Sunday, October 16, 2016
Este domingo 16 de octubre el papa Francisco proclamará 7 nuevos santos de la iglesia Católica.Entre los nuevos santos está el mexicano José Luis Sánchez del Río, "mártir con tan sólo 14 años". El joven José Luis Sánchez del Río (1913-1928) fue mártir a sus 14 años, cuando fue asesinado durante la persecución religiosa de México por pertenecer a “los cristeros”, un grupo numeroso de católicos mexicanos levantados en contra la opresión del régimen de Plutarco Elías Calles, según información de la Agencia Católica de Información,
El adolescente cayó bajo el poder de las tropas gubernamentales al darle su caballo al general Prudencio Mendoza, líder del levantamiento contra el gobierno de turno. Duró cuatro días en cautiverio, tiempo tras el cual fue llevado hacia el Panteón Municipal, “Le cortaron la piel de las plantas de los pies y le obligaron a caminar por el pueblo, rumbo al cementerio. Él lloraba y gemía de dolor, pero no cedía”
I am calling attention to the irrational theology.One can continue to accept all the teachings of the Church, all the dogmas, without using the irrational theology. Change the theology and you change Vatican Council II, change the theology and you change the Church, you take it back to its rational and traditional teachings.
You said: "If the whole world violates the Principle of Non Contradiction then the whole world is wrong."
Luther had the same kind of thinking, saying the entire Church had failed and was wrong. As we know he was condemned as a heretic for doing so.
When you and the rest of the Church infer that an invisible case is visible in 2016 this is a lie.
This was originally a lie in 1949 and yet it was consolidated in Vatican Council II.So they made it appear that 'the Church'had approved the lie and also a new doctrine. It also meant that 'the Church' had rejected the infallible teaching on extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the infallibility of the pope when he taught the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, ex cathedra.
So this is the 'new Church', the 'present Church' and you like the liberals are part of it.
Do not compare me to Luther.I choose to remain in the Church and I support my position with magisterial documents interpreted rationally.These are the same magisterial documents, accepted by the Vatican Curia and you, but interpreted with an irrationality.
I am not proposing any new doctrines like Luther and nor am I rejecting any magisterial teaching.
I am rejecting the New Theology, which is based on the irrationality of being able to see invisible cases.I am not interpreting any Church document with this theology while you are interpreting Vatican Council II and other documents with this Rahner-Ratzinger New Theology and there is a hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition.
If the hypothetical/nonhypothetical condition were really important regarding baptism of desire, then the quotes from the Church on baptism of desire would certainly specify it.
Why should they have specified it before the Council of Trent ? It's a given!
Everyone knows that the baptism of desire is not explicitly seen and it refers to a possibility, a hypothetical case.This is something obvious.Even a non Catholic could confirm it. Even a school boy can confirm it.
It was the liberal theologians who made the irrational inference and then created a new theology upon this error. They 'condemned' Fr. Leonard Feeney and for some 19 years did not lift the excommunication so that the new doctrines based on the irrationality could be consolidated in 'the Church'.
Even Archbishop Lefebvre accepted the error hook,line and sinker.Pope Pius XII maintained his silence on this issue.
You'll notice not a SINGLE quote from the Church mentions anything about hypothetical or nonhypothetical. This condition is only in YOUR head, and nobody else's, and you are adding it to fit your belief. You are not fooling anybody.
When the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 said that not every one needs to be incorporated into the Church as a member since a person could be saved with .....this was an inference, that there were exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.So if there are exceptions then it means what the world considered hypothetical was now assumed not to be hypothetical; what common sense would say is invisible was not visible, for the ecclesiaistics in 'the Church'.
I have quoted you an Archbishop, a Dean of Theology at a pontifical university in Rome, numerous priests and a well known lay Catholic apologist who have said that there are no known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and that the baptism of desire is not an exception.So this is not some pet theory of mine.
I am pointing out the irrationality so that we can all go back to the old ecclesiology of the 16th century missionaries, once the error is avoided in 'the Church'.
And how many times now have you come to the defense of "the dogma", as though you are some great defender of the faith.
Yes extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) is a foundational dogma of the Church which must be defended since other doctrines depend upon it.
Yet the infallibility of the Church is ALSO A DOGMA, yet you deny it.
I affirm the dogmas of the Church and I also affirm the infallibility of the pope ex cathedra and when he supports traditional teachings.If a pope rejects teachings on faith and morals and even if he has the support of the present cardinals I would reject it.Since it seems as if today the Church has been infiltrated.
Let me repeat - it is a DOGMA of the Church that the Church cannot teach error, and that General Councils are infallible. You blatantly deny this by saying Vatican II is valid and also teaches errors.
I am calling attention to the irrational theology.One can continue to accept all the teachings of the Church, all the dogmas, without using the irrational theology.
Change the theology and you change Vatican Council II, change the theology and you change the Church, you take it back to its rational and traditional teachings.
You defend dogmas when it supports your belief, and you deny them when it doesn't. You are a hypocrite.
I support all dogmas. I do not know of any dogma which contradicts what I believe in .
I affirm EENS and the baptism of desire.I assume EENS refers to the need for all to be physically incorporated into the Church since there cannot be any exception. I affirm the baptism of desire which is hypothetical.It is not an exception to EENS. So I affirm EENS without rejecting the baptism of desire.
I specifically pointed out, in the last e-mail to you, the magisterial teachings I support.
As like the other sedevacantist you would have a problem with Vatican Council II. You are really rejecting a Cushingite Vatican Council II and you are correct. You should continue to do so.
However you can also interpret Vatican Council II without Rahner's theology;, without mixing up what is invisible as being visible.In this way LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 all referring to hypothetical cases would not be an exception to the Feeneyite interpretation of EENS.In this way you would be affirming Vatican Council II in harmony with the Syllabus of Errors and the Catechism of Pope Pius X but then they would call you 'a Feeneyite' and this is what you would dread.
Tea with Rosie
Police finalised security strategy for all sensitive points
Published: October 11, 2016
MULTAN: At least 200,000 police personnel have been deployed across Punjab to perform security duty during Muharram.
Officials told The Express Tribune on Monday that in addition 43,000 Qaumi Razakar and 98,000 volunteers have also been appointed to help police in maintaining security. They added all RPOs and DPOs were directed to issue special identity cards to the security personnel so that their identity could be verified. Meanwhile, police finalised security strategy for all sensitive points, including Imambargahs and processions on 9th and 10th of Muharram.
While speaking to journalists, Multan City Police Officer Ehsan Younis said the police force had been assigned security tasks in respective areas for providing foolproof security to all mourning processions in the district. He said police also observed a successful flag march and urged the people to contact Rescue 15 in case of any untoward incident.
Published in The Express Tribune, October 11th, 2016.
Woman Attacked With Acid by Her Boyfriend
A Christian pastor in Nigeria is encouraging the faithful to extend financial aid to a local Muslim woman who suffered grave physical injuries after her boyfriend allegedly splashed acid on her body.
According to a report in the local newspaper Vanguard, Senior Pastor Joshua Iginla recently made a presentation during a church service to seek help for 26-year-old acid attack victim Jamila Yusuf.
Yusuf reportedly suffered burns on 60 percent of her face, and 10 percent burns all over her body after being attacked with acid by her fiancé.
During the meeting with church members, Iginla, who is also a known televangelist in the African nation, said helping Yusuf is a form of standing up for the rights of women and condemning physical violence.
"I think Nigerians should rise up to defend the rights of women; to lay your hands on a woman is injustice. I just don't know how a man can do this (pour acid) on a lady; some people are just animals; how can you disfigure a lady like this," Iginla said, as quoted by Vanguard.
The Christian pastor added that Yusuf represents the "hundreds" of women suffering violence and abuse in Nigeria.
"I am not doing this for her because she is a member of my church; I don't know her from anywhere; she's even a Muslim and not a Christian. We are only doing this to preach love and not to convert her to Christianity after her surgery in India," he said.
The Church leader said Yusuf needs 10 million Nigeria naira, or equivalent to almost $32,000 to undergo surgery in India. He pledged to raise the amount within the week to cover expenses for the acid attack victim's air transport, accommodations and food while she recovers from the surgery.
"This is an opportunity to show love to your neighbour because she's not a Christian; your neighbour must not necessarily come from your religion or ethnic group," Iginla said.
The Qur’an teaches that Infidel women can be lawfully taken for sexual use (cf. its allowance for a man to take “captives of the right hand,” 4:3, 4:24, 23:1-6, 33:50, 70:30). The Qur’an says: “O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to bring down over themselves of their outer garments. That is more suitable that they will be known and not be abused. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful.” (33:59) The implication there is that if women do not cover themselves adequately with their outer garments, they may be abused, and that such abuse would be justified.
“Wheelchair-bound woman was ‘gang-raped by group of migrants after asking to use the loo at asylum centre,’” by Danny Collins, The Sun, October 11, 2016:
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2016/10/sweden-muslim-migrants-gang-rape-wheelchair-bound-womanA WHEELCHAIR-bound woman was gang raped by six asylum seekers, Swedish police have said.The unnamed disabled woman had asked to use a toilet at a nearby asylum centre after sharing a taxi with one of its residents.But after she was invited inside, the woman, in her 30s, was attacked by the man and six of his fellow migrants.A furious group of more than 100 Swedes have since attacked the centre in Visby, pelting it with rocks.The victim’s lawyer Staffan Fredriksson told local newspaper Aftonbladlet: “She followed him in and had no fears that something would happen.“Then the man took advantage of the situation. The abuse started in the toilet.“Where they came from we don’t know. This was going on for a couple of hours,“She got paralysed in this situation and was not able to bring herself to resist physically, other than saying no.”He added: “She is completely broken down.”Five men, all aged in their 20s, have since been arrested by Swedish police following the incident on October 2.They are yet to release the men’s nationalities or identities.Sweden has been at the forefront of efforts to accept migrants fleeing conflicts in place like Syria and Afghanistan….
“The religious decree warned government of Pakistan that if Asia Bibi was sent abroad with any conspiracy then administration will face consequences.”
That is, of course, a threat of violence if they don’t get this poor woman’s blood. If we had a sane administration, Asia Bibi’s case would have been taken up energetically by the State Department and made into a diplomatic issue until she was released to a country where she could live free. She is facing death for supposedly insulting Islam and Muhammad. The United States ought to be standing up for the freedom of speech. But this is, of course, the age of Obama and Hillary Clinton.
“150 Sunni Muslim Clerics demand death for Asia Bibi,” Pakistan Christian Post, October 11, 2016:
Lahore: October 11, 2016. (PCP) As hearing date of appeal of Asia Bibi against death sentence on blasphemy charges in Supreme Court of Pakistan Lahore Bench is approaching the radical Muslim groups have also lined up for showdown to put pressure on Judges of SCP to uphold death sentence for her issued by District and Session Judge Sheikhupura, a lower court carrying jurisdiction of police station in which FIR was lodged under section 295 C PPP.Today about 150 top Muslim Clerics (Muftis) issued a religious decree and demanded from Government to hang Asia bibi [sic] and all other prisoners of blasphemy laws and also demanded speedy trial of pending cases of blasphemy in Pakistani courts.The religious decree warned government of Pakistan that if Asia Bibi was sent abroad with any conspiracy then administration will face consequences.The Markaz Ahl-e-Sunnat Lahore which have issued signed Fatwa of 150 of Muslim Mullahas have warned Supreme Court of Pakistan to hearing appeal of Asia Bibi because Islamic teaching have judgment of hanging or beheading of blasphemers and Asia Bibi deserves death.They also issued decree of killing of those who rescued blasphemy accused and assisted or trying to rescue blasphemers.
Yes when I meet a non Catholic I know that he or she is on the way to Hell since the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus says so. Also the Catechism of Pope Pius X repeats the same message.Similarly Vatican Council II says all need faith and baptism for salvation
45.56 Dr.David Anders says that we cannot say that 'I know for sure that someone is going to Hell'.
He also says that to go to Heaven explicit membership in the Church is necessary.However there is the baptism of desire...
Yes when I meet a non Catholic I know that he or she is on the way to Hell since the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus says so. Also the Catechism of Pope Pius X repeats the same message.Similarly Vatican Council II says all need faith and baptism for salvation.
So explicit membership in the Catholic Church is the norm.
The baptism of desire is not the norm.
The ordinary means of salvation is being incorporated into the Church as a member.
In 2016 we cannot meet someone saved with the baptism of desire. So as John Martignoni the apologist says, it is 'a zero case' with reference to the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma EENS.
The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston made an objective mistake.
St.Robert Bellarmine and St. Francis Xavier only knew and taught the ordinary means of savation, which is explicit, visible entry into the Catholic Church.-Lionel Andrades
If the whole world violates the Principle of Non Contradiction then the whole world is wrong.If you and the other sedevacantists assume imaginary cases are physically visible in 2016 then you all are wrong.
'the whole world misunderstands except you is beyond bold.'
If the whole world violates the Principle of Non Contradiction then the whole world is wrong.
If you and the other sedevacantists assume imaginary cases are physically visible in 2016 then you all are wrong.
If for you it is normal that someone saved in invincible ignorance and allegedly without the baptism of water is a known exception to the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus( EENS); the 'rigorist interpretation', then something is seriously wrong,especially so after having explained it to you.
If your website can cite a whole list of popes and saints citing the baptism of desire and you infer that they were physically visible cases instead of theoretical possibilities expressed with goodwill and speculation, then there is something seriously wrong.May be you should discuss this reasoning with someone even if he is not a Catholic,perhaps he could help.
I have cited an Achbishop, a Dean of Theology at a pontifical univeristy in Rome, numerous priests and a lay apologist who support me and yet you suggest that this is a persona view and an irrational reasoning.
I support my view with magisterial documents interpreted without your irrational inference,that is invisible cases are visible and so are exceptions to traditional ecclesiology and theology.I affirm Vatican Council II ( without your irrational premise), the Cateshism of the Catholic Church (1995- Feeneyite interpretation), the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to the 16th century missionaries,the Catechism of Pope Pius X ( with invincible ignorance referring to a hypothetical case),the Letter of the Holy Office ( first part),Cantate Dominio, Council of Florence 1441 on outside the Church there is no salvation, the Nicene Creed with 'I believe in one known baptism and not three or more', the Athanasius Creed on outside the Church there is no salvation,Dominus Iesus , Redemptoris Missio and other magisterial documents interpreted with the theology of Feeneyism and not Cushingism.
Can you beat this?
You reject Vatican Council II ( Cushingite), just as I do and assume that this is the only interpretation of the Council possible.
You also accept the second part of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 which contradicts the first part and is responsible for the Cushingite ( Rahner theology) interpretation of Vatican Council II.
So with this Cushingism you will be contradicting the Syllabus of Errors, Catechism of Pope Pius X etc and would assume that this is the only interpretation of magisterial texts possible, not knowing that your reasoning is based on a false premise.
I use a different premise to interpret magisterial documents and so my conclusion is different.It is traditional and non heretical.