The speakers at the Lepanto Foundation conference in Rome on June 23 do not know that there is a mistake in Lumen Gentium 14,Vatican Council II.They should be discussing it.
Lumen Gentium 14 was written assuming 'there are known cases of known salvation outside the Roman Catholic Church'!. In this way there was a change in ecclesiology.2
LUMEN GENTIUM 14
14. This Sacred Council wishes to turn its attention firstly to the Catholic faithful.Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church. Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.
They are fully incorporated in the society of the Church who, possessing the Spirit of Christ accept her entire system and all the means of salvation given to her, and are united with her as part of her visible bodily structure and through her with Christ, who rules her through the Supreme Pontiff and the bishops. The bonds which bind men to the Church in a visible way are profession of faith, the sacraments, and ecclesiastical government and communion. He is not saved, however, who, though part of the body of the Church, does not persevere in charity. He remains indeed in the bosom of the Church, but, as it were, only in a "bodily" manner and not "in his heart."All the Church's children should remember that their exalted status is to be attributed not to their own merits but to the special grace of Christ. If they fail moreover to respond to that grace in thought, word and deed, not only shall they not be saved but they will be the more severely judged.Catechumens who, moved by the Holy Spirit, seek with explicit intention to be incorporated into the Church are by that very intention joined with her. With love and solicitude Mother Church already embraces them as her own.-Lumen Gentium 14, Vatican Council II
LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE 1949
Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it is necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing.-Letter of the Holy Office
CONCLUSION
it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member
WHY ?
Since 'one may obtain eternal salvation' also 'by desire and longing'.
SO WHAT?
And these cases are known, they are explicit in the present times and so they are exceptions to the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).
HOW CAN THEY BE EXPLICIT FOR US?
Since someone has seen these cases in Heaven saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
Someone knows of persons who will be saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
False premise: There are people in Heaven saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church and they are known to us in the present times.
False inference : These persons are known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.So it is not always required that a person be incorporated into the Church actually as a member.
LUMEN GENTIUM 14
I
Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.- Lumen Gentium 14, Vatican Council II
FALSE PREMISE: 'among persons known to us'
Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved (and they are among persons known to us)
FALSE INFERENCE :
'so all do not need to convert formally into the Church for salvation'.
These persons known to us, 'who know that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, and have refused to enter or to remain in it' , are known to us , they are among persons known to us, and so they are exceptions to all needing to convert fornally into the Church for salvation. So all do not need to formally enter the Church, but only those who 'know'.
_______________________________
II
Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.- Lumen Gentium 14, Vatican Council II
CONCLUSION
it is not always required that he ( a non Catholic, a non baptised person ) be incorporated into the Church actually as a member
it is not always required that he ( a non Catholic, a non baptised person ) be incorporated into the Church actually as a member
WHY ?
Since 'one may obtain eternal salvation' also 'by desire and longing'. Or by being in invincible ignorance of the Gospel through no fault of one's own. A person in invincible ignorance can be saved according to the Holy Office 1949 without the baptism of water. So all do not need to enter the Church for salvation but only those who 'know ' and who are not in invincible ignorance .This was their reasoning.
SO WHAT?
And these cases are known, they are explicit in the present times and so they are exceptions to the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).We personally know non Catholics in invincible ignorance and who are not baptised in the Church and they will be saved. Or we know of cases now already in Heaven, who are in invincible ignorance, and do not have 'faith and baptism', is the reasoning here.
HOW CAN THEY BE EXPLICIT FOR US?
Since someone has seen these cases in Heaven saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
Someone knows of persons who will be saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
Apply the same irrational reasoning to the other passage in Lumen Gentium 14.
There are 'catechumens who, moved by the Holy Spirit, seek with explicit intention to be incorporated into the Church 'and they are known to us in the present times, they can be known to us, they are visible and not invisible for us. These cases who are personally known, whose names are known to us, ' by that very intention' are ' joined with her. With love and solicitude Mother Church already embraces them as her own'.
Explicit cases?
If they are not explicit cases how can they be relevant to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ? They would also have to be objective cases, personally known to be exceptions or relevant to the passages above( in orange) which are in agreement with the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Church.So invisible cases were assumed to be visible, and this is the common wrong inference accepted today. 3
Father John Zuhlsdorf did not notice the mistake in Lumen Gentium 14.For John Zuhlsdorf on his blog he refers to the traditional teachings in Lumen Gentium which the Jesuits ignore. 4
He considers ' those who resist membership in the Church, knowing her for what she is, cannot be saved.' (Lumen Gentium 14) as being a traditional doctrine.
He does not realize that this line in Lumen Gentium 14 is there because of the mistake in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston.
This line in Vatican Council II was a mistake.
It also contradicts the passge in Lumen Gentium 14 which says 'Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church.
Here are the some of the historical steps to this error in Lumen Gentium 14.
1. The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston 3 during the pontificate of Pope Pius XII assumes the baptism of desire (BOD), baptism of blood (BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance (I.I) refer to explicit cases, personally known to us.It also assumes that these cases exclude the baptism of water. It assumes the passages in red (see below) are explicit for us and so contradict the dogmatic teaching ( passages in blue). We know this is irrational and a mistake. The passages in red are really implicit, invisible for us and known only to God.So they cannot be exceptions or even relevant to the passages in blue. 5
2. The excommunication was not lifted during Vatican Council II. Generations of Catholics grew up believing that the Church had changed its teachings on extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).They were told there was salvation outside the Church and every one did not need to convert, they did not have to be ' a card carrying member of the Church' .
3. The Archbishop of Boston Richard Cushing did not issue a denial when the Boston newspapers stated that the Church had changed its teaching on salvation.The Jewish Left newspapers said that Fr. Leonard Feeney was not allowed to hold the rigorist interpretation of the dogma. At that time the state of Israel was new and influential.
4.The Archbishop of Boston prohibited Catholics from visiting the St. Benedict Center and Fr. Leonard Feeney's priestly faculties were taken away.The Holy Office in Rome supported the Archbishop in the doctrinal error i.e BOD,BOB and I.I were considered explicit and so became exceptions to the traditional interpretation of EENS.
This was irrational. Since BOD, BOB and I.I cases who are saved, would be in Heaven.They could not be exceptions on earth.Also no one could say that a particular person could be saved with BOD and without the baptism of water.
This was irrational. Since BOD, BOB and I.I cases who are saved, would be in Heaven.They could not be exceptions on earth.Also no one could say that a particular person could be saved with BOD and without the baptism of water.
5.The Archbishop was supported by the Jesuits who expelled Fr. Leonard Feeney from their community.The Jesuit theologians began to cite the Baltimore Catechism (1808) in their defence.It assumed 1) implicit desire for the baptism of water in a hypothetical case was the same as seen- in - the -flesh baptism of water and 2) these theoretical cases were visible 'baptisms' so they were placed in the Baptism Section of the catechism.
6. So now in the Church there are three baptisms and not one baptism as is mentioned in the Nicene Creed.This was heresy and Rome did not correct it.There were also no known cases of BOD, BOB or I.I without the baptism of water.These 'baptisms' cannot be given like the baptism of water, which is visible and repeatable.They are invisible for us and so they were irrelevant to the teachings on baptism and should not have been placed in the baptism section.
The confusion was there in the Council of Trent which only mentions implicit desire(it does not refer to it as being explicit or a known baptism).The Baltimore Catechism developed it. It was included in the Catechism of Pope Pius X.
7.The Archbishop of Boston was made a cardinal and was active at Vatican Council II along with the Jesuits.They were ready to implement the new doctrine. They accepted BOD, BOB and I.I as exceptions to the traditional interpretation of EENS. The understanding was : not every one needed to enter the Church. There were exceptions. Being saved in invincible ignorance, for example, was an exception to the dogma EENS.This 'explicitly known person' would not be condemned. So Vatican Council II, says whosoever ' knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved'.This is a new teaching. The traditional teaching was every one needed to enter the Church not only those who knew. This was a break with St. Ignatius of Loyola, St. Francis Xavier and the Jesuit missionaries.They were Feeneyites ( no known exceptions).
We cannot know who knows or does not know and will be saved accordingly.So why had they to mention it in Vatican Council ?
They could mention it because of the error upheld by the Archbishop of Boston which was supported by Pope Pius XII and then even Cardinal Ottaviani.Rome supported Cushingism ( there are known exceptions to the dogma EENS)
NO LINK BETWEEN I.I AND EENS
Cardinal Cushing and the Jesuits wrongly made the link between being saved in invincible ignorance and the dogma EENS.There was no connection between the two.
'
'
Anyway at the practical level today Vatican Council II (AG 7, LG 14) says all need 'faith and baptism for salvation and Fr. John Zuhlsdorf and Fr. Spadero S.J do not know any one in 2015 who will be saved in invincible ignorance and without faith and baptism.There are no objective cases in 2015.
So the line '' knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved' was a mistake.It should not have been placed in Vatican Council II. It is confusing.It refers to a theoretical, hypothetical possibility known only to God. It would also have to be followed with the baptism of water since this is the dogmatic teaching on salvation and baptism.
If Pope Francis and the Vatican Curia want to accept this line, this error, fine, as along as they do not assume it refers to explicit cases in 2015.
Rationally, we know Vatican Council II does not contradict the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.LG 14 does not contradict itself , nor the dogma EENS.The Holy Office 1949 made an objective mistake and the mistake was planted all over Vatican Council. Implicit cases were assumed to be explicit( LG 14, LG 8, NA 2, UR 3, AG 11 etc).
It seems as if Vatican Council II was called to implement the error in the 1949 Boston Case.
Ralph Martin too assumes that we can see the dead saved in invincible ignorance and a good conscience.6
Archbishop Gerhard Muller interpreted Lumen Gentium 14 as contradicting the literal interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
In the interview with the National Catholic Register (Oct.2,2012) (1) the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith interpreted Lumen Gentium 14(LG 14) as a break from tradition.he also used an irrationality and a false premise, perhaps, unknowingly.The CDF, Prefect may not have known also, that he was expressing heresy in public.
We can interpret LG 14 with a hermeneutic of continuity or a break from tradition. He chose the latter.7
It was the Boston Heresy of Archbishop Richard Cushing, the Archbishop of Boston which influenced Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church.8
Therefore those men cannot be saved, who though aware that God, through Jesus Christ founded the Church as something necessary, still do not wish to enter into it, or to persevere in it."-Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II
Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience.-Lumen Gentium 16.
Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.-Lumen Gentium 14
In the first paragraphs of the Letter Fr.Leonard Feeney is supported and in the latter paragraphs he is criticised.
Similarly Ad Gentes 7 supports the dogma and Fr.Leonard Feeney (blue) and then also suggests that there are exceptions to the dogma (red).
14. This Sacred Council wishes to turn its attention firstly to the Catholic faithful. Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism(124) and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church.Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved. Therefore those men cannot be saved, who though aware that God, through Jesus Christ founded the Church as something necessary, still do not wish to enter into it, or to persevere in it."-Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II
Here is the same pattern in Lumen Gentium 14.The dogma is affirmed then it is suggested there are exceptions.
14. This Sacred Council wishes to turn its attention firstly to the Catholic faithful. Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church.Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.-Lumen Gentium 14
The Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude...God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments.-Catechism of the Catholic Church 1257
846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers? (on extra ecclesiam nulla salus as known traditionally)...Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body ( there are those who are saved without the baptism of water and they are known to us personally and so contradict the traditional understanding of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.).
The Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Richard Cushing and the Jesuits thought there were known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and so they inserted this error in the Council 9 and the Catechism. It causes confusion. The SSPX assumes the Council and the Catechism are modernist heretical documents.
Once we are aware of the origin of the error in Vatican Council II we can also observe that with a re-interpretation Vatican Council II does not contradict itself.Lumen Gentium 14 and Ad Gentes 7 do not contradict itself and neither are the Feeneyite passages in them contradicted by the Cushingite passage in Lumen Gentium 16.10
Vatican Council II like the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ( Feeneyite) says all need to enter the Church for salvation.11
Lumen Gentium 14 says all the members of the American Jewish Committee, Anti-Defamation League, National Council of Synagogues, Orthodox Union and Rabbinical Council of America are oriented to Hell 12
-Lionel Andrades
1
OCTOBER 24, 2017
Someone needs to help Cardinal Luiz Ladaria, Archbishop Pozzo and Archbishop Di Noia see how they use a false premise to interpret Vatican Council II http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2017/10/someone-needs-to-help-cardinal-luiz.html
DECEMBER 27, 2017
Lumen Gentium 14 has a philosophical mistakehttp://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2017/12/lumen-gentium-14-has-philosophical.html
2.
APRIL 6, 2016
Lumen Gentium was written assuming 'there are known cases of known salvation outside the Roman Catholic Church'! In this way there was a change in ecclesiology : Magisterial heresy
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2016/04/lumen-gentium-16-was-written-assuming.html
3.
False reasoning from the Letter is all over Vatican Council II: Abp Lefebvre did not notice it -2
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2015/12/the-false-reasoning-from-letter-is-all_30.html
4.
NOVEMBER 20, 2015
Father Z didn't notice the mistake in Lumen Gentium
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2015/11/father-z-didnt-notice-mistake-in-lumen.html
5
LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE
Now, among the commandments of Christ, that one holds not the least place by which we are commanded to be incorporated by baptism into the Mystical Body of Christ, which is the Church, and to remain united to Christ and to His Vicar, through whom He Himself in a visible manner governs the Church on earth.
Therefore, no one will be saved who, knowing the Church to have been divinely established by Christ, nevertheless refuses to submit to the Church or withholds obedience from the Roman Pontiff, the Vicar of Christ on earth.
Not only did the Savior command that all nations should enter the Church, but He also decreed the Church to be a means of salvation without which no one can enter the kingdom of eternal glory.
In His infinite mercy God has willed that the effects, necessary for one to be saved, of those helps to salvation which are directed toward man's final end, not by intrinsic necessity, but only by divine institution, can also be obtained in certain circumstances when those helps are used only in desire and longing. This we see clearly stated in the Sacred Council of Trent, both in reference to the sacrament of regeneration and in reference to the sacrament of penance (<Denzinger>, nn. 797, 807).
The same in its own degree must be asserted of the Church, in as far as she is the general help to salvation. Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it is necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing.
However, this desire need not always be explicit, as it is in catechumens; but when a person is involved in invincible ignorance God accepts also an implicit desire, so called because it is included in that good disposition of soul whereby a person wishes his will to be conformed to the will of God...
Toward the end of this same encyclical letter, when most affectionately inviting to unity those who do not belong to the body of the Catholic Church, he mentions those who "are related to the Mystical Body of the Redeemer by a certain unconscious yearning and desire," and these he by no means excludes from eternal salvation, but on the other hand states that they are in a condition "in which they cannot be sure of their salvation" since "they still remain deprived of those many heavenly gifts and helps which can only be enjoyed in the Catholic Church" (AAS, 1. c., p. 243). With these wise words he reproves both those who exclude from eternal salvation all united to the Church only by implicit desire, and those who falsely assert that men can be saved equally well in every religion (cf. Pope Pius IX, Allocution, <Singulari quadam>, in <Denzinger>, n. 1641 ff.; also Pope Pius IX in the encyclical letter, <Quanto conficiamur moerore>, in <Denzinger>, n. 1677)...
Furthermore, it is beyond understanding how a member of a religious Institute, namely Father Feeney, presents himself as a "Defender of the Faith," and at the same time does not hesitate to attack the catechetical instruction proposed by lawful authorities, and has not even feared to incur grave sanctions threatened by the sacred canons because of his serious violations of his duties as a religious, a priest, and an ordinary member of the Church.
Finally, it is in no wise to be tolerated that certain Catholics shall claim for themselves the right to publish a periodical, for the purpose of spreading theological doctrines, without the permission of competent Church authority, called the "" which is prescribed by the sacred canons.
Therefore, let them who in grave peril are ranged against the Church seriously bear in mind that after "Rome has spoken" they cannot be excused even by reasons of good faith. Certainly, their bond and duty of obedience toward the Church is much graver than that of those who as yet are related to the Church "only by an unconscious desire." Let them realize that they are children of the Church, lovingly nourished by her with the milk of doctrine and the sacraments, and hence, having heard the clear voice of their Mother, they cannot be excused from culpable ignorance, and therefore to them apply without any restriction that principle: submission to the Catholic Church and to the Sovereign Pontiff is required as necessary for salvation.
In sending this letter, I declare my profound esteem, and remain,
Your Excellency's most devoted,
F. Cardinal Marchetti-Selvaggiani.
A. Ottaviani, Assessor.
(Private); Holy Office, 8 Aug., 1949.
https://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDFFEENY.HTM
6.
Ralph Martin assumes that we can see the dead saved in invincible ignorance and a good conscience
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2012/10/ralph-martinn-assumes-that-we-can-see.html
7.
OCTOBER 6, 2012
ARCHBISHOP GERHARD MULLER CHOOSES A HERETICAL INTERPRETATION OF LUMEN GENTIUM 14 WHICH IS A BREAK FROM TRADITION http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2012/10/archbishop-gerhard-muller-chooses.html
8.
AUGUST 11, 2012
THE BOSTON HERESY OF THE ARCHBISHOP INFLUENCED VATICAN COUNCIL II AND THE CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2012/08/the-boston-heresy-of-archbishop-of.html
9
Second Vatican Council.
At the Second Vatican Council (1962–1965) Cushing played a vital role in drafting Nostra Aetate...His emotional comments during debates over the drafts were echoed in the final version - Wikipedia
10.
VATICAN COUNCIL II DOES NOT CONTRADICT ITSELF: LUMEN GENTIUM 14 AND AD GENTES 7 DO NOT CONTRADICT ITSELF :NEITHER ARE THEY CONTRADICTED BY LUMEN GENTIUM 16
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2012/06/vatican-council-ii-does-not-contradict.html
11.
Second Vatican Council.
At the Second Vatican Council (1962–1965) Cushing played a vital role in drafting Nostra Aetate...His emotional comments during debates over the drafts were echoed in the final version - Wikipedia
10.
VATICAN COUNCIL II DOES NOT CONTRADICT ITSELF: LUMEN GENTIUM 14 AND AD GENTES 7 DO NOT CONTRADICT ITSELF :NEITHER ARE THEY CONTRADICTED BY LUMEN GENTIUM 16
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2012/06/vatican-council-ii-does-not-contradict.html
11.
MARCH 20, 2012
Vatican Council II like the dogma says all need to enter the Church for salvation http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2012/03/vatican-council-ii-like-dogma-says-all.html
12.
NOVEMBER 12, 2009
Lumen Gentium 14 says all the members of the American Jewish Committee, Anti-Defamation League, National Council of Synagogues, Orthodox Union and Rabbinical Council of America are oriented to Hell http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2009/11/lumen-gentium-14-says-all-members-of.html
_______________________________________________
Vatican Council II like the dogma says all need to enter the Church for salvation http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2012/03/vatican-council-ii-like-dogma-says-all.html
12.
NOVEMBER 12, 2009
Lumen Gentium 14 says all the members of the American Jewish Committee, Anti-Defamation League, National Council of Synagogues, Orthodox Union and Rabbinical Council of America are oriented to Hell http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2009/11/lumen-gentium-14-says-all-members-of.html
_______________________________________________
JUNE 9, 2018
Lepanto Foundation conference this month in Rome is expected to be another non committal, prudent meeting among friends : the real problem and its solution is too sensitive for them to discuss and proclaim http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/06/lepanto-foundation-conference-his-month.html
MAY 27, 2018
Liberals cannot criticize Cardinal Raymond Burke since he accepts Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite),in harmony with EENS ( Feeneyite),the Syllabus of Errors,an ecumenism and the Social Reign of Christ the King : traditionalists at conf. next month support the New Theology http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/05/liberals-cannot-accuse-cardinal-raymond.html
___________________________
Lepanto Foundation conference this month in Rome is expected to be another non committal, prudent meeting among friends : the real problem and its solution is too sensitive for them to discuss and proclaim http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/06/lepanto-foundation-conference-his-month.html
MAY 27, 2018
Liberals cannot criticize Cardinal Raymond Burke since he accepts Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite),in harmony with EENS ( Feeneyite),the Syllabus of Errors,an ecumenism and the Social Reign of Christ the King : traditionalists at conf. next month support the New Theology http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/05/liberals-cannot-accuse-cardinal-raymond.html
___________________________
MAY 27, 2018
Liberals cannot criticize Cardinal Raymond Burke since he accepts Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite),in harmony with EENS ( Feeneyite),the Syllabus of Errors,an ecumenism and the Social Reign of Christ the King : traditionalists at conf. next month support the New Theology http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/05/liberals-cannot-accuse-cardinal-raymond.html
___________________________
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment