Catechetical aid in Italian available in Rome's churches has an error : Spiegazione Facile Della Dotrina Cristiana

 

The Diocese of Milan has produced a teaching aid for catechists.It is a book called  Spiegazione Facile Della Dottrina Cristiana with an introduction by Don Angelo Albani and Don Massimo Astrua.It has an imprimatur and has been produced my Mimep-Docete 2015.It teaches catechism in a simple question and answer form like the Catechism of Pope Pius X.

However this catechetical book has been created based upon Vatican Council II ( Cushingite) and not Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite). So it does not say outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation or no known salvation.

There is a big gap in the catechesis.
 

The Catechism of Pope Pius X says all need to be members of the Catholic Church for salvation.Pope Pius X mentions invincible ignorance and does not state that it refers to a personally known person saved outside the Church. It does not state that it is an exception to the dogma outside the Church there is no salvation.

However this catechism in Milan,now also available in the parishes in Rome, assumes there is known salvation outside the Church. The baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) refer to practical exceptions to all needing to be members of the Church for salvation. This is the New Theology of Rahner and Ratzinger which was approved by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and the traditionalists.

This has created new doctrines in the Catholic Church and they have been accepted by the Conference of Italian Bishops for national catechetical teaching.

 82.What is the Church( Che cos'e la Chiesa?

The explanation is vague. It describes the Church as a family. It refers to Christians who are baptized.

It does not refer to Catholics with faith and baptism only, who are saved. Since the ecclesiastics assume the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus has been contradicted with visible and personally known non Catholics saved outside the Catholic Church. They are referenced in LG 16,UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc.It is based upon this irrational  interpretation of Vatican Council II that there is a rupture created with the Catechism of Pope Pius X and other catechisms.

84.Which is the Church of Jesus Christ? (Qual e la Chiesa di Gesu Cristo?)

It says the Church of Jesus Christ is the Catholic Church because only it is only, holy, Catholic and apostolic  as Jesus wanted it.

However the implication still is that there is known salvation outside the Church even among those who are not visible members of the Church. Since the BOD, BOB and I.I have been interpreted irrationally. 

88.Can the Church teach error in the truth taught and revealed by God? ( La Chiesa docente puo errare nell' insegnarci le verita rivelate da Dio?)

It says that the Church cannot teach error revealed by God. It is infallible. Since Jesus Christ said that the spirit of truth will assist the Church continually.

However this catechetical book is based on the New Theology.It is a false theology. I call it Cushingism.So error has been brought into the Church.It was overlooked by the popes since Pius XII. It has created a rupture with the teachings of the Holy Spirit to the popes, of the past. They taught that there was exclusive salvation in the Church and BOD, BOB and I.I were not exceptions. This was the Old Theology.With the New Theology BOD, BOB and I.I are exceptions. This changes the understanding of EENS, Nicene Creed, Vatican Council II, Catechisms etc.The new understanding is heretical.

-Lionel Andrades

Repost : Announcement and apology expected from Bishop Daniel Dolan, Bishop Donald Sanborn and Fr. Anthony Cekada

March 15, 2018

Announcement and apology expected from Bishop Daniel Dolan, Bishop Donald Sanborn and Fr. Anthony Cekada

In 2015 I wrote to Fr. Anthony Cekada, sedevacantist at the St. Gertrude the Great Church, Ohio,USA  telling him that there are no  known cases of the baptism of desire in our reality and the long list of his references to the baptism of desire do not state that they refer to personally known people saved outside the Church. No pope or saint has said this. However he infers that the saints and popes were referring to known people saved outside the Church.So the baptism of desire is an exception to his concept of Feeneyism.

ANNOUNCEMENT AWAITED

Common sense tells us that the baptism of desire is always hypothetical for us. So the baptism of desire never ever was an exception to Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).So when will he make an announcement saying they were wrong on this issue?

For him the baptism of desire was an exception to Feeneyite EENS and so he wanted the communities of Fr. Leonard Feeney, the St. Benedict Center in the USA to say the same. Since they would not do so he accused them of being in mortal sin.

He needed to apologize to the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary since now we know that hypothetical cases of the baptism of desire were not relevant or exceptions to EENS.

VATICAN COUNCIL II NO MORE BASIS FOR SEDEVACANTISM

Today I reminded him via e-mail that not only is the baptism of desire not an exception to Feeneyite EENS since there are no practical exceptions but there are no exceptions to EENS in Vatican Council II. Vatican Council II does not contradict the Syllabus of Errors etc. So with Vatican Council II not a rupture with Tradition( when hypothetical cases are interpreted as just being hypothetical and not objective exceptions to EENS) then there is no reason to go into sedevacantism  assuming  Vatican Council II is a rupture with Tradition.

FLIPPANT

He responded flippantly.Probably he wants me to come back after another three years and he will still be teaching the seminarians that Vatican Council II contradicts the Syllabus of Errors and there are objective cases of the baptism of desire which are exceptions to Feeneyite EENS in 2015-2018.

BAPTISM OF DESIRE A RUPTURE WITH FEENEYITE EENS FOR THREE SEDEVACANTIST BISHOPS

The Pastor at the St.Gertrude the Great church, their principal church, is Bishop Daniel Dolan.He  was ordained  a bishop in 1992 by Bishop Mark Pivarunas of the Congregatio Mariae Reginae Immaculatae (CMRI).It is also a traditionalist sedevacantist community which interprets Vatican Council II as a rupture with the Syllabus of Errors.Also for them the the baptism of desire is a rupture with Feeneyite EENS.Yesterday I e-mailed these blog posts to the CMRI and Bishop Pivarunas.There is no response from him.

I have also e-mailed Bishop Donald Sanborn, the founder of the sedevacantist Most Holy Trinity Seminary, Florida.Fr.Anthony Cekada is a member of the faculty. .

When will Fr.Anthony Cekada have the integrity to say that he made a mistake about the baptism of desire(BOD) and the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary being in mortal sin ?

Over three years, he knows that the BOD can be interpreted as being 1) visible and known in personal cases or 2) just hypothetical.The conclusion is different. That it is hypothetical for us is common sense.It was obviously hypothetical for the popes and saints in the past too.

FR.CEKADA MADE A MISTAKE ON VATICAN COUNCIL II TOO

Fr.Cekada made a similar mistake with Vatican Council II. He interpreted Lumen Gentium 16(invincible ignorance) and Lumen Gentium 14( case of the catechumen) as being exceptions to Feeneyite EENS. So his  inference was that these were known people.Otherwise they could not be  exceptions.For him these were known cases of salvation outside the Church.So Vatican Council II became a rupture with Tradition and he went into sedevacantism,when the fault lay with this false premise.

Three years back perhaps there was a problem with comprehension on his part but now after being informed  are we dealing with deception and sin ?

FR.CEKADA KNOWS THERE ARE NO KNOWN CASES OF THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE IN 2018

There should be an announcement from Fr. Anthony Cekada saying that he agrees that there are no known cases of the baptism of desire in our reality.

Mystici Corporis, Syllabus of Errors and the Catechisms of Trent and Pius X are referring to hypothetical cases of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance.

SEDEVACANTIST INFERENCE WAS WRONG.

So these Magisterial documents never were objective exceptions to the traditional interpretation of outside the Church there is no salvation.The inference of the sedevacantists were wrong.

TRADITIONALISTS AND SEDEVACANTISTS MADE A MISTAKE ON VATICAN COUNCIL II

Fr.Cekada also needs to announce that LG 8,LG 14,LG 16, UR 3, NA2 ,GS 22 etc refer to invisible people in 2018 and so they are not exceptions to the old exclusivist ecclesiology of the Catholic Church. They are not exceptions to the Syllabus of Errors on ecumenism etc.So we can affirm Vatican Council II and Feeneyite EENS.Vatican Council II is compatible with the old exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church.

FAITHFUL NEED TO BE INFORMED

It is not a rupture with Tradition as the traditionalists and sedevacantists wrongly believed over the last 50 years.They need to announce that they made a mistake in their interpretation of Vatican Council and the Council is no more a reason to go into sedevacantism.

This announcement should also be made for the interests of seminarians,the faithful and Catholics at large, by Bishop Daniel Dolan and Bishop Donald Sanborn.

-Lionel Andrades

http://www.traditionalmass.org/priests/dolan.php

http://www.traditionalmass.org/priests/sanborn.php

http://www.sgg.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/20180311.pdf

https://sggresources.org/
http://www.traditionalmass.org/articles/article.php?id=28&catname=2

_________________________________________
















   

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/03/announcement-and-apology-expected-from.html

Repost : Traditionalists and sedevacantists cannot get over it, Vatican Council II is not a rupture with Tradition .But affirming EENS in public is going to be quite a thing for them

March 16, 2018

Traditionalists and sedevacantists cannot get over it, Vatican Council II is not a rupture with Tradition .But affirming EENS in public is going to be quite a thing for them

Three years have passed and Fr.Anthony Cekada cannot get over it.Vatican Council II was not a rupture with Tradition.Sedevacantism based on Vatican Council II is now obsolete.The truth is out.

It's the same with the Una Voce traditionalists.They cannot get around this.

Those who have had their religious formation under Archbishop Lefebvre cannot believe it.The Archbishop had it wrong all along.He interpreted Vatican Council II irrationally and did not know about the rational  choice.

It is now time for all the traditionalists to support Vatican Council II and Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus, or extra ecclesiam nulla salus, was it was known to the missionaries and Magisterium of the 16th century.

Otherwise the doctrinal confusion remains in the Church and this is useful for the Masons and the political Left. The traditionalists like the liberals, would continue to remain in schism with the past popes since they would be rejecting Feeneyite EENS.They would do this by interpreting the baptism of desire as referring to known people saved outside the Church, when there are no such known people. This is the wide spread heresy in the Church.With visible for us baptism of desire, they have changed the meaning of the Nicene Creed.They have changed the interpretation of EENS,Vatican Council II and the Catechisms, past and present.They have ignored a rational interpretation of these Church documents/teachings.

This error is so thick in the Church that this month when Cardinal Luiz Ladaria at the Press Conference on Placuit Deo said that Lumen Gentium 8 was an exception to the Church's old teaching on having the superiority and exclusiveness of salvation no one objected.

Even the sedevacantists Peter and Michael Dimond at the Most Holy Family Monastery did not object in their E-Exchanges.Since it is based on physically- visible- for- them Lumen Gentium 8, cases of 'elements of sanctification and truth' that Peter and Michael Dimond interpret Vatican Council II.So for them there are known elements of sanctification and truth in other religions, in 2018.So  Vatican Council II contradicts the dogma EENS, as Cardinal Ladaria suggested. Peter and Michael Dimond  rejected Vatican Council II when the error lies with their false premise.

Similarly at the sedevacantist St.Gertrude the Great Church of Bishop Dolan and Fr.Anthony Cekada, there were no objections. Since like Cardinal Ladaria they also interpret Lumen Gentium 8 as referring to known people saved outside the Church.So for them there were known people saved outside the Church where the Catholic Church allegedly subsists.For the liberals and the sedevacantists there is known salvation outside the Church.This is not how I interpret Lumen Gentium 8.

So when I say that Lumen Gentium 8 refers not to known people in 2018 or the past, but to hypothetical cases, they do not understand me. In their mind it is fixed that these are known people saved outside the Church.

How could someone see a non Catholic saved in Heaven without the baptism of desire in the Church. So who could have seen or known an exception to Feeneyite EENS?

Now after they have been informed there is no comment from them.Since it is difficult for all of them to state in public that they affirm Vatican Council II and also Feeneyite EENS.-Lionel Andrades

 https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/03/traditionalists-and-sedevacantists.html

The natives who lived after Christ in the Americas before the Europeans came, and thus did not have the Catholic faith, were not saved. They could not be saved outside the Church. - Peter Dimond

• TheRomanRite 
  Wait, wait, wait..... If there is no salvation outside the Church, what about the Natives in the Americas that lived before the Europeans came?
  
  
  • 

    
    

    vaticancatholic Mod TheRomanRite • 

    
    

    You say 'if'. Well, there's no 'if' about it. It's a dogma that must be accepted. It's part of Christ's revelation. The natives who lived after Christ in the Americas before the Europeans came, and thus did not have the Catholic faith, were not saved. They could not be saved outside the Church. They were left in ignorance for bad will. That's covered in our salvation book. One must accept, and truly believe, the dogma EENS without exception. Here are some quotes relevant to your question.
    Fr. Francisco de Vitoria, O.P., a famous 16th century Dominican theologian, summed up the traditional teaching of the Catholic Church on this topic very well. Here is how he put it:
    “When we postulate invincible ignorance on the subject of baptism or of the Christian faith, it does not follow that a person can be saved without baptism or the Christian faith. For the aborigines to whom no preaching of the faith or Christian religion has come will be damned for mortal sins or for idolatry, but not for the sin of unbelief. As St. Thomas says, however, if they do what in them lies [in their power], accompanied by a good life according to the law of nature, it is consistent with God’s providence that he will illuminate them regarding the name of Christ.” (citation in our salvation book)
    St. Augustine (426): “Consequently both those who have not heard the gospel and those who, having heard it, and having been changed for the better, did not receive perseverance… none of these are separated from that lump which is known to be damned, as all are going… into condemnation.” (citation in our salvation book)
    2 Corinthians 4:3:“And if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost, in whom the god of this world [Satan] hath blinded the minds of unbelievers, that the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should not shine unto them.”
    Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Cantate Domino,” 1441, ex cathedra: “The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the Church before the end of their lives; that the unity of this ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do the Church’s sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia produce eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and even if he has shed blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bo
    som and unity of the Catholic Church.”
    
     from
    
    

    Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation

    
    

    By Bro. Peter Dimond, O.S.B.
     https://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/catholicchurch/outside-the-church-there-is-no-salvation/?utm_source=WPc&utm_medium=EENS-grey&utm_campaign=WP#.XKtKbtbEU5k

Disturbing Points

DISTURBING POINTS

1

TWO QUESTIONS

1) We cannot meet or see someone saved in invincible ignorance (I.I), baptism of desire(BOD) and baptism of blood(BOB) in 2019.We cannot physically see people saved in Heaven?

2) Since there are no cases of I.I,BOD, BOB in our reality, they cannot be examples of salvation outside the Church.They are not exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) ?

2

TWO INTERPRETATIONS OF THE CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

See this text in the Catechism of the Catholic Church(846-848). The red passages  do not contradict the blue passage . If the red contradicts the blue,  you are irrational. It is an irrational interpretation.

"Outside the Church there is no salvation"

846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers? Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:

Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door.Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.

847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:

Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.

848 "Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men."

-Lionel Andrades

I Found Myself in Hell. The biggest lie of the devil is 'once saved always saved' .It is a Hell- conspiracy.Gossip, un-forgiveness is a mortal sin.

     
23.42 video The biggest lie of the devil 'once Saved always saved' is a Hell- conspiracy.Gossip,un-forgiveness  is a mortal sin.-L.A

Repost : Jesuit Superior General Review the Fr.Leonard Feeney case : there is no known case of a person saved with the baptism of desire which is visible

 NOVEMBER 16, 2011

JESUIT SUPERIOR GENERAL REVIEW THE FR.LEONARD FEENEY CASE : THERE IS NO KNOWN CASE OF A PERSON SAVED WITH THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE WHICH IS VISIBLE

In a prepared statement for the press the former Jesuit added: "The conscience difficulty is that the diocese of Boston, under the auspices of Archbishop Cushing, and Boston College, under the auspices of Father John J. McEloney, S.J., both notably ignorant in the field of Catholic theology ... are teaching that there is salvation outside the Catholic Church." - Father Feeney Is Dismissed From Jesuit Order by Rome

 http://www.thecrimson.com/article/1949/10/29/father-feeney-is-dismissed-from-jesuit/

We now know that the Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Richard Cushing and the Reverend John J. McEleney S.J. the former Provincial of the New England branch of the Society of Jesus were wrong in assuming that those saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance are explicitly known to us,that they are real and visible cases and so they contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Fr.Leonard Feeney.

Fr.Leonard Feeney was correct in saying that there is no baptism ofdesire or invincible ignornance cases that we know of and so they are not exceptions to the dogma defined three times.

Fr.Leonard Feeney was unjustly deprived of his faculties to offer Mass and hear Confession when he was only affirming the centuries old interpretation of the dogma.

The Archbishop of Boston and the Jesuit Superior General did not issue a clarification when the Boston newspapers reported that the Church had changed its ancient teaching on outside the Church there is no salvation.

Instead the Archbishop and the Jesuits began teaching that there was salvation outside the church for those saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire not mentioning that these cases were accepted only on principle de jure and so did not contradict the dogma which indicated that all non Catholics need to convert into the Catholic Church to avoid Hell.

Pope Pius XII in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 affirmed ‘the dogma’ the ‘infallible teaching’. The dogma CantateDomino, Council of Florence indicates that all non Catholics in Boston and the rest of the world need to convert into the Catholic Church. This was exactly the teaching of Fr.Leonard Feeney for which he was being transferred and silenced.

Even though the Letter of the Holy Office supported the priest the excommunication was not listed and the media was allowed to state that Fr.Leonard Feeney was condemned by the Hly Office.

Justice needs to be done by the present Superior General of the Jesuits Superior General is the Reverend Father Adolfo Nicolás..-Lionel Andrades

_____________________________________________________________________________

Father Feeney Is Dismissed From Jesuit Order by Rome

Refused to Take Holy Cross Post

By Brenton WELLING Jr.,

Published: Saturday, October 29, 1949

Father Leonard Feeney last night was dismissed from the Jesuit Order.

His discharge, the latest event in his dispute with the Catholic authorities, came in the form of a decree from Rome signed by The Very Reverend Jean Baptiste Janssens, S.J., General of the order,

The decree arrived at St. Benedict's Center at 6 p.m. in a registered letter from The Reverend John J. McEleney S.J. Provincial of the New England branch of the Society of Jesus.

Judicial Process

Father Feeney announced his own dismissal at a press conference last night. He translated from the Latin a sentence of the decree, which said: "Your dismissal from the Society of Jesus through judicial process has been approved."

Father Feeney, who is the chaplain of St. Benedict's commented, "The reason is because I will not leave St. Benedict's Center." He refused to do so in August, 1948, when he was ordered by the Jesuits to join the faculty of Holy Cross.

The reason for his disobedience, Father Feeney said last night, was a "conscience difficulty which Father McEloney will not listen to."

Explains Difficulty

In a prepared statement for the press the former Jesuit added: "The conscience difficulty is that the diocese of Boston, under the auspices of Archbishop Cushing, and Boston College, under the auspices of Father John J. McEloney, S.J., both notably ignorant in the field of Catholic theology ... are teaching that there is salvation outside the Catholic Church."

Archishop Cushing declined to comment on this statement last night, and Father MeEleney could not be reached.

Father Feeney's insistence that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church has been the cause of the con- troversy which has gene on between the Archbishop and the Jesuits, on the one hand, and Father Feeney, on the other, since October 1947. Last January Father Feeney was "deprived on his faculties" by Archbishop Cushing. This meant that he could no longer say Mass or hear confession.

Despite this and the more recent punishment, Father Feeney announced last night, "I shall continue as a Catholic priest, loyal and devoted to the Church and to the Pope, at St. Benediet's Center."

The faculty and students of St. Benedict's in a statement signed by the secretary of the School, said last night; "Many of us have at one time or another been associated with Jesuit institutions, and know that their policies of late are motivated more by political expediency than by Christian charity. -Harvard Crimson online.

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/11/jesuit-superior-general-review.html