Wednesday, February 10, 2021

The Doctrinal Beliefs of the St. Benedict Center could clarify that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF) and the Diocese of Manchester use a false premise in the interpretation of Vatican Council II, the dogma exta ecclesiam nulla salus , Catechism of the Catholic Church and the Magisterial documents

Comments from REPLY TO FR. GEORGES DE LAIRE ON CHURCH MILITANT TV

The Doctrinal Beliefs of the St. Benedict Center could clarify that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF) and the Diocese of Manchester use a false premise in the interpretation of Vatican Council II, the dogma exta ecclesiam nulla salus , Catechism of the Catholic Church and the Magisterial documents.

INTRODUCTION

The following exposition of the doctrinal beliefs of the Saint Benedict Center has as its core those propositions extracted from a letter dated March 7, 2017 authored by Brother André Marie, acting as the representative of the Saint Benedict Center, addressed to the Diocese of Manchester and copied to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

Neither the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith nor the Diocese of Manchester have ever qualified the following beliefs as “unacceptable.”

The following propositions are provided here to lend greater clarity and depth to the doctrinal tenets of the Saint Benedict Center. They are all subject to the “disclaimer” found at the end of this page.

DOCTRINAL BELIEFS

The members of the Saint Benedict Center believe with Divine and Catholic Faith all those things contained in the Word of God, written or handed on, that is, in the one Deposit of Faith entrusted to the Church, and at the same time proposed as divinely revealed either by the Solemn Magisterium of the Church or by its Ordinary and Universal Magisterium which is manifested by the common adherence of the Christian faithful under the leadership of the Sacred Magisterium, avoiding any doctrines whatsoever contrary to them.1

Lionel: It is not Magisterial when the present popes assumed unknown cases of the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I) are known people saved out side the Church. We can accept BOD, BOB and I.I as hypothetical cases only and not as practical exceptions to EENS.

2. We embrace and retain each and every thing which is proposed definitively by the Magisterium of the Church concerning the doctrine of Faith and Morals, that is, each and every thing which is required to safeguard reverently and to expound faithfully the same Deposit of Faith.2

Lionel: The present interpretation of Vatican Council II with a false premise contradicts the past Magisterium. One Magisterium cannot contradict another.One of the two has to be wrong. The present ecclesiastics use a false premise to contradict the past Magisterium.

_________________

3.We adhere with submission of will and intellect to the teachings which either the Roman Pontiff or the College of Bishops enunciate when they exercise their authentic Magisterium, even if they do not intend to proclaim these teachings by a definitive act.3

Lionel : The past Magisterium did not interpret the Nicene Creed with a false premise.

The past Magisterium did not use the false premise to reject the Athanasius Creed.

The past Magisterium did not interpret the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance with the false premise to create practical exceptions to EENS and a new version of EENS.

They did not change the interpretation of BOD, BOB and I.I with a false premise and so change the understanding of all the Catechisms.

This is doctrinal chaos and it is not Magisterial.

The false premise in the interpretation of Magisterial documents is not mentioned in the St. Benedict Center Doctrinal Beliefs.

______________________

Lionel : The possibility of salvation outside the Church is accepted hypothetically only. Speculatively.

We affirm that those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and His Church have the possibility of obtaining eternal salvation.17 This proposition is affirmed in conjunction with all of the other conditions sine qua non for salvation explicitly narrated in the Epistula ad Archiepiscopum Bostoniensem of 8 August 1949 referenced in footnote n. 342 of the CCC, which themselves are referenced as extracted from the Encyclical Letter Mystici Corporis Christi of Pope Ven. Pius XII, namely: 1) perfect Charity (“perfecta caritate”) and 2) Supernatural Faith (“fidem supernaturalem”)18 Such souls can and must be united to Jesus Christ through his Mystical Body, the Catholic Church.19

We affirm that for non-Christians, salvation in Christ is accessible [“patens”] by virtue of a grace, which, coming from Christ and communicated by the Holy Spirit, has a relationship with the Church, and is bestowed by God in ways known to God Himself.23

How God Almighty chooses to exercise His omnipotence in “difficult cases” is not ours to say. In keeping with the teaching of Pope Bl. Pius IX in Singulari Quadam, referenced above, it is not for man, a mere creature, to “arrogate” to himself such judgments. And, as the Holy Father says in that same Allocution, “let us hold most firmly that, in accordance with Catholic teaching, there is ‘one God, one faith, one baptism”’ [Eph. 4:5].”24 Hence the importance we attach to preaching the necessity of sacramental Baptism and joining the Catholic Church without exception.

Lionel: So hypothetically only Brother Andre Marie MICM does not reject invincible ignorance etc.

For the present ecclesiastics, the two popes, the International Theological Commission, Vatican and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican and the Diocese of Manchester and the Archdiocese of Boston, invincible ignorance is not hypothetical but an objective exception to 16th century EENS. This point must also be cleared in the Doctrinal Beliefs. .-Lionel Andrades

https://catholicism.org/doctrinal-belief.html

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/02/brother-andre-marie-micm-could-inform.html

https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/reply-to-fr-georges-de-laire

_______________________

In spite of being informed about the error, since about time Michael Voris went to the St. Benedict Center N.H, no correction or apology has come forth from the diocese or Manchester or the CDF

Comments from REPLY TO FR. GEORGES DE LAIRE on Church Militant TV

Alyosha Karamazov 2 days ago
I see that comments with links get caught up in moderation, so I also suggest that folks reading this article do a search for "Promising Salvation to Non-Catholics: A Sin against Charity." To me, this puts the whole theological issue in its proper context.
1
Reply
Share ›
Alyosha Karamazov 2 days ago
I suggest that readers do an internet search for "Letter Explaining Saint Benedict Center's Doctrinal Stance." This letter was NEVER answered by the diocesan official who received it — and this is the same priest who is persecuting the St. Benedict Center!
Lionel: Fr. Georges de Laire and the Curia at the Diocese of Manchester, USA use a false premise to interpret Vatican Council II and extra ecclesiam nulla salus and this keeps them politically correct with the Left. So they cannot discuss theology.
It was like a few years back Jim Likoudis and Catholics United for the Faith would criticize Michael and Peter Dimond for their 'rigo rist interpretation' of EENS.But theologically Likoudis could not show the Most Holy Family Monastery,why they were wrong when they would quote the popes and saints on EENS. So all Likoudis and CUF could say is that they are are 'sedevacantists' and should be ignored.
So when Fr. Georges de Laire gave an interview to the Catholic Herald, U.K he refused to go into the theology of the issue.
In apologetics on this subject it is important to mention the false premise.
Since this is not just a theological view. The use of the false premise among those who have been informed in the Diocese Offices, is dishonest. It is a lie. It is an objective error, an empirical error. It is consciously used to create a rupture with Tradition and particular EENS.
In spite of being informed about the error, since about time Michael Voris went to the St. Benedict Center N.H, no correction or apology has come forth from the diocese or Manchester or the CDF. -Lionel Andrades

https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/reply-to-fr-georges-de-laire

__________________________

FEBRUARY 8, 2021

If the CDF is honest the sanctions should also apply to the Judicial Vicar and Chancellor of the Diocese of Manchester, who are faking it,with the false premise and inference. It should also apply to cardinals and bishops and ecclesiastics at the Vatican

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/02/if-cdf-is-honest-sanctions-should-also.html

FEBRUARY 10, 2021

The Decree of Precepts and Prohibitions placed upon the St. Benedict Center, New Hampshire for affirming the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS), with no known exceptions, could be placed upon the other religious communities in the Diocese of Manchester, men and women, and also the Bishop and his Curia, if they did not unethically use a false premise to interpret Vatican Council II and create fake exceptions for EENS

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/02/the-decree-of-precepts-and-prohibitions_10.html

FEBRUARY 10, 2021

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Diocese of Manchester, interpret Vatican Council II as a rupture with Feeneyite EENS. Since the false premise causes the rupture.It is not the Council per se : Their Decree would also apply to other religious communities in New Hampshire after they answer Seven Questions

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/02/the-congregation-for-doctrine-of-faith.html

FEBRUARY 9, 2021

Seven questions which Bishop Peter Libasci , Diane Quinlin, the Chancellor and the Rev. Georges de Laire, Judicial Vicar could answer and affirm. Their interpretation of Vatican Council II and EENS woud be the same as that of the St. Benedict Center, NH.So they can end the prohibitions placed upon the religious community

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/02/seven-questions-which-bishop-peter.html

FEBRUARY 10, 2021

When you read the past Magisterium on this subject, and keep in mind the difference between speculative and practical theology, all those quotations on EENS on Wikipedia support the St. Benedict Center, NH.

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/02/when-you-read-past-magisterium-on-this.html

FEBRUARY 10, 2021

This is a major objective error of the CDF and the present two popes.It needs to corrected

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/02/this-is-major-objective-error-of-cdf.html

FEBRUARY 9, 2021

Repost : Meredith Cook could clarify that as a Catholic and Chancellor, for her, unknown cases of being saved in BOD, BOB and I.I are not visible and practical exceptions to EENS. Also in Vatican Council hypothetical and invisible cases mentioned in LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, are not objective and practical exceptions to EENS as held by the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, in New Hampshire

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/02/repost-meredith-cook-could-clarify-that.html

FEBRUARY 8, 2021

Once it is clear that the baptism of desire refers always to a hypothetical case then the Catechism of the Council of Trent is not controversial when it refers to ' the desire thereof '

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/02/once-it-is-clear-that-baptism-of-desire.html

_____________________

FEBRUARY 9, 2021

Ad Gentes 7( all need faith and baptism for salvation ) agrees with extra ecclesiam nulla salus( outside the Church there is no salvation) which also agrees with the Athanasius Creed ( all need the Catholic faith for salvation )

_____________

FEBRUARY 9, 2021

The Catechism of the Catholic Church (n.1257) says all need the baptism of water for salvation but God is not limited to the Sacraments.Defacto ( practically) all need the baptism of water for salvation and de jure (in principle, hypothetically, speculatively, theoretically) God is not limited to the Sacraments

___________

The Catechism of the Catholic Church (n.846) states outside the Church there is no salvation (AG 7, CCC 846) and all who are saved are saved through Jesus and the Church. So if anyone is saved through the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance, outside the Church, it would only be known to God, and so it would not be an exception or relevant to the traditional teaching on all needing faith and baptism for salvation(AG 7, EENS etc) and outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation (CCC 846)

__________________

FEBRUARY 8, 2021

We can affirm the first part of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 (LOHO) which supports traditional EENS and reject the second part of LOHO which contradicts the first part, with the use of a false premise to interpret the baptism of desire(BOD) and invincible ignorance(I.I) .LOHO assumes wrongly that BOD and I.I are objective exceptions to EENS

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/02/we-can-affirm-first-part-of-letter-of.html

FEBRUARY 7, 2021

Rev.Georges de Laire, Judicial Vicar of the Diocese of Manchester, USA and the bishop and curia of the diocese, are refusing in public to interpret Vatican Council II without the false premise and inference, which creates harmony with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as interpreted by the Apostles, Church Fathers and Medieval Fathers of the Catholic Church. They choose to use the fake premise to create a rupture with Catholic Tradition. If they do not use the false premise, they would be declared 'legally not Catholic', by the Left

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/02/revgeorges-de-laire-judicial-vicar-of.html

FEBRUARY 7, 2021

Bishop Peter Libasci, Bishop of the Diocese of Manchester, USA and his Judicial Vicar Fr.Georges de Laire are publically and legally interpreting Vatican Council II , the Catechism of the Catholic Church ( when the Catechisms refer to the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance) and the Creeds ( Nicene, Athanasius ), with a false premise. This is deception.It is unethical and not Catholic

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/02/bishop-peter-libasci-bishop-of-diocese.html

Una cameriera tratta con gentilezza un vagabondo. Quando scopre chi era,...

The Vortex — Coming Justice

Medjugorje dei primi anni con immagini d'epoca: "La Madonna ci invita"

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Diocese of Manchester, interpret Vatican Council II as a rupture with Feeneyite EENS. Since the false premise causes the rupture.It is not the Council per se : Their Decree would also apply to other religious communities in New Hampshire after they answer Seven Questions

The Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate and the Brazilian community Joseleitos di Cristo, both have been based in the Diocese of Porta Santa Rufina, Rome.The bishop is Gino Reali.

These two religious communities with whom I have communicated in writing, would agree with the following seven points. None of the two have raised objections even though they project themselves as being liberal.

They would know how to interpret Vatican Council II in harmony with exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. It's the only rational choice. It would be the same for the Men and Women Religious Communities in the Diocese of Manchester, USA.

The answer to these seven questions show that Vatican Council II ( without the false premise) can be interpreted in harmony with the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

The Council and the Catechism of the Catholic Church do not contradict the St. Benedict Center interpretation of EENS.

Presently the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Diocese of Manchester, interpret Vatican Council II as a rupture with Feeneyite EENS. Since the false premise causes the rupture.It is not the Council per se.

So the Decree of Precepts Prohibitions is today meaningless.Since the prohibitions, could also be placed on the other religious communities in New Hampshire,after they answer the seven questions. The Decree could also be applied to The Order of St. Benedict (O.S.B), St.Benedict's Abbey, the Order of Friars Minor - Franciscan Friars (O.F.M), The Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter (F.S.S.P.), Redemptorist Fathers (C.Ss.R.)and among Women Religious, the Discalced Carmelites (O.C.D.), Sisters of the Presentation of Mary (p.m.) and the Dominican Sisters of Hope (O.P).

Their interpretation of Vatican Council II and extra ecclesiam nulla salus would be the same as that of the St. Benedict Center, NH.

SEVEN POINTS

1. LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II always refer to hypothetical, speculative and theoretical cases.So they are not practical exceptions to the exclusivist ecclesiology of the Catholic Church. There is no objective rupture with the Athanasius Creed which says all need Catholic faith for salvation.

2. They agree that Jesus died for all, salvation is open for all in potential but to receive this salvation all need to enter the Church, with faith and baptism(AG 7). The Church is necessary ( Dominus Iesus 20, CDF, Notification on Fr.Jacques Dupuis sj 2000 etc).

3. They interpret Vatican Council II without the false premise, just like me. LG 14, LG 16 etc are only hypothetical. They are not objective cases in 2021.

4. The baptism of desire(BDD), baptism of blood(BOB) and invincible ignorance (I.I) refer to only hypothetical cases. If any one has received salvation with BOD, BOB and I.I only God can know.

5.The Church teaches in Vatican Council II( without the false premise) that everyone who dies in 2021, without faith and baptism, are oriented to Hell in general, in principle.

6. It is a lie and deception when someone uses the false premise to interpret the Nicene Creed, Vatican Council II. Catechisms, the dogma EENS and BOD, BOB and I.I.

7. Catholics need to interpret Vatican Council II rationally and not irrationally. There is a rational option.-Lionel Andrades

FEBRUARY 9, 2021

Seven questions which Bishop Peter Libasci , Diane Quinlin, the Chancellor and the Rev. Georges de Laire, Judicial Vicar could answer and affirm. Their interpretation of Vatican Council II and EENS woud be the same as that of the St. Benedict Center, NH.So they can end the prohibitions placed upon the religious community

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/02/seven-questions-which-bishop-peter.html

When you read the past Magisterium on this subject, and keep in mind the difference between speculative and practical theology, all those quotations on EENS on Wikipedia support the St. Benedict Center, NH.

comments from REPLY TO FR. GEORGES DE LAIRE

church militant tv

While I would have serious disagreements with 'Jack' on his comment about Biden being a "decent fellow' compared to Trump some days ago, or 'Jacks' favorable sentiments towards PF, he is correct on the proper interpretation of 'extra ecclesiam nulla salus'.

Since Scripture [Epistle of St. Peter] says 'no personal interpretation' of the faith is permissible, I therefore spent a few hours checking out the true meaning of 'extra ecclesiam nulla salus' per what our Catholic Church authority had to say on the matter over time. The Official Catholic references below [there are more] all indicate that a 'strict' Feeneyite interpretation is not permissible, and that under certain conditions & situations [will have to read them on your own folks, don't have time or space here] one certainly can be saved outside formal membership in the Church.

The following agree that is the case:

Pope Pius IX's 1863 encyclical 'Quanto conficiamur moerore'

Pope Pius XII, 1943 Mystici Corporis and his 1949 protocol

VII, Lumen Gentium #16

JPII, 1990 encyclical 'Redemptoris Missio'

Catechism of the Catholic Church, #846-7

Lionel: The references from Wilipedia cite the popes and saints affirming the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

All need to be members of the Catholic Church to go to Heaven and avoid Hell.

However there are also references which mention the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance which can only be hypothetical and theoretical cases. So they never were, nor are, practical exceptions to the dogma EENS.

All need faith and baptism for salvation says Vatican Council II (AG 7) and there are no known practical exceptions for us human beings.There are none mentioned in the Council-text.

So when you read the past Magisterium on this subject, and keep in mind the difference between speculative and practical theology, all those quotations on EENS on Wikipedia, support the St. Benedict Center, NH.

-Lionel Andrades

https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/reply-to-fr-georges-de-laire

Michael Voris intervened since the priest and the CDF were suggesting a dogma issued by three Church Councils , supported by numerous saints and interpreted in harmony with Vatican Council II (without the false premise) was now obsolete and suspect.

Comments from REPLY TO FR. GEORGES DE LAIRE

Church militant

Good King Wenceslas

I think they may have more problems with this case. According to Happy Jack below, Fr. de Laire's interpretation of Church teaching is correct. If that can be proven by the plaintiff in court, then the whole premise of the article is false and they can likely argue that CM should have known it was false prior to the writing of the article. In that light, then the releasing of personal information about him takes on the appearance of unwarranted defamation. Kind of like reporting: "Biden was elected president through widespread fraud, and anonymous sources say he also kicks his dog."

Lionel:

The issue is that Fr. Georges de Laire,Judicial Vicar, the Bishop of Manchester, Peter Libasci and the ecclesiastics at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican are using a fake premise to create a false rupture with the traditional stict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, held by the St. Benedict Center.

So if the priest uses a false premise to reject Magisterium documents, even after , being informed then his motive is suspect.

He still will not clarify if he interprets Vatican Council II and extra ecclesiam nulla salus with or without a false premise. E-mail messages have been sent to him and the other officials of the Diocese.

Michael Voris intervened since the priest and the CDF were suggesting a dogma issued by three Church Councils , supported by numerous saints and interpreted in harmony with Vatican Council II(without the false premise)was now obsolete and suspect.

It was cause to be labeled legally as being 'non Catholic.', with prohibitions associated with excommunication, placed upon the St. Benedict Center.

So the CDF and the Diocese of Manchester, for whatever reason, are now saying that St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Augustine, St.Albert the Great, St. Ignatius of Loyola, St. Francis Xavier, St. Robert Bellarmine, St. Francis of Assisi, St. Bonaventure, St. Teresa of Avila, St. John of the Cross, St. Maximilian Kolbe... were not Catholic, since they held the strict interpretation of EENS. -Lionel Andrades