. Direttore territoriale per l’Europa occidentale e centrale.

Un incontro speciale a livello internazionale è stato riservato anche a tutti gli ex collaboratori e collaboratrici del Movimento presenti a Cracovia.
Al loro ritorno i ragazzi, alla domanda su cosa gli ha colpiti maggiormente, sottolineano lo spirito di fratellanza fra giovani di diverse nazioni che pur nella diversità di culture condividono gli stessi valori, la gioia e l’allegria contagiosa che li faceva sentire tutti amici senza mai essersi conosciuti, la generosità del popolo Polacco. 
Mentre Francesca dice: «Io rientro con la voglia di approfondire la mia fede ancora di più di non aver paura di annunciare Cristo ai miei amici».

Tra gli stand vocazionali, all’interno della stadio, c’erano le Consacrate del Regnum Christi e i Legionari di Why Not Priest.

Domenica 31 luglio, mentre si chiudeva, con la concelebrazione eucaristica la Giornata Mondiale della Gioventù a Cracovia, in Polonia, hanno avuto inizio in Messico, con un’altra celebrazione eucaristica le Missioni estive di Gioventù Missionaria.

La sede della prossima Giornata Mondiale della Gioventù sarà Panama!

Galleria fotografica qui:
Why Not Priest qui:
Messaggi e discorsi di papa Francesco qui:

Imam in chiesa: una grave offesa alla fede e alla ragione


31 luglio
(di Roberto de Mattei su Il Tempo del 03-08-2016) Il presidente della Conferenza Episcopale Italiana Angelo Bagnasco ha criticato quei cattolici che si sono mostrati sconcertati e in molti casi indignati, per l’invito ai musulmani di pregare, domenica 31 luglio, nelle chiese italiane: «Veramente non capisco il motivo – ha detto –. Il motivo non mi sembra proprio esistente».
 31 luglio

SSPX theologians have to decide if Vatican Council II can be interpreted with Cushingism or Feeneyism, can there be two interpretations of the Council ? : one has the hermeneutic of continuity the other of rupture

Comments from the blog The Eponymous Flower : Archbishop Pozzo: Bishop Fellay to Accept Personal Prelature ArrangementPaxTecum
... The fact is no one understands Vatican ll and that is the problem.
They interpret Vatican Council II with an irrational premise and do not know that the Council can be interpreted without this irrationa premise and the result is traditional.
This result would be rejected by the liberals and the spirit of Vatican Council II people.


Those demanding that the SSPX adhere to Vatican ll as a Doctrinal Council are the very "spirit of Vatican ll" Catholics
Yes they interpret Vatican Council II with Cushingism, so the Council is a break with Tradition.The SSPX acts as if it still does not have a clue as to what I am saying.
Their theologians are still at sea or trying to be obedient to the liberal error of Archbishop Lefebvre.


who don't follow the Council themselves but have invented their own ideologies of what Vatican ll should be.
Lionel: They do not follow the Council interpreted with Feeneyism i.e without the innovation with the new premise.
So their ideology is based on a Vatican Council II which says there is salvation outside the Church and contradicts the dogma EENS.


Pope Benedict XVl called for Vatican ll to be re-interpreted according to Tradition and he expressed hope that the theologians of the SSPX could make a great contribution to this new work.
They first have to decide if Vatican Council II can interpreted with Cushigism or Feeneyism, can there be two interpretations of Vatican Council II ?
Can Vatican Council II be interpreted with LG 16 being physically known in 2016 or LG 16 being invisible for us? This decides the interpretation of Vatican Council II for me.

This decides if Vatican Council II has a hermeneutic of continuity or rupture.
-Lionel Andrades

You conclude BOD is an exception to the dogma EENS. This is heresy.It is liberalism. It is what the SSPX would call modernism.Due to this irrationality you and the SSPX are interpreting Vatican Council II as a break with Tradition

Comments from the Eponymous Flower
  1. No, I think Lionel just takes Our Lord at His word.

  2. nice non-responsive non-seqitor. I'm sure that Pius X, Aquinas, Bonaventure Ligouri, Augustine, the fathers of Trent inter multus alios will be shaking in their heavenly boots at Lionel's binding declarations. He (and you) will have much to teach them one day.

    Peace be with you Tancred.
For you the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. It is the same for the SSPX bishops and priests.
It is not so for me:-
So the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance do not contradict the Church Fathers and the Popes on Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus.They were never in the first place, exceptions to EENS or relevant to EENS
Defacto, in real life, practically,BOD does not contradict the Popes on Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus
By assuming there are physical cases of the baptism of desire and blood and being saved in invincible ignorance, all without the baptism of water, the contemporary Church has rejected the rule, the general teaching on salvation over the centuries
Susan, first of all your position on the baptism of desire etc is irrational. Since the BOD refers to a hypothetical case and so cannot be explicit in the present times.Then you conclude that BOD is an exception to the dogma EENS. This is heresy.It is liberalism. It is what the SSPX would call modernism
Due to this irrationality you and the SSPX are interpreting Vatican Council II as a break with Tradition.

So with this false premise dogmatic teachings are changed
-Lionel Andrades