What will be the position of Cardinals Burke and Brandmuller on this issue? Can a pope who says he will not accept BOD, BOB and I.I as being exceptions to EENS and he will not accept Vatican Council II as not being a rupture with the past ecclesiology - still be a pope ?

Comment on the blog Vox Cantoris- awaiting approval

If Irenaus, Ann, Steve Skojec, David and others in an organized way announce that the baptism of desire(BOD),baptism of blood(BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I) refer to hypothetical cases only and they are not visible non Catholics saved outside the Church in 2018 then other Catholics would agree with them. They would repeat the obvious. We cannot physically see any exception to the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ( EENS).

Then the SSPX and FSSP priests could also agree that there are no practical exceptions to EENS in 2018 or over the last 50 years for us human beings.

Then Ecclesia Dei would also have to repeat what is common sense.There are no BOD, BOB and I.I cases in our reality.

This would mean Cardinal Ladaria would also have to admit that he personally does not know any man or woman saved outside the Church with BOD, BOB and I.I. Neither does he know of anyone saved with 'elements of sanctification and truth'(LG 8).

Then when the bloggers, the SSPX, FSSP and other traditionalists and the CDF agree that there are no known cases of BOD, BOB and I.I in our reality and neither do they know of any any one saved outside the Church mentioned in Vatican Council II and that LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3,NA 2, GS 22 etc are not exceptions to EENS, then the two popes would also have to agree on the obvious.

BOD,BOB and I.I are 'zero cases' says the apologist John Martignoni. Many priests here in Rome agree with him.

Then the German bishops would also soon be told by Catholics in Germany that there are no physically visible exceptions to EENS mentioned in Vatican Council II and that it is obvious BOD, BOB and I.I are not objective exceptions to Feeneyite EENS. The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 made a mistake and the mistake was repeated in Vatican Council II.

So then what will the German, British, American, Maltese and Swiss bishops do ? Are they going to affirm the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS?

Will the German bishops choose schism? 

Will the two popes agree with each other and Cardinal Ladaria?

What will be the position of Cardinals Burke and Brandmuller on this issue?

Can a pope who says he will not accept BOD, BOB and I.I as being exceptions to EENS and he will not accept Vatican Council II as not being a rupture with the past ecclesiology - still be a pope ?-Lionel Andrades

http://voxcantor.blogspot.com/2018/11/the-bergoglian-anti-papacy-by-ann.htm

What about the two popes will they oppose each other?

Comments from the blog Vox Cantoris
Irenaeus said...

Your point about the baptism by desire, baptism by blood and invincible ignorance, Lionel? How are they relevant to the discussion at hand? Also, the German bishops have been ripe for schism - I dare say they are already - for a while now. Not sure what this has to do with Ann Barnhardt, either.

Lionel:

In many ways.

Both the present popes interpret baptism of desire(BOD),baptism of blood (BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I) as referring to known non Catholics saved outside the Church. While for me they refer to invisible and hypothetical cases only.

So they interpret extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) with this irrationality. This is a mortal sin of faith.It is heresy. They are automatically excommunicated.A pope cannot reject de fide doctrines and a dogma and still be a pope.Canon Law would not permit this for a cardinal, bishop or priest.

But I do not expect you and Ann to admit this since this is the same irrationality used by the both of you and also Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and the SSPX bishops.

We have popes in heresy but so also traditionalist bloggers and they are unable to explain themselves in writing.

As I have mentioned in the initial comment on this thread that Ann refers to a false premise in her talks. Yet she uses the false premise to interpret BOD,BOB and I.I to create a rupture with Tradition.

Secondly if Pope Benedict says that he is not the pope and for him Pope Francis is the pope what more is there to say?

Thirdly, when the present popes or the new SSPX Superior General says that BOD BOB and I.I refer to invisible and hypothetical cases, it means the German bishops have to choose schism. Since they will not affirm the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS ?

What about the two popes will they oppose each other?-Lionel Andrades

http://voxcantor.blogspot.com/2018/11/the-bergoglian-anti-papacy-by-ann.html

I am a Feeneyite.I accept Vatican Council II.I also accept Pope Francis as pope.I also affirm the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance.I affirm other magisterial documents(All the Creeds, Vatican Council II and the Catechisms). I attend Mass in English, Italian and Latin. For me the missionaries and Magisterium of the 16th century were also Feeneyite.So was St. Thomas Aquinas and the popes.

 Comments from the blog Vox Cantoris

Peter Lamb said...
Dear Tom, I think you misinterpreted what I wrote. I don't think any conciliarists are Feeneyites. Feeneyites are a distinctive heretical group and have nothing to do with conciliarists. However, sadly, they and the loons are all lumped with us "Catholics
sedes" because we are all sedevacantists - i.e. we all recognize that the conciliar "popes" are false.

Lionel:
I am a Feeneyite.
I accept Vatican Council II.
I also accept Pope Francis as pope.
I also affirm the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance.
I affirm other magisterial documents(All the Creeds, Vatican Council II and the Catechisms).
I attend Mass in English, Italian and Latin.
For me the missionaries and Magisterium of the 16th century were also Feeneyite.So was St. Thomas Aquinas and the popes.
The popes affirmed the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS like me and BOD, BOB and I.I were hypothetical cases for them, and for me, and so BOD,BOB and I.I were not exceptions to what the secular media call the rigorist interpretation of the dogma EENS.
-Lionel Andrades
 http://voxcantor.blogspot.com/2018/11/its-about-doctrine-it-always-was-and.html

December 3, 2018

So I am not saying anything new and neither am I rejecting Vatican Council II. I am citing Magisterial documents and affirming the traditional teachings of the Catholic Church. 

 https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/12/so-i-am-not-saying-anything-new-and.html

 

July 5, 2018

These points should be clarified by the religious communities who are in communication with the CDF and Ecclesia Dei.Ask them if everyone can interpret Vatican Council II and EENS as does the blogger on Lionel's Blog. 

 https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/07/these-points-should-be-clarified-by.html

 

JULY 5, 2018

Reiterate
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/07/reiterate.html

These points should be clarified by the religious communities who are in communication with the CDF and Ecclesia Dei.Ask them if everyone can interpret Vatican Council II and EENS as does the blogger on Lionel's Blog.

 https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/07/these-points-should-be-clarified-by.html

 

So I am not saying anything new and neither am I rejecting Vatican Council II. I am citing Magisterial documents and affirming the traditional teachings of the Catholic Church.

I have to keep repeating again and again that what I write here is the teachings of the Catholic Church according to Vatican Council II and not just a personal view.

It is a personal interpretation of Magisterial documents in harmony with Tradition, in harmony with the past Magisterium.It is not the interpretation of Vatican Council II according to the leftist media.It is also not the interpretation of Pope Benedict, Pope Francis, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF) and Ecclesia Dei.

My interpretation is based on the text of Vatican Council II and the Catechisms interpreted rationally.

Their interpretation of Vatican Council II etc is based on a false premise( physically invisible non Catholics are visible) and false inference( they are visible examples of salvation outside the Church).So I can cite Vatican Council II to support my traditional view.While they can only cite the Council with an irrationality e.g personally known non Catholics saved outside the Church in invincible ignorance (Lumen Gentium 16) are alleged objective exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).Or, there are known Protestants saved outside the Catholic Church in 'imperfect communion' with the Church (Unitatis Redintigratio 3). They are non-anonymous Christians who are exceptions to an ecumenism of return.
They have to presume what is unknown as being known and what is invisible as being invisible to cite Vatican Council II.
So on March 1, 2018 Cardinal Luiz Ladaria sj at the Placuet Deo Press Conference cited visible for him cases of non Catholics saved with 'elements of sanctification and truth'(LG 8) as an exception to EENS.
In response to the question by the Associated Press journalist he could have said that the Catholic Church today still holds its traditional understanding of having the superiority and exclusiveness in salvation and the hypothetical and theoretical reference in LG 8 is not an exception.
He did not say this since he wanted a hermeneutic of rupture and the only way he could cite LG 8 was with the false premise and inference.

So for me the Catholic Church in the past and today is Feeneyite.It supports the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS, the past ecclesiology and only an ecumenism of return.

Mission is traditional since all need faith and baptism for salvation ( Ad Gentes 7) and we know most people on earth go to Hell, since they die without faith and baptism.

Since outside the Church there is no salvation, the priority is that everyone become Catholic to save their soul.So it is important to have the non separation of Church and State and the proclamation of the Social Reign of Christ the King in all political legislation of a Catholic State.

So I am not saying anything new and neither am I rejecting Vatican Council II. I am citing Magisterial documents  and affirming the traditional teachings of the Catholic Church.

 

It is the present two popes and the CDF who have brought a theological innovation in the Church by using an irrational premise and inference. It is they who must announce that invisible cases of the baptism of desire, baptism  of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance are not objective exceptions to EENS as it was known in the 16th century.

I hold the same understanding of mission and salvation as St.Francis Xavier whose feast day it is today. I support my view with Vatican Council II. The Council (AG 7) says all need to be members of the Church with faith and baptism for salvation. This includes those who know about Jesus and the Church and those who do not.-Lionel Andrades 

JULY 5, 2018

Reiterate
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/07/reiterate.html

Catechesis without the fire of the Holy Spirit : Tre Fontane Sisters with an excellent website and an evangelization program with a lot of depth

On Saturday evening the Basilica of St.Andrea della Fatte, Rome was full.People were sitting with earphones listening silently to a few religious sisters with a green habit.The church was silent.One Sister was silently speaking softly into a personal microphone with a wireless system.

These Sisters, Missionarie della Divina Rivelaione, have an excellent website and an evangelization program with a lot of depth.

They called the meeting on Saturday a Catechesis on Art.It was focused on the paintings and sculpture in the Church.I was appreciating the silence.Then the sisters asked to speak on the common microphone and I learnt what they  were saying.

I joined them at the column of Our Lady at Piazza Spagna where we were praying the rosary. They left and I was still there trying to complete the rosary.

But their catechesis was polite stuff.They talked about St.Catherine Laboure and the Miraculous Medal and St.Maximilian  Kolbe. St. Teresa of the Child Jesus had come to this altar when she was in Rome with her parents.They did not mention that Teresa stayed at a hotel down the road, San Giuseppe a Capo le Casa.

What was missing was a fire in their catechesis.The fire of the Holy Spirit.

They sounded as politically correct at the Minim Fathers who officiate at this church.

Kolbe believed membership in the Catholic Church was necessary for salvation.They did not say it.

Alphonse Ratisbonne became a priest and missionary since Our Lady showed him in an apparition the beauty and necessity of the Catholic Church for the salvation of all people.Ratsibonne founded a missionary community in the Middle Our Lady was saying extra ecclesiam nulla salus . Outside the Church there is no salvation.

The Sisters distributed Miraculous Medals and explained why they were called miraculous.

They gave examples of how the medal proved miraculous in France.One of the Sisters , must have spoken about the medal and the conversion of Ratisbonne, into the Catholic Church.

These are the sisters in Rome at the sanctuary of Our Lady of Tre Fontane, it is opposite the area where St.Paul was beheaded.

At the Tre Fontane apparitions to Bruno Cornacchiola, Our Lady confirmed Catholic doctrine and the dogma of the Immaculate Conception.At the site of the apparitions there was phenomena in the sky like that at Fatima.-Lionel Andrades

https://www.divinarivelazione.org/catechesi/

https://www.divinarivelazione.org/1-dicembre-ore-1530-catechesi-con-arte-santandrea-delle-fratte-e-piazza-di-spagna/

DECEMBER 3, 2018

7° Catechesi sul Credo Apostolico - Introduzione Storica

Apparizioni Tre Fontane: la Vergine della Rivelazione

7° Catechesi sul Credo Apostolico - Introduzione Storica