La certezza che il PADRE ci Ama…! - madre Rosaria della Carità - 3 Piccoli Passi

Signore rafforza in noi la Fede e la Fiducia in Te affinché non abbiamo paura del futuro

Il Card. Angelo Comastri ospite a Di Buon Mattino

Pope Francis and Pope Benedict could correct the error in Wikipedia and Internet resources and the German theological and catechetical publications

 

Pope Francis and Pope Benedict need to announce that they agree with Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshall – there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire and so Wikipedia , the American encyclopedias and Internet resources in general , should correct their error.Under the entry Extra ecclesiam nulla salus for example, Wikipedia places the text of Lumen Gentium  14( baptism of desire) and Lumen Gentium 16(invincible ignorance).It is as if they are exceptions.The baptism of desire (BOD), being saved in invincible ignorance and being saved with the baptism of blood without the baptism of water(BOB) are always theoretical and hypothetical cases in 1949-2021.They never were practical exceptions for Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).Neither are speculative cases of LG 8, LG UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc  in Vatican Council II exceptions for the Syllabus of Errors’ ecumenism of return with no known exceptions.

CARDINAL MARX, USCCB

Pope Francis and Pope Benedict could inform Cardinal Reinhardt Marx about his error, common among the German books and magazines on theology, Catechesis, Evangelisation, ecumenism and Inter-religious dialogue.They will carry the false premise.The Bishops Conferences and Catechectical Centers  in Germany, like those in the USA, need to announce the correction.

Eric Sammons the new editor of Crisis Magazine in the USA has written a new book in which he makes the same mistake as Wikipedia.Anthony Flanders the new editor of the blog 1Peter5  repeats the same error in the interpretation of of Vatican Council II, EENS,BOB, BOB and I.I. 

In an objective observation Bishop Athanasius Schneider has said that there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire, When interviewed by Dr.Taylor Marshall, Schneider reminded us that we cannot see or meet someone saved with the BOD and without the baptism of water. So he was telling us that Lumen Gentium 14 ( the case of the Catechumen with the baptism of desire) was not a practical exception for EENS. Dr.Taylor Marshall agreed. He said that there are no explicit cases of St. Thomas Aquinas' implicit baptism of desire.In other words hypothetical cases of BOD cannot be projected as objective examples of salvation outside the Church. In principle, they must not be considered practical and objective exceptions to EENS and the Catechism of Pope Pius X, 24Q,27Q on other religions and the need for conversion into the Catholic Church to avoid Hell ( for salvation).

But for the popes from Pius XII, unknown cases of the BOD were allowed to be seen as known and objective exceptions to EENS of the missionaries in the 16th century.From Pius XII they supported the irrational Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston(LOHO).It was even referenced in Vatican Council II(LG 16) by some of the liberal Council Fathers in 1960-1965.Rahner and Ratzinger allowed the LOHO with the mistake to be placed in the Denzinger.

PAPAL INNOVATION WITH THE FALSE PREMISE

I have mentioned in the last post on this blog on this issue that Pope Francis and Pope Benedict claim that Vatican Council II is innovative and a break with Tradition when they really have chosen a fake premise to create the innovation. It's this irrational premise which makes the Council innovative and schismatic.The College of Cardinals must correct this mistake.It has spread through out the Catholic Church. This is an issue the Lega-Salvini  could bring up in Parliament. Why should Catholics have to follow the leftist interpretation of Vatican Council II with the fake premise and not the trditional rational option ?

The popes from Paul VI to Francis have confused invisible cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc as being visible examples of salvation outside the Church. In other words, there are non Catholics saved without faith and the baptism of water.This is as if they could see or meet such people. Then they projected LG 8, LG 16 etc as being practical exceptions to the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church.So they made the Syllabus of Errors obsolete.Traditional ecclesiocentrism was rejected in Redemptoris Missio and Dominus Iesus. Cardinal Ratzinger did not interpret the Council with the rational premise.He approved the false premise in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949. He was the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith overseeing all this doctrinal chaos.

DECREE OF PROHIBITION ON U.S RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY : NO CANONICAL STATUS FOR THE SSPX

The present two popes and the Left are maintaining a severe Decree of Prohibitions  since 2019, on the religious community Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary in New Hampshire, USA since they will not interpret being saved in invincible ignorance( Catechism of the Catholic Church 847-848) as being objective exceptions to Feeneyite EENS in 2019-2021.They are also not granting canonical recognition to the Society of St. Pius X. Since the SSPX will not accept Vatican Council II interpreted with the LG 8, LG 1ì4, LG 16, UR 3 etc, as being objective exceptions to the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Catholic Church. Like the SSPX I reject Vatican Council II interpreted with the fake premise.

I accept Vatican Council II and I interpret it with the rational premise and so I am not allowed to complete my philosophy and theology studies at the pontifical universities or be accepted by a Catholic seminary in Rome.

VATICAN COUNCIL II IS DOGMATIC WITHOUT THE SPECIFIC ERROR

There is a Specific Error in Vatican Council II. It is the false premise. We can avoid it by choosing the left hand side blue rational column.We choose the rational premise, inference and traditional conclusion. The Council becomes dogmatic and traditional.It supports the past ecclesiocentrism.When we avoid the Specific Error the Council is dogmatic and not only pastoral.So we do not have to any more criticize the Council in general and in a vague way. Theology has changed.It goes back to the past. It is the Specific Error which causes the hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition.

POPE FRANCIS COULD ANNOUNCE THAT POPE PAUL VI MADE AN OBJECTIVE MISTAKE 

Pope Francis could announce that the Council Fathers in 1965 interpreted Vatican Council II with the right hand side irrational column. So he made a mistake.Pope Francis could de-certify the Council, acknowledge the objective mistake of Pope Paul VI. Pope Francis could place Vatican Council II in a super-annuated category.It is no more to be cited with the objective error which cannot be the work of the Holy Spirit.It cannnot be Magisterial.Or, if the Council is interpreted with the left hand side blue rational column, it is in harmony with Magisterial Documents ( Creeds, Catechisms, EENS etc).It is not schismatic and heretical.It can be accepted with the rational re-intepretation.

POPES USE THE RED IRRATIONAL COLUMN AND BISHOP ATHANASIUS SCHNEIDER AND DR. TAYLOR MARSHALL THE BLUE RATIONAL COLUMN : CONCLUSIONS ARE DIFFERENT.

Karl Rahner, Joseph Ratzinger, Yves Congar, John Courtney Murray, Hans Kung and Richard Cushing were all interpreting Vatican Council II with the right hand side irrational red column. Now Bishop Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshall interpret Lumem Gentium 14 (baptism of desire) with the blue left hand side rational column and their conclusion is traditional and non schismatic.

Wikipedia must make the change. -Lionel Andrades

Signore Gesù nel silenzio desideriamo sentire la tua voce ed essere pronti a seguirti - Adorazione