Sunday, October 29, 2017

Dr.Robert Fastiggi cannot respond with the usual accusations

It's interesting.Dr.Robert Fastiggi cannot accuse me of being in schism or in sedevacantism and I am saying that he is in heresy.
He cannot accuse me of denying any of the magisterial documents of the Church and yet I say that I do not interpret magisterial documents like he does.
He cannot of course accuse me of rejecting Vatican Council II instead it is I who make the accusation against him.
He cannot accuse me of rejecting the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to the Council of Florence.Instead it is I who make the accusation against me.
He can accuse me of not theologically following the present two popes.This would be true since the two popes  are not following the popes of the past and are in schism.
To not follow a theology is  a sin? Then it would be a sin for him.Since it is he who teaches a new theology based on a nonsenical premise which violates the Principle of Non Contradiction and which never was part of the deposit of the faith. The two popes do the same.
He has not responded to these blog posts which I have e-mailed him.
Even if he responds what is he going to say? Will he say that the Holy Spirit guides this magisterium to teach that there are known people saved outside the Church in the past and they are objective exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus in the present times? So every one does not need to enter the Church in 2017.
Would this be a teaching inspired by the Holy Spirit?
Image result for Photos Archbishop of Detroit with Rector of the seminary
But the reality is that as a professor of theology in the Archdiocese of Detroit he cannot state that all non Catholics with no exception need to be formal members of the Catholic Church to avoid Hell? 
So he is stuck.
He cannot honestly accuse me of being in schism as he did with Bishop Sanborn who affirmed EENS and was saying every non Catholic in Detroit are hell-bound unless they convert formally into the Church to save their soul.
At the same time he cannot rationally say that he knows someone in Detroit who is a practical exception to the dogma EENS as it is held by Bishop Donald Sanborn.
Bishop Sanborn accused him of being in heresy,like the rest of the Church, for discarding the ecumenism of return with the new ecumenism of non return.There was no denial from Dr.Fastiggi.I think this point went above his head.
He could only fall back on saying the bishop was in schism and this was a mortal sin. Now I am saying the same thing as the good bishop.But he cannot shrug me off so easily.I am not a sede.
Image result for Photos Its different this time
I accept the two popes. Pope Francis is my pope in manifest mortal sin and is automatically excommunicated. Like Fastiggi he does not affirm the Nicene Creed, EENS , Vatican Council II and the Catechisms without the irrational premise and so his conclusions are not traditional and Catholic.It is the same with Pope Benedict.They need to go for Confession and affirm de fide teachings of the Church which are obligatory for all of us.
Of course all this is not permanent and fixed. Both the popes can issue a clarification and affirm Catholic doctrine without the irrational premise which creates heresy, and all will be well again.Theologically they are back on an even keel.
I write all this not just to criticize any one but so that they acknowledge their error and make the correction.
Image result for Photos Ralph Martin Sacred Heart
But I ask myself how is Ralph Martin and Robert Fastiggi going to make the correction at the Sacred Heart Major Seminary Detroit? 
Is it possible in the future that they will be allowed to interpret all magisterial documents without the invisible people are visible premise and so affirm the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus like Bishop Donald Sanborn?
For now, here I am a Catholic, a good Catholic who is not a traditionalist like the SSPX priests who correctly reject Vatican Council II (with the premise) but do not affirm the Council interpreted without the irrational premise,as I do.
Then I do not say that I reject the pope since the pope is in heresy.Since for me most Catholics are in innocent heresy due to ignorantly following these two popes.
For now while I affirm Vatican Council II with hypothetical cases just being hypothetical, which makes the Council traditional and exclusive on salvation Dr. Robert Fastiggi is unable to correct me or even reply.It is the same with the Rector at Sacred Heart, Detroit.
-Lionel Andrades




OCTOBER 29, 2017


The New Evangelisation of the two popes is based on the Letter of the Holy Office, lay movements must observe. It is flawed.

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/10/the-new-evangelisation-of-two-popes-is.html


OCTOBER 28, 2017


Faculty at Sacred Heart Major Seminary agree there are no known cases of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance in 2017

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/10/faculty-at-sacred-heart-major-seminary.html


OCTOBER 28, 2017

There is an in principle error in the text of Vatican Council II and Dr.Robert Fastiggi is not aware of it

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/10/there-is-in-principle-error-in-text-of.html


OCTOBER 25, 2017


Heresy before Vatican II

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/10/heresy-before-vatican-ii.html

OCTOBER 25, 2017


Protocol 122/49 was written in specific contradistinction to Fr. Feeney’s statement that all who die as non-Catholics are lost

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/10/protocol-12249-was-written-in-specific.html


OCTOBER 25, 2017


If Pope Pius XII had come to the defense of Father Feeney in the early 1950’s, and reasserted that all who die as non-Catholics are lost (and therefore must be converted), there would never have been a Vatican II.

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/10/if-pope-pius-xii-had-come-to-defense-of.html




No comments: