Wednesday, July 4, 2018

Repost : Editor refuses to define her terms.Infers that the baptism of desire is not invisible but visible for us.SSPX has made a mistake.

JUNE 17, 2014

Editor refuses to define her terms.Infers that the baptism of desire is not invisible but visible for us.SSPX has made a mistake.

The Editor refuses to define her terms. She, like Athanasius, infers that the baptism of desire is not invisible but visible for us.
I have asked her to clarify her terms but she will not. Perhaps she realizes already that the SSPX has made a mistake.
She has pulled down posts related to the issue.Here are some of them.
 
This ‘theoretical’ case can be saved.Once again I am asking you to please clarify your terms http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/06/this-theoretical-case-can-be-savedonce.html#links
 
I can hold the traditional interpretation of the dogma along with invisible for us and visible for God only, baptism of desire http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/06/can-hold-traditional-interpretation-of.html#links    
The Good Thief is not an exception to all needing the baptism of water 
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/06/the-good-thief-is-not-exception-to-all.html#links
   
Hundreds of saints have used what the secular media calls ‘the rigorist interpretation’ of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/06/hundreds-of-saints-have-used-what.html#links

Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre did not accept Vatican Council II with an irrational inference.He was correct. The Holy Spirit cannot teach error
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/06/archbishop-marcel-lefebvre-did-not.html
   
At one of the two times, the magisterium has to be wrong
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/06/at-one-of-two-times-magisterium-has-to.html
-Lionel Andrades

http://catholictruthblog.com/2014/06/14/bishop-schneider-schism-looming/

No comments: