Repost : Conchiglia of the Holy Trinity and the International Theological Commission

 MAY 30, 2015

Conchiglia of the Holy Trinity and the International Theological Commission

The leftist Italian newspaper La Stampa, Vatican Insider  refers to the 'fake messages' of the seer Conciglia of the Holy Trinity.It is as if La Stampa is  having apparitions of their own and so know these messages are false.They could have just reported it objectively without judging the messages.

Jesus tells Conciglia  that what we see today is not His  Church.In some aspects it is not.Of course this still is the Church of Jesus Christ, it still is the Mystical Body of Jesus - but many aspects of the present day church are not part of Jesus' Church. They clearly come from Freemasonary and other enemies of the Church who represent Satan.

 

Conciglia says

THAT WHICH YOU SEE TODAY IS NOT MY CHURCH...
Jesus: Even « the person of the Highest level in the Freemasonry »
is subordinate of the Hebrew Heads that hate Me
and that are effectively in power in the Vatican...
« That part of the Hebrew People » readily forgathered to study and plan
a monstrous « Worldwide Project ». The Hebrew Holocaust...
is a work of the same Hebrew Heads of the same époque and even then
« they have used others » to do the dirty work. Muslims... against Christians...
The « Unnamed » precedes the Antichrist... Is distorting all that I have taught.
PART V - The Most Appalling Reality of Humanity

Yesterday I  commented  on  Limbo according to the document issued by the International Theological Commission, Vatican. ITC  has made a factual and objective error in the Limbo report. I wrote about this a few years back.The blog post  has been there on the Internet since then. Yet nothing has been done or said about it at the Vatican.The Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Luiz Ladaria S.J  has been directly involved in this error.He was the President of the ITC. Cardinal Muller and Archbishop Di Noia have also been active at the ITC. So they all knew about it. All were  involved.

Rorate Caeili posted my reports as comments and then pulled them down.Rorate reported that a member of the Jewish Reformed community, who teaches ecumenism at the Angelicum University in Rome called in.

The ITC report on Limbo uses  Apparition Theology.So does  the rest of the Church.The error  originated in Boston in 1949. This was about the time of the creation of the state of Israel. Pope Pius XII was silent. He let the error creep into the Church. He did not defend Fr.Leonard Feeney who was faithful to the magisterium of the Church before 1949.

Since then there is a new magisterium. The contemporary magisterium accepts apparition theology. It's influence can be seen in Dominus Iesus and Redemptoris Missio. It is there in the Catechism of the Catholic Church 846,1257.How could a magisterium infer that the dead for us, who are now in Heaven, have been saved without the baptism of water, and they are now visible and known to us in the present times, to be exceptions to the rigorist interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus,which says all need to formally enter the Church ? This is fantasy theology. Yet this is the politically correct irrationality, accepted by the popes, cardinals and bishops at the Vatican- since the time of Pope Pius XII.
The dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus has been done with.In reality it does not exist. It has been lost.

At Fatima, Our Lady said that the dogma of the faith will be lost. She could be referring to this important dogma of the Catholic Church.

This is the new Church which Conciglia of the Holy Trinity could be referring to.

My approach to this issue is not through mysticism but theology and doctrine and common sense.I can see that so many things which she mentions are correct.I see this by looking at the issue of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

The present theology being used by the magisterium is irrational, non traditional, heretical and not Catholic.It is the new Church. This teaching cannot be part of Jesus' Church.

-Lionel Andrades

 

Seer Conchiglia of the Holy Trinity meets Pope Benedict
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/05/seer-conchiglia-of-holy-trinity-meets.html

In The Hope of Salvation for Infants Who Die Without Being Baptized they used Marchetti theology, an irrational theologyhttp://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/05/in-hope-of-salvation-for-infants-who.html

http://gloria.tv/media/gcbjhw6TbwN

http://www.conchiglia.us/UK/UK_C_lettere/13.261_UK_PAPA_Em_BENEDETTO_XVI_5a_Parte_La_realta'_piu'_sconvolgente_dell'Umanita'_Capi_ebrei_che_Mi_odiano_al_potere_in_Vaticano_L'Innominato_precede_l'Anticristo.pdf

http://www.conchiglia.us/UK/UK_C_lettere/13.252_UK_PAPA_EMERITO_BENEDETTO

The CDF needs to apologize for the error in the Fr. Leonard Feeney case.It has a direct bearing on how we interpret Vatican Council II. The Council becomes a rupture or continuity with the past.

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF) needs to review the Fr. Leonard Feeney case since an objective error  was made by the Holy Office(CDF) 1949.Invisible baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) were assumed to be visible exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).All references to BOD, BOB and I.I in the past ,were  interpreted in 1949 as referring to objective people saved outside the Chrch, people in the flesh who were exceptions to traditional EENS.

When the saints mentioned BOD, BOB and I.I they were referring to hypothetical cases.But the liberal theologians in 1949  re-interpreted  BOD, BOB and I.I.So the saints and popes were projected as a rupture  with Feeneyite EENS.

Similarly they interpreted references to BOD, BOB and I.I in the Catechisms of Pius X, Trent etc as a rupture with the Syllabus of Errors on an ecumenism or return and no salvation outside the Church.Again it was physically visible cases of BOD, BOB and I.I.

The mistake of the Letter was repeated by the Council Fathers in 1965.Then the liberal theologians along with the CDF interpreted Vatican Council II as a rupture with the Syllabus of Errors and EENS.They used the false premise, even though they had a rational choice.
The CDF did not correct the mistake after Vatican Council II  but actually promoted it.

How could invisible cases of BOD, BOB and I.I be visible exceptions to traditional EENS ? Who can see people saved without the baptism of water in Heaven? What are the names of the practical exceptions to EENS in 2018?

So now even the understanding of the Nicence Creed is changed to 'I believe not in one known baptism for the forgiveness of sins but three known baptisms and they exclude the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.They are also known examples of salvation outside the Church'.

The CDF accepted this false reasoning in two papers of the International Theological Commission.The new theology is there in  Redemptoris Missio and Dominus Iesus and this year, at the Placuet Deo Press Conference.On  March 1 Cardinal Luiz Ladaria, Prefect of the CDF told a journalist from the Associated Press that Lumen Gentium 8 was an exception to the traditional exclusivist ecclesiology of the Catholic Church.




He meant there were known non Catholics saved outside the Church with elements of sanctification and truth(LG 8) or there were known Catholics saved outside the Church where the true Church of Christ allegedly subsists(LG 8).

These cases would have to be known people for there to be a practical exception to the old ecclesiology.Invisible people cannot be exceptions to EENS and the past ecclesiology.Simiarly the ecumenism of return of the Syllabus of Errors could only be rejected if there were known Christians saved in their religions outside the Church.

Pope Benedict repeated the error in March 2016 when he said that EENS today was no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century since there was a development with Vatican Council II. He meant Vatican Council II interpreted with the false premise ( LG 16, LG 14 etc refer to known non Catholics saved outside the Church).
He had a choice. He could have said that EENS today was not a rupture with EENS as it was known to the missionaries in the 16th century since LG 8, LG 14,LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc refer to invisible people in the present times. They are only hypothetical cases. Theoretical cases are not practical exceptions to EENS as it was known to the missionaries and Magisterium in the 16th century.
He could have simply corrected the error but it seems as if he wanted to promote the hermeneutic of rupture.

The CDF needs to clarify that hypothetical cases of the BOD,BOB and I.I cannot be practical exceptions to Feeneyite EENS. Possibilities of salvation are hypothetical and theoretical cases always for us human beings. They cannot be objective exceptions to EENS.No one could have seen any one saved in Heaven without faith and the baptism of water.So the Holy Office 1949 made a mistake in the Fr. Leonard Feeney case.

Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member -Letter of the Holy Office 1949

Fr.Feeney held the traditional interpretation of EENS.There was no BOD, BOB and I.I which was relevant to EENS as an exception.Like the popes and saints he was not saying anything new as was Pope Benedict and Cardinal Ladaria.

It was Cardinal Richard Cushing, the Archbishop of Boston and  the cardinals at Rome which had brought the innovation into the Church with BOD, etc being  alleged exceptions to traditional EENS and the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Catholic Church.

The CDF needs to apologize for the error in the Fr. Leonard Feeney case.It has a direct bearing on how we interpret Vatican Council II. The Council becomes a rupture or continuity with the past.-Lionel Andrades


Graphics http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2016/03/pope-benedict-breaks-silence-and.html
http://connecticutcatholiccorner.blogspot.com/2018/07/how-can-dogma-change.html


________________________________
________________________________