Tuesday, May 8, 2018

So what is Louie waiting for , what prevents him from interpreting Vatican Council II rationally ?

In a previous blog post I wrote Everything hinges on visible baptism of desire : correct the premise and change the Council. 
Change the premise and change the Council's interpretation with one stroke.The changes Cardinal Richard Cushing, the Jesuits and others made in Vatican Council II were based on the Fr. Leonard Feeney case ; the use of the false premise.
We need one simple action to make the Council traditional again.One simple action.It is - correct the premise.
It can be compared to a dark room when the light is switched on.The darkness all goes at once. One simple action.Press the light switch.
It can be compared to watering the root of the tree. One simple action and the whole tree is nourished. We do not have to water the leaves and branches separately.
Similarly by changing the invisible cases are visible premise to simply invisible cases are just invisible - we water the whole tree of Vatican Council II, so to speak, all at once.We do not have to touch up Lumen Gentium or re-write Gaudium et Spes. 1
Marx
So when Unitatis Redintegratio 3 says,' It follows that the separated Churches and Communities as such, though we believe them to be deficient in some respects, have been by no means deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation.' it refers to a hypothetical case.
It refers to someone physically invisible on earth. It is speculative.
But for Louie Verrechio UR 3 refers to known people saved outside the Church. It refers to known Christians saved outside the Church. 
Well, because the almighty Council said that these heretical operations are such that “Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation!” (ibid.)- Fool me once, shame on you…  2
So for Louie and the present two popes UR 3 is a rupture with extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors and so Vatican Council II is a rupture with Tradition.The Council does not have the hermeneutic of continuity because the traditionalists and the liberals see UR 3 as a known person saved outside the Church and not a hypothetical case.
The two popes and the Left appreciate it. Louie rejects the conclusion. But both are using the same irrational premise.

So now we have a choice. We can use the irrational premise or discard it.We can assume LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc refer to physically visible people or we can say that they are invisible cases in 2017.Either way the conclusion with reference to EENS is different(Ibid).
Louie and the pope have a choice . But they do not choose the rational option.They interpret Vatican Council II as a rupture with Tradition.
Pope Benedict also had a choice and he chose the irrational premise and this is  expressed in the new Code of Canon Law which Louie has cited.
So when your premise is : invisible cases of LG 16, LG 8 etc are not exceptions to EENS, since they are invisible in 2017, there is no rupture with EENS in Vatican Council II, we have a traditional Council.Vatican Council II is not a break with the Syllabus of Errors and the rest of Tradition.
So with one action we have changed Vatican Council II as it is being interpreted by just about every body today.
One simple action(Ibid).
Louie writes :
The seeds were planted at the almighty Council:
The brethren divided from us [Editor’s note: the heretics] also use many liturgical actions of the Christian religion. These most certainly can truly engender a life of grace in ways that vary according to the condition of each Church or Community. These liturgical actions must be regarded as capable of giving access to the community of salvation. (UR 3)
Yes the seeds were planted at the Council. They interpreted being saved in invincible ignorance among Christians, as referring to known people saved outside the Church.
They saw being saved with the baptism of desire and baptism of blood among Protestants, as referring to known people saved outside the Church.
So there was salvation outside the Church for them. No one contested this error in the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office.
But today in 2018 Louie is free to interpret UR 3 as referring to only hypothetical cases.
It can be compared to a magnet. When we change the polarity of a magnet all the iron filings placed before it move.They change their position.Similarly by changing the premise, one simple action, all the irrationality in Vatican Council II is moved out.
Try it for yourself. Experiment. Picture LG 16, LG 8, UR 3 etc as referring to unknown persons , unknowable persons.Or picture them as being known people saved outside the church. What is your conclusion in both cases with reference to EENS?
When we choose a rational premise not only does Vatican Council II change but the Council is in harmony with other magisterial documents.(ibid)
No one prevents Louie from saying that UR 3 refers to an invisible and unknown Protestant in 2018.
Without the irrational premise the Holy Mass offered today, in Italian , Latin or Greek, has the same ecclesiology of the Tridentine Rite Mass of the 16th century.The Nicene Creed is simple and the same as the understanding over the centuries.Invisible for us baptism of desire and blood and being saved in invincible ignorance are not exceptions to the old ecclesiology or to Feeneyite EENS.They do not make Vatican Council II a rupture with the past.
One small change and all this good is achieved. One simple action and the Council returns to Tradition.(ibid)
So what is Louie waiting for, what prevents him from interpreting Vatican Council II rationally ? -Lionel Andrades
1.

 MAY 7, 2018

Repost : Everything hinges on visible baptism of desire : correct the premise and change the Council  http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/05/repost-everything-hinges-on-visible.html

2.

Fool me once, shame on you…  https://akacatholic.com/fool-me-once-shame-on-you/

It is only when Catholics have unity in theology and doctrine that Europe can go back to its Catholic roots

Image result for Photo Feast of Our Lady of Pompeii
Today is the feast of Our Lady of Pompei. There will be prayers for Europe and 'all erring nations'.Europe has forgotten not its Christian but Catholic roots.Their Catholic roots included the belief that outside the Roman Catholic Church there was no salvation.
The present two popes have also forgotten their Catholic roots and so have the governments.They speak about Europe's Christian roots but they really mean its Catholic roots.
Christian civilization with its scientific discoveries was originally Catholic.Jesus founded only one Church which did not have the doctrines of Martin Luther.
Italy too has forgotten its Catholic roots as the pope recently told the Neo Cathecumenal Way, to avoid 'triumphalism'.He did not want them to interpret Vatican Council II in harmony with the Europe of the past.
Pope Benedict in March 2016 told us that the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, for him, was no more like it was in 16th century- Europe. He had a choice. He could have said that Vatican Council II supports EENS as it was known to the Jesuit missionaries in  16th century Spain.But he avoided saying this .So he maintained the doctrinal confusion among Catholics.
He forgot Germany's Catholic roots too, before, the  theological and doctrinal Protestant invasion supported by the German princes.
Then on March 1, 2018 Cardinal Luiz Ladari s.j was telling all Catholic politicians in Europe that they could no more proclaim the Social Reign of Christ the King over all political legislation. Since for him, there was known salvation outside the Church.No politician told him that this was false. There are no known cases of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance, outside the Catholic Church and there never were.
Image result for Photo Matteo Salvini with a rosary in his hand
Even Matteo Salvini the populist political leader of Italy, once shown with a rosary in his hand, in a photograph before the last elections has not called Italy back to its Roman Catholic roots.Instead he unknowingly supports the Left's vision of a vague Christian theology for Europe.Perhaps this is ignorance.Since the cardinals and bishops also interpret Vatican Council II with the irrational premise( invisible people are visible and examples of salvation outside the Church) when without this false premise, approved by the popes, Italy would return to the old teaching on extra ecclesiam nulla salus, which Berlusconi remembers being taught at school by the Redemptorists.
To go back to Europe's roots it is important for Salvini and other Catholic politicians to correct the false theology in the Church. Then they can unite the Catholic population with a common traditional theology and the traditional doctrines, in harmony with the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX, which presently is opposed by the two popes and the Jewish Left.
It is only when Catholics have unity in theology and doctrine that Europe can go back to its Catholic roots.-Lionel Andrades

Cammino Neocatecumenale, torna in tutto il mondo la “Missione nelle 100 piazze”

Cammino Neocatecumenale, torna in tutto il mondo la “Missione nelle 100 piazze”

Da oggi, per tutte le domeniche del tempo pasquale, l’iniziativa di evangelizzazione che si svolgerà contemporaneamente in 135 nazioni

http://www.lastampa.it/2018/04/08/vaticaninsider/cammino-neocatecumenale-torna-in-tutto-il-mondo-la-missione-nelle-piazze-Xi80JBg0Q322AEd9bJ38VK/pagina.html















http://www.catechistaduepuntozero.it/100piazze/picture.php?/7089/category/441



March for Life (2) England

 fROM THE BLOG COUNTERCULTURAL FATHER


8 MAY 2018

March for Life (2)

Rachel Mackenzie
I have already posted my reflections on Saturday morning. Once we arrived in Parliament Square, we had a pro-Life song from Joy Villa (who famously wore a dress with an image of her unborn child to the Grammy award ceremony), and then some of the most powerful testimonies from British pro-Life women.

The first was Rachel MacKenzie, who now works for Rachel's Vineyard, the organisation dedicated to helping women to recover from the trauma of abortion. She described her own sad experiences as a young woman, including being awake enough during one of her abortions to see the abortionists counting the body parts of her dismembered baby.  She described her long journey through the classic stages of grief: anger, denial, bargaining, depression, and acceptance; and acknowledged that some of the anger and hostility that we were experiencing from the counter-protestors might indicate that some of them were stuck in the early stages of that process.  Rachel's courageous acceptance of the reality of her choices was very evident in all that she said: about the children she had had aborted, and about her finding meaning through faith and her charitable outreach to others in a similar situation. Rachel's talk may be seen and heard here

Clare McCullough
The second was the indomitable Clare McCullough, founder of Good Counsel Network. Clare was very clear about the need for the frontline work she and her volunteers do: reaching women on the very threshold of the abortion clinics. Her testimony gives the lie to the political posturing of Sister Supporter and their fellow-travellers.  If Clare and her team were harassing or abusing women, then women would never trust them; and it would be self-evidently counter-productive. In fact, many women are grateful for their presence, as it offers them a real choice, to turn away from the path they are - often extremely unwillingly - on, and make a positive choice for themselves and their unborn children.

Alina and her daughter
Powerful as Clare's speech was, it was the following testimonies of two of the women that Good Counsel Network have helped that was most moving.  The first, Alina, told us her story, and how one of Clare's volunteers had offered her love and support, and the belief that she could have her baby.  She had the girl - due to be killed by Marie Stopes International on that fateful day all those years ago - with her on stage.  Alina is so grateful for Good Counsel Network that she now volunteers for them, and it is she who is challenging Ealing Council's Buffer Zones in the courts.

Aurelia
The next speaker was Aurelia, another women rescued from the very jaws of the abortuary.  Again, her situation was difficult, and seemed without hope, until a Good Counsel volunteer approached her and said that she could help. And that volunteer was Alina. Like Aurelia, Alina had her daughter with her: you can watch and listen to her testimony here - and in the background at the start, you will see Clare McCullough carrying Alina's baby: 'the best thing that ever happened to me, the love or my life' as Alina said.

After Alina's story, Aurelia and Alina were joined on stage by a number of other women helped by Good Counsel Network, and their babies and young children.  This is why we do what we do.

--

Shortly after this, I had to leave, as the last train North was unreasonably early!  But as I made my way home, I reflected on the start and the end of the day: on Life's fantastic strategy of reaching as many women as possible at the very start of their pregnancies: trying to help them before they are placed on the one-way path to abortion; and then on Good Counsel Network's heroic work at the other end, snatching life from the jaws of death, and hope from the threshold of despair.

Pray for them all.  And act! As Clare McCullough said, it is no good lamenting the draconian actions of Ealing Council if we are not prepared to do something. Prayer is important; but it doesn't let us off the hook of writing the the Home Secretary and our own MP about the travesty of buffer zones (and drawing their attention to the testimony of women like Alina and Aurelia); and of considering what more we can do to support the essential work of Life and Good Counsel Network, both thought alms and volunteering.  

If not us, then who?...

--

Lord, when did I see you pregnant and refuse to help you? Unborn, and refused to stand up for you?...

http://ccfather.blogspot.it/2018/05/march-for-life-2.html

Cardinal Raymond Burke and Gloria TV in a split between faith and reason : no new Revelation for a change in their salvation theology

Cardinal Raymond Burke tells Gloria TV that revelation does not contradict reason yet like the LMS, SSPX and the two popes he assumes invisible cases of the baptism of desire are visible exceptions to Feeneyite EENS. So for him Fr. Leonard Feeney of Boston would be in heresy and Pope Pius XII would be orthodox.Visible cases of the baptism of desire? This makes sense for them.
Common sense tells us that the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) are physically invisible for us.We cannot see or meet any one saved as such.
It was the liberal theologians in 1949 and then again in 1965 who interpreted BOD, BOB and I.I as being exceptions to EENS, in other words they referred to known people saved outside the Church.
They also wrongly interpreted Mystici Corporis, Quanta Cura and the Catechisms of Trent and Pius X as referring to known people saved with BOD, BOB and I.I. Then they projected these Church documents and the past popes as contradicting Feeneyite EENS.This was a liberal ploy and the traditionalists innocently went along with it.
This is the interpretation today of Cardinal Raymond Burke,  Bishop Athanasius Schneider and the Staff at Gloria TV.
This is a rupture between faith and reason.
Theology and doctrine on salvation has been changed.
In the past the theology was outside the Church there is no salvation and now it is outside the Church there is known salvation.
In the past it was taught that every one in ignorance of Jesus and the Church were oriented to Hell now it is taught that they are not.Why? Since there are known cases of non Catholics saved outside the Church. So only those who know, need to enter the Church.
Only those who know! This was the false theology of Lumen Gentium 14 in Vatican Council II built upon an irrational premise from the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office.The Letter was a flawed document which could not be magisterial.Since it was a rupture with the popes of the past.The saints affirmed BOD, BOB and I.I and also the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS. There was contradiction. They were rational. There was no split between faith and reason.This was how the  Holy Spirit inspired them to teach sound Catholic doctrine.
We need a Correctio Filialis showing Cardinal Burke his error which is the same as that of the present two popes and which he does not correct or comment upon.
Basically what I am saying is that there are no physically visible cases of the BOD, BOB and I.I in 2018. They cannot  agree or disagree with me on something so simple.-Lionel Andrades




Cardinal Burke: Francis Risks A Schism



Pope Francis cannot permit that a bishops' conference or an individual bishop does anything contrary to the doctrine and practice of the faith, Cardinal Raymond Burke said in a gloria.tv interview hosted by the Austrian philosopher Thomas Stark.

Burke called the proposal that German Protestants should be "allowed" to receive Holy Communion "absurd."

He hopes that Francis will correct this, "Otherwise, the Roman Catholic Church ends up in a situation like the ever multiplying Protestant denominations."

Further, Burke commented on Francis' recent denying the existence of hell and the immortality of the human soul noticing that there has not been a proper correction on the part of the Holy See.

According to Burke, it would have been necessary to say that Francis "reaffirms what the Church has always taught about the last things."

According to Burke the current situation in the Church runs the risk "of a schism".

Picture: Raymond Burke, #newsUnxczrvyut



Latin Mass Society of England and Wales and the SSPX have changed theology and doctrine on salvation Joseph Shaw agrees

Annual York Pilgrimage
I mentioned in a post on this blog (May 6,2018)1 that the Latin Mass Society(LMS) of England and Wales 2 and specifically the Chairman of the LMS Dr. Joseph Shaw, professor of philosophy at Oxford has changed the teachings of the Catholic Church on salvation in doctrine and practice and have accepted it since it is magisterial for the present two liberal popes.So today there is a rupture with the ecclesiology of their Latin Mass and that of the Tridentine Rite Mass in for example, in the 16th century. The rubrics/rituals may be the same but the theology and doctrines are the same as those at the Novus Ordo Mass in 2018.
I don't expect them to answer since I have said the same thing before and received no reply. It is the same with the SSPX.This is also the theological and doctrinal position of Una Voce.
Image result for Photo Louis Tofari SSPXImage result for Photo Louis Tofari SSPX
I recall some years back Louis Tofari at the SSPX, USA Public Relations office saying confidently that the SSPX rejects Feeneyism and so he has nothing more to say.The same is said by the liberals.They tell me 'the Church' has rejected Feeneyism and the traditionalists are on the same wavelength as them.
 So for all of them Fr.  Leonard Feeney of Boston would  be heretical and the Letter of  the Holy Office 1949, orthodox.This was also the theology of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger when he was the Prefect of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith. This seemed the theology of Pope Pius XII and it was also supported by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.So it would be rational for all of them to assume invisible cases of the baptism of desire etc are visible exceptions to traditional EENS. This is the common view in the Church even today.
Since the LMS and SSPX reject Feeneyism they imply that there are known people saved outside the Church.Otherwise how could there be exceptions to dogma outside the Church there is no salvation? So this is the common inference.This is the understanding of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 i.e invisible cases of the baptism of desire etc are visible exceptions to Feeneyite and traditional extra ecclesiam nulla salus
There is no denial from Dr. Joseph Shaw.He is not a Feeneyite and so invisible cases of being saved in invincible ignorance(LG 14) are visible exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus for him. 
But not for me. LG 14 does not contradict EENS for me.References to hypothetical cases are not concrete and defacto known, in the present times.
Here is our understanding of the Catholic faith.
1) Invisible- for- Shaw baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance are visible exceptions to traditional extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was known for example to the missionaries and Magisterium in the 16th century.
1) I Lionel, affirm invisible for me BOD, BOB and I.I and so they are not exceptions or relevant to  EENS for me. So I can attend the Latin Mass with the same ecclesiology as the Mass in the 16th century, but the LMS and the SSPX do not have permission to do the same.I also attend the Novus Ordo Mass with the same ecclesiology as Mass in the 16th century.

2) Similarly invisible for him LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22, etc are visible exceptions to traditional extra ecclesiam nulla salus.So Vatican Council II is a rupture with EENS as it was known to the Jesuits in the Middle Ages. Vatican Council II is a rupture with Tradition for the LMS and SSPX. Since there is known salvation outside the Church for them the old exclusivist ecclesiology is obsolete. Upon this old ecclesiology depended the ecumenism of return. So the Syllabus of Errors has also been made obsolete.
2) For me invisible and unknown cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2 etc are not visible and known in particular cases. So Vatican Council II is not a rupture with the old ecclesiology of the Church.There is no known salvation outside the Catholic Church, for us humans, in 2018.There are no exceptions to EENS or the Syllabus of Errors for me. The traditional ecclesiology of the Church before and after Vatican Council II is the same. However the LMS is not permitted to affirm this.
So there is a change in theology and doctrine on salvation for the LMS, SSPX and cardinals and bishops in Britain. 
There is no denial from them.
This is interesting since Joseph Shaw was the spokesman for the Correctio Filialis, 3 which was concerned about a change in moral theology and the rejection of the doctrines of the Catholic Church by Pope Francis.
-Lionel Andrades

1.

MAY 6, 2018

Latin Mass Society Press Release : The LMS denies the Faith on salvation, in principle and in doctrine, in practice and pastorally
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/05/excommunication-of-sspx-faithful-lms.html
2.
https://lms.org.uk/

3.
Saturday, September 23, 2017
With profound grief... A filial correction.
St Catherine of Siena before Pope Gregory XI

Update: to add your name (the public list will be moderated, i.e. we are looking especially for signatories with academic qualifications etc.) please email




or go to Change.org to support the petition.


With profound grief, but moved by fidelity to our Lord Jesus Christ, by love for the Church and for the papacy, and by filial devotion toward yourself, we are compelled to address a correction to Your Holiness on account of the propagation of heresies effected by the apostolic exhortation Amoris laetitia and by other words, deeds and omissions of Your Holiness.

We are permitted to issue this correction by natural law, by the law of Christ, and by the law of the Church, which three things Your Holiness has been appointed by divine providence to guard.


By natural law: for as subjects have by nature a duty to obey their superiors in all lawful things, so they have a right to be governed according to law, and therefore to insist, where need be, that their superiors so govern. 


By the law of Christ: for His Spirit inspired the apostle Paul to rebuke Peter in public when the latter did not act according to the truth of the gospel (Gal. 2). St Thomas Aquinas notes that this public rebuke from a subject to a superior was licit on account of the imminent danger of scandal concerning the faith (Summa Theologiae 2a 2ae, 33, 4 ad 2), and ‘the gloss of St Augustine’ adds that on this occasion, “Peter gave an example to superiors, that if at any time they should happen to stray from the straight path, they should not disdain to be reproved by their subjects” (ibid.). 

The law of the Church also constrains us, since it states that “Christ’s faithful . . . have the right, indeed at times the duty, in keeping with their knowledge, competence, and position, to manifest to the sacred pastors their views on matters which concern the good of the Church” (Code of Canon Law 212:2-3; Code of Canons of Oriental Churches 15:3).

I am a signatory of the document which begins with these words, and also its spokesman. You can read the full text on Rorate Caeli, and on a specially made website, http://correctiofilialis.org/ [corrected]. See also 1Peter5's commentary.
http://www.lmschairman.org/2017/09/with-profound-grief-filial-correction.html