Monday, February 26, 2018

As long as a person is on earth we cannot say that he is in Hell but we can say that he is oriented to Hell. He is on the way to Hell according to the Bible, Tradition and present day Magisterial documents interpreted with the theology of Feeneyism( according to L.A).

I will not say that  as a matter of fact that ANYONE is on the way to Hell.
Why not?
Is faith and baptism in the Catholic Church the ordinary way of salvation or is it BOD, BOB and I.I.?
___________________


 Judgement is up to God alone and not me or you. 
Final Judgement.
However we can judge based on the moral and faith teachings of the Church. For example we do not condemn any homsexual but we know that homosexuality leads to Hell.The person is oriented to Hell.
Similarly we do not condemn any non Catholic. But we know that without faith and baptism(Vatican Council II,AG 7) he or she is oriented to Hell.
_____________________

Do I think that they are going to Hell, absolutely BUT I can not know if any INDIVIDUAL is on the way to hell. 

You say absolutely and then you say you do not know?
________________________


It does not look at all good for them but when I am asked by a protestant for example do you think that I am going to hell. I always answer if you do not become a Catholic the answer is sadly yes but I hold out hope that they would become Catholic even if that means at Deaths door and to that I have no way to be certain but feel very sad for them for truth is truth, YET DECLARING SOMEONE IS IN HELL IS FOR GOD ALONE!

As long as a person is on earth we cannot say that he is in Hell but we can say that he is oriented to Hell. He is on the way to Hell according to the Bible, Tradition and present day Magisterial documents interpreted with the theology of Feeneyism( according to L.A).
____________________________

  In Christ

Lionel

Ralph Martin, Fr.Gerald Collins, Eduardo Echeverria,Gavin D'Costa and others make an objective mistake in the Homilectic and Pastoral Review

from Homilectic and Pastoral Review

Art for Conflicting Interpretations of Lumen Gentium 16 by Echeverria

Conflicting Interpretations of Lumen Gentium 16

Fr. Gerald O’Collins, S.J., has recently claimed that Ralph Martin “egregiously misrepresents Vatican II’s teaching {in LG 16}.”1 How so? What exactly does LG 16 state, according to O’Collins? Here’s the crux of O’Collins’ charge against what he calls Martin’s “chilling thesis”:
Martin simply moves beyond what Vatican II states here {LG 16}, when he claims an impossibility, and maintains that very often people who have never heard the gospel cannot be saved. If they live deprived of the conditions under which they can be saved, that means that they will not be saved, and will finish up damned for all eternity. If they cannot be saved, they will not, in fact, be saved. This is a frightening thesis, tantamount to the extreme Augustinian view that God creates a massa damnata: the majority of the human race are simply predestined to hell.2
Lionel: Theologians Collins and Martin are talking in terms of hypothethicals and are playing God.In a way this was the major exercise at Vatican Council II. They kept speculating as if their speculation referred to known people who were saved as such or who would be saved as they speculated.
We have to keep in mind that for Ralph Martin, possibilities in the past are not just hypothetical in 2018 or in real life. They are real people ,real examples of salvation outside the Church. So they are exceptions to the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS). So for Martin invincible ignorance is an exception to Feeneyite EENS. LG 16 is an exception to EENS, the past ecclesiology and the Syllabus of Errors.These are Church teachings and documents which he no more can affirm as a Catholic. It would contradict the new ecumenism and new ecclesiology which he teaches at the Sacred Heart Major Seminary Detroit.
_______________________________

To discuss O’Collins’ interpretation, and Martin’s criticism, of the received interpretation of LG 16, we should have the text in question before us. I follow Martin’s identification of each paragraph of LG 16 as a, b, and c.
(a) Those who have not yet received the gospel are related in various ways to the people of God. There is, first, that people to which the covenants and promises were made, and from which Christ was born according to the flesh (cf. Rom 9:4-5): in view of the divine choice, they are a people most dear for the sake of the fathers, for the gifts of God are without repentance (cf. Rom 11:29-36). But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator. In the first place amongst whom are the Moslems: these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us, they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day. Nor is God remote from those who, in shadows and images, seek the unknown God, since he gives to all men life and breath and all things (cf. Acts 17:25-28), and as Savior wills that all men be saved (cf. 1 Tim 2:4).
(Speculation. We do not know a single such case in real life).
(b) Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ, or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience—those, too, may achieve eternal salvation. Nor shall Divine Providence deny the assistance necessary for salvation to those who, without any fault of theirs, have not yet arrived at an explicit knowledge of God, and who, not without his grace, strive to live a good life. Whatever good or truth is found amongst them is considered by the Church to be a preparation for the Gospel, and given by him who enlightens all men so that they may finally have life.
(O.K one is free to speculate. We do not know a single such case in real life. So the theorizing is not an exception or relevant to the dogma EENS as it was known for example to the missionaries and Magisterium in the 16th century.)
(c) But very often {at saepius} men, deceived by the Evil One, have become vain in their reasonings, have exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and served the world rather than the Creator. Or else, living and dying in this world without God, they are exposed to ultimate despair. Wherefore, to promote the glory of God, and procure the salvation of all of these, and mindful of the command of the Lord, “Preach the Gospel to every creature” (Mark 16:16), the Church fosters the missions with care and attention.3
(O.K this could be a reason to preach the Gospel. But Ralph Martin can no more say that all non Catholics are on the way to Hell unless they are incorporated into the Church as members, with faith and baptism(AG 7).Since for him hypothetical cases are explicit exceptions to the strict interpretation of EENS. So he puts forward this personal theory for mission.He has rejected the traditional theology and reason for mission.
__________________________________

The concluding paragraph of LG 13 is the context for understanding this text. It states:
All men are called to belong to the new People of God … This characteristic of universality, which adorns the People of God, is a gift from the Lord himself. By reason of it, the Catholic Church strives energetically and constantly to bring all humanity, with all its riches, back to Christ its Head, in the unity of his Spirit … All men are called to be part of this catholic unity of the People of God, a unity which is harbinger of the universal peace it promotes. And there belong to it ,or are related to it, in various ways, the Catholic faithful as well as all who believe in Christ, and, indeed, the whole of mankind. For all men are called to salvation by the grace of God (emphasis added).
The main presupposition here is that faith, baptism, and the Church are necessary for salvation. This is explicitly stated in LG 14. 
Here the orthodox teaching on salvation and mission are supported but it will be contradicted in by assuming  hypothetical cases are objectively known in the present times.So it is then postulated that there is known salvation outside the Church(LG14, LG 15 etc)
For me LG 14 and LG 15 do not refer to known people saved outside the Church.They mention hypothetical cases only because of the original mistake in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 which was overlooked at Vatican Council II. How can we humans see or know someone in 2018 who has been saved without faith and baptism? How can there be practical exceptions to EENS and the past ecclesiology of the Church?
The norm for salvation is faith and baptism and not invincible ignorance, the baptism of desire and baptism of blood.
____________________________
You can read the rest of the article. The same irrational premise is used.Then upon this false premise a new theology is created.It is based on an objective mistake in observation and empirical mistake. It violates the Principle of Non Contradiction.It is magisterial and officially taught at the pontifical universities and seminaries.
This is also how Vatican Council II is interpreted as the secular universities.-Lionel Andrades
Continued
http://www.hprweb.com/2016/06/conflicting-interpretations-of-lumen-gentium-16/

 FEBRUARY 26, 2018


When you read the text of Vatican Council II do not read the text as being for and against extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS). This would mean you are using the false premise

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/02/when-you-read-text-of-vatican-council.html


FEBRUARY 24, 2018



SSPX begin negotiations with Abp. Guido Pozzo : ask if Vatican Council II can be interpreted with the Lionel Andrades model.

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/02/sspx-begin-negotiations-with-abp-guido.html



FEBRUARY 26, 2018


Abp Guido Pozzo, Secretary of Ecclesia Dei,Vatican interprets Vatican Council II irrationally and so there is the hermeneutic of rupture. He wanted the SSPX to interpret the Council like him and then sign a Doctrinal Preamble.

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/02/ralph-martin-frgerald-collins-eduardo.html

Abp Guido Pozzo, Secretary of Ecclesia Dei,Vatican interprets Vatican Council II irrationally and so there is the hermeneutic of rupture. He wanted the SSPX to interpret the Council like him and then sign a Doctrinal Preamble.

When you read the text of Vatican Council II do not read the text as being for and against extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS). This would mean you are using the false premise I mentioned in the last blog post.The orthodox texts are for EENS. The against texts are really hypothetical references to invisible people in the present times. So they cannot be against EENS.1
When you assume hypothetical cases are not hypothetical and exclude the baptism of water in the Catholic Church it is irrational. The text does not say this.However this is the common inference.

This creates a rupture with EENS as it was known in the past and it is rejection of the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church.
Even the traditionalists and sedevacantists are interpreting Vatican Council II schismatically.Cardinal Raymond Burke, Bishop Athansius Schneider,Chris Ferrara and Bishop Donald Sanborn use the false premise to make the Council a rupture with the past Magisterium.Then they blame Vatican Council II.

However even Archbishop Guido Pozzo, Secretary of Ecclesia Dei,Vatican also interprets Vatican Council II irrationally .So there is the hermeneutic of rupture. He wanted the SSPX to interpret the Council like him.They had to accept the non traditional conclusion and then sign a Doctrinal Preamble.
The SSPX is already interpreting the Council like Archbishop Pozzo but unlike him they reject the conclusion.
Neither of the two are mentioning that they can interpret the Council like me in which hypothetical cases would simply be considered hypothetical. Then there would be no text in the Council which would contradict the past ecclesiology of the Church, EENS and the Syllabus of Errors.

EXAMPLE  LUMEN GENTIUM 16,VATICAN COUNCIL II


16. Finally, those who have not yet received the Gospel are related in various ways to the people of God. (Hypothetical. Speculation) In the first place we must recall the people to whom the testament and the promises were given and from whom Christ was born according to the flesh.(125) On account of their fathers this people remains most dear to God, for God does not repent of the gifts He makes nor of the calls He issues. But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator.(Hypothetical) In the first place amongst these there are the Muslims, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful God, who on the last day will judge mankind. Nor is God far distant from those who in shadows and images seek the unknown God, for it is He who gives to all men life and breath and all things,(127) and as Saviour wills that all men be saved.(In potential salvation is open to all . In fact all need to enter the Church. Dejure( in principle) one can speculate. In fact, defacto all need faith and abaptism for salvation( Ad Gentes 7) 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.(Hypothetically yes .In theory it is a possibility. In reality we do not know any such person on earth) Nor does Divine Providence deny the helps necessary for salvation to those who, without blame on their part, have not yet arrived at an explicit knowledge of God and with His grace strive to live a good life.(Hypothetically O.K.This is said speculatively, in general with good will)  Whatever good or truth is found amongst them is looked upon by the Church as a preparation for the Gospel. (O.K. Accepted with good will. But we do not know any particular person saved as such so there is no link with EENS. This should be clear. ) She knows that it is given by Him who enlightens all men so that they may finally have life. But often men, deceived by the Evil One, have become vain in their reasonings and have exchanged the truth of God for a lie, serving the creature rather than the Creator.(129) Or some there are who, living and dying in this world without God, are exposed to final despair. Wherefore to promote the glory of God and procure the salvation of all of these, and mindful of the command of the Lord, "Preach the Gospel to every creature",(130) the Church fosters the missions with care and attention.

For Archbishop Guido Pozzo the passages in red are not hypothetical but are exceptions to the old ecclesiology and the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma  EENS. This is how Cardinal Ratzinger and the then Fr.Luiz Ladaria s.j expressed themselves in the International Theological Commission papers ( See Christianity and the World Religions on the right hand side label on this blog).
Now for me the passages in red refer to only hypothetical cases and un-known and invisible people in 2018.So they  cannot be visible examples of salvation outside the Church. They do not contradict, and never did in the past, the dogma EENS and the past ecclesiology of the Church upon which the Syllabus of Errors was based.
So the new ecumenism and the new ecclesiology of Archbishop Guido Pozzo emerges after mixing up what is invisible as being visible, what is implicit is interpreted as being explicit.
This violates the Principle of Non Contradiction. How can a person saved allegedly with the baptism of desire and without the baptism of water and who would now be in Heaven, also be on earth to be an exception to the dogma EENS? It doesn't make sense.
Yet this is the  theological gymnastics that Archbishop Pozzo and Augustine Di Noia have to do to interpret Vatican Council II as a rupture with the past ecclesiology and the Syllabus of Errors. This is schism with the past popes and Councils and they are forcing this upon all Catholics.
-Lionel Andrades

1.
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/02/when-you-read-text-of-vatican-council.html

When you read the text of Vatican Council II do not read the text as being for and against extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS). This would mean you are using the false premise

When you read the text of Vatican Council II do not read the text as being for and against extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS). This would mean you are using the false premise.

You assume that hypothetical cases are not hypothetical and exclude the baptism of water in the Catholic Church. The text does not say this.However this is the common inference.
Image result for photo Christopher Ferrara and Roberto dei Mattei
This creates a rupture with EENS as it was known in the past and it is rejection of the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church.



Even the traditionalists and sedevacantists are interpreting Vatican Council II schismatically.Chris Ferrara and Bishop Donald Sanborn use the false premise to make the Council a rupture with the past Magisterium.Then they blame Vatican Council II.

EXAMPLE : 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.(Note: Do not assume that this passage contradicts EENS. For me it  refers to a hypothetical case.)
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.(Note: This passage does not contradict the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS,unless you are assuming unknown and physically invisible catechumens in 2018 are known and nameable examples of salvation outside the Church).

This mistake is made here in this blog post at Catholic Sensibility.


Lumen Gentium 14

Who’s in? Who’s out? Lumen Gentium 14 answers it:
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(Cf. Mk 16, 16; Jn. 3, 5) and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door (people) 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 (people) to the Church in a visible way are profession of faith, the sacraments, and ecclesiastical government and communion. (One) is not saved, however, who, though part of the body of the Church, does not persevere in charity. (That one) remains indeed in the bosom of the Church, but, as it were, only in a “bodily” manner and not “in (the) heart.”(Cfr. S. Augustinus, Bapt. c. Donat. V, 28, 39; PL 43, 197: Certe manifestum est, id quod dicitur, in Ecdesia intus et foris, in corde, non in corpore cogitandum. Cfr. ib., III, 19, 26: col. 152; V, 18, 24: col. 189; In Io. Tr. 61, 2: PL 35, 1800, et alibi saepe.) 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.(Cfr. Lc. 12, 48: Omni autem, cui multum datum est, multum quaeretur ab eo. Cfr. etiam Mt. 5, 19-20; 7, 21-22; 25 41-46; Iac., 2, 14.)
A few comments … This section leaves untouched the notion of those who are incorporated, though in less fully a way. This section also condemns the lack of charity in a believer. A fate worse than unbelievers awaits, according to St Augustine, at any rate.
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.
And if catechumens, why not others?
(There are no known catechumens who are saved with the baptism of desire and who are known to us. So this is a hypothetical reference. It is not an exception to EENS.)
Image result for photo  Roberto dei Mattei
Image result for photo  Roberto dei Mattei
Related image

Image result for photo  Roberto dei Mattei

Image result for photo  Roberto dei Mattei

_

__________________
From Catholic Answers
I am sorry if this question has been debated many times before, but I will try to narrow it down as much as possible.
In Lumen Gentium 14 we read the following:
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.
What do you think that the council means by "knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ"? What does it mean to "know"? Does it mean that everyone that has heard about the necessity of the Catholic Church (including submitting to the authority of the Roman Pontiff) but still refuses to enter it cannot be saved? That would mean that all non-Catholic Christians including all protestants and Eastern Orthodox that know about the Catholic Church's own claims cannot be saved.
Or, does it merely mean that everyone who has been convinced that the Catholic Church is necessary for salvation need to enter it? In that case, the meaning of this sentence would narrow down to mean almost nothing, for why wouldn't anyone who knows in his or her heart that the Catholic Church is necessary for salvation want to enter it?

You're right. Anyone who knows about the Church and rejects it is lost. This simply means there are billions of people clamoring to get into Hell.

https://forums.catholic.com/t/eens-what-does-lumen-gentium-14-really-say/201732



Catholic Answers assumes there are known people.The reference in Lumen Gentium 14 is to a hypothetical case.
So why is it mentioned in Vatican Council II? Since the Council Fathers repeated the mistake in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston.The Letter wrongly assumes hypothetical and invisible  cases of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance are visible and concrete exceptions to the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma EENS.This was false. The error was not corrected by the popes.
We can avoid this error when reading Vatican Council II (LG 14, LG 8, LG 16, UR 3, Na 2, GS 22 etc).
__________________________


Gavin D'Costa in his book published by Oxford University Press makes this error. He assumes invincible ignorance (LG 16) etc are exceptions to the dogma EENS. So he reads hypothetical passages in Vatican Council II as being non hypothetical. So there are orthodox and non orthdodox passages for him in the Council II. He has accepted the false premise ( invisible people are visible exceptions to EENS in the present times.)


Front CoverImage result for Photo of Gavin D'costaImage result for Photo of Gavin D'costaImage result for Photo of Gavin D'costa

__________________

- Lionel Andrades




 MARCH 4, 2017

Unknown




English universities present a lie on Catholic theology and doctrine - unethical for academics

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/03/english-universities-present-lie-on.html


AY 25, 2015

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/05/prof-gavin-dcosta-is-using.html
Photograph of Dr Susannah TicciatiProfessor Paul Joyce

OCTOBER 9, 2014



Faculty at the Department of Theology and Religious Studies Kings College, London use an irrational premise which is a falsehood.

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/10/professor-paul-joyce-and-dr-susannah.html

OCTOBER 7, 2014



Universities in England have a new interpretation of Catholic doctrine : uncontested http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/10/universities-in-england-have-new.html

When the University of Bristol permits Prof. Gavin D'Costa and the faculty to use an irrational premise, it is a secular lie http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/10/when-university-of-bristol-permits-prof.html 

Gavin D'Costa comes across as professionally unethical.His irrationality would not be accepted by academics in England http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/04/gavin-dcosta-comes-across-as.html 

Gavin D'Costa presents an irrational view of the Catholic Faith to the Islamic Society of the University of Bristol and visiting Muslim professors http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/04/gavin-dcosta-presents-irrational-view.html 

Muslim professors must know exactly what are the teachings of the Catholic Church about Islam and other religions, before and after Vatican Council II http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/04/muslim-professors-must-know-exactly.html  

APRIL 9, 2015

University of Bristol and Gavin D'Costa repeat the lie on Catholic teaching : interprets Vatican Council II with Cushingism http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/04/university-of-bristol-and-gavin-dcosta.html



October 7, 2014

Department of Theology and Religious Studies at the University of Bristol is still teaching an irrationality : even after being informed

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/10/department-of-theology-and-religious.html

May 31, 2014

Joseph Shaw, Gavin D'Costa obedient to Cardinal Vince Nicols are misleading lay Catholics http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/05/joseph-shaw-gavin-dcosta-obedient-to.html

May 29, 2014

Cardinal Nicols and FIUV are telling a falsehood. Why do rank and file Catholics have to accept it? http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/05/cardinal-nicols-and-fiuv-are-telling.html

May 20, 2014

If someone is saved with ' a ray of the Truth' (Nostra Aetate 2) it is not known in 2014, so NA 2 does not contradict AG 7 or extra ecclesiam nulla salushttp://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/05/if-someone-is-saved-with-ray-of-truth.html#links

APRIL 25, 2015

Gavin D'Costa will not say that Vatican Council II indicates all Muslims in Britain and elsewhere are on the way to Hell : there is no correction or apology for irrational reasoning  http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/04/gavin-dcosta-will-not-say-that-vatican.html 

Gavin D'Costa has not denied that he uses a false reasoning, which is factually and objectively incorrect http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/04/gavin-dcosta-has-not-denied-that-he.html 

MAY 10, 2014

Prof.Gavin D'Costa cannot say that all the Muslims in England are on the way to Hell according to Vatican Council II (AG 7)

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/05/profgavin-dcosta-cannot-say-that-all.html

MAY 8, 2014

Lady Hale is promoting the political left version of Vatican Council II at the University of Bristol, England

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/05/lady-hale-is-promoting-political-left.html

May 5, 2014

University of Bristol is making the same factual error on Nostra Aetate as Cardinal Richard Cushing and the Jesuits in Boston

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/05/university-of-bristol-is-making-same.html#links


Related image