Lionel's blog
Alberto Melloni’s FSCIRE (Bologna School) continues to interpret Vatican Council II irrationally and unethically and is calling for research papers on Islamism. There is no denial from Melloni and the FSCIRE staff. They are not telling researchers to interpret Vatican Council II without the irrational premise, inference and false conclusion. According to Vatican Council II all need faith and baptism for salvation from Hell (AG 7). Muslims do not have Catholic faith and the baptism of water. In general they are oriented to Hell according to Vatican Council II (AG 7). The Catechism of the Catholic Church says outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation(846). The Catechism (846) cites AG 7 and LG 14).
For the FSCIRE LG 8, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc refer to physically visible examples
of salvation outside the Catholic Church in the present times. So there are
explicit examples of salvation outside the Church which are objective
exceptions for Ad Gentes 7 and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS), of
the Fourth Lateran Council (1215 on EENS.
For me LG 8,
UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc alwayes refer to only hypothetical and invisible cases in
the present times. So they are not objective examples of salvation outside the
Church for us human beings. They are not objective exceptions for the dogma
EENS and Ad Gentes 7. Vatican Council II has the hermeneutic of continuity with
EENS, the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX. The
Council does not contradict the Catechism of Pope Pius X (24Q, 27Q). This is
the rational way to interpret Vatican Council II.
The FSCIRE does not choose this rational way since it does not want to
affirm the dogma EENS and then say that all Muslims in general are outside the
Church without faith and the baptism of water. They would need to believe in
Jesus in the Catholic Church to avoid the fires of Hell ( for salvation).
So with a new theology, a fake theology based upon the invisible people are visible premise, there is dialogue with Islamic researchers and leaders. They are not told the truth about the Catholic Faith.- Lionel Andrades
from the FSCIRE website
FSCIRE invites applications for Postdoctoral Fellowships for the “Giorgio La Pira” Library and Research Centre on the History and Doctrines of Islam (Palermo).
Find out the Call for Research Fellowships
Palermo Occasional Papers – Islamic History, Doctrines and Sources (PaOP) is a multidisciplinary and international journal that plans to contribute to scientific research on Islamic history, doctrines, hermeneutics, literatures, languages, relations, institutions, perception and cultures.
With its international editorial board and a standard selection process (double-blind peer review), the journal welcomes unpublished papers and invites submissions from researchers in all Islamic traditions working on Oriental languages and manuscripts. In addition to first-hand research articles, PaOP also accepts notes, documents and book reviews. It is published mainly in English.
For more information, click here.
È indetta la procedura selettiva per l’ammissione al Corso di Dottorato di Ricerca di interesse nazionale in Studi Religiosi, di seguito DREST, XXXIX ciclo (2023/24-2025/2026).
Per maggiori informazioni consultare il bando
FSCIRE invites applications for Postdoctoral Fellowships for its Bologna centre.
Fellowships are established in accordance with requirements defined by the policy of FSCIRE, its agreements with the Italian Ministry of University and Research and its donors.
Candidates may there by apply for the following position:
• Junior Research Fellow (2 years, renewable).
Applicants must have obtained their doctorate within the last five years. The successful candidate will sign a research contract for two years, equivalent to the Italian “Assegno di ricerca junior” (which amounts to a monthly net sum of about €1,700). The contract defines a research programme in accordance with the research lines of FSCIRE.
We invite applications from all over the globe, provided that the applicant fluently speaks English.
For more information, see the call for applications.
È indetta una selezione, per titoli e colloquio, di un/a catalogatore/catalogatrice da impiegare con contratto di collaborazione coordinata e continuativa alla catalogazione bibliografica del libro moderno presso la Biblioteca specialistica G. Dossetti della Fondazione per le Scienze Religiose.
Per partecipare alla selezione è richiesto l’invio della domanda in carta semplice con cv allegato tramite e-mail segreteria@fscire.it e in cc biblioteca@fscire.it o posta ordinaria all’indirizzo della Fondazione per le Scienze Religiose, via San Vitale 114, 40125 Bologna.
La domanda dovrà pervenire entro le ore 12:30 del 23 febbraio 2023 (in caso di invio via posta, non farà fede il timbro postale).
Per maggiori informazioni consultare il bando.
Terminata la fase di valutazione dei curricula e in seguito ai colloqui in risposta al bando di selezione per la stipula di un contratto di collaborazione coordinata e continuativa per la catalogazione del libro moderno della Biblioteca Dossetti, la commissione ha ritenuto idonea la candidata: Lisa Giacopelli.
È aperta la selezione per il conferimento di un posto di bibliotecario/a presso la Biblioteca e Centro di Ricerca Giorgio La Pira.
Le candidature possono essere inviate a segreteria@fscire.it entro e non oltre le ore 14 del giorno 30 novembre 2022.
Per maggiori informazioni consultare il bando.
Il fascicolo dei Qsrm dedicato al tema Diversamente “mendicanti” sarà il 2, 2024. In base alla numerosità delle proposte ricevute, sarà possibile anche impegnare il fascicolo 1, 2025. La consegna dei saggi, per essere sottoposti a revisione, è prevista entro ottobre 2023 (un eventuale secondo fascicolo prevede una consegna al febbraio 2024). I termini per la proposta di adesione al progetto sono fissati al 30 giugno 2022. Entro tale data dovrà pervenire ai curatori editoriali (Maria Teresa Dolso e Andrea Tilatti) una proposta di titolo con una breve descrizione della ricerca. Oltre che in italiano, i saggi potranno essere redatti in inglese, francese, spagnolo. Orientativamente i saggi (salvo diverse esigenze) possono consistere in 60.000 caratteri (spazi e note inclusi) seguendo le norme editoriali dei Qsrm, che saranno inoltrate a tutti i collaboratori. Sarà possibile fornire illustrazioni, carte, grafici, in accordo con i curatori editoriali. I curatori editoriali sono a disposizione per ogni ulteriore chiarimento.
Per maggiori informazioni consultare il bando e la bibliografia di orientamento.
La Fondazione per le scienze religiose presso la sede della Biblioteca e centro di ricerca Giorgio La Pira di Palermo realizza un programma di assunzioni rivolto a soggetti disabili iscritti negli elenchi di cui alla L. n. 68/99 per complessive n.1 unità, che siano iscritti presso il CPI di Palermo e che presentino una certificazione di invalidità del 46% minimo. L’assunzione sarà effettuata tramite un contratto di lavoro subordinato a tempo determinato della durata minima 7 mesi, con orario di lavoro part-time da 25 ore settimanali.
Il contratto prevede l’espletamento delle mansioni di impiegato amministrativo addetto al servizio di aiuto bibliotecario.
Le domande dovranno pervenire entro e non oltre il 30 aprile 2022 all’attenzione del dott. Gianmarco Braghi all’indirizzo braghi@fscire.it e in cc maktaba@fscire.it.
Graduatoria.
È aperta la selezione per il conferimento di due posti di bibliotecario (lingua araba e lingua persiana) presso la Biblioteca e Centro di Ricerca Giorgio La Pira.
Le candidature possono essere inviate a segreteria@fscire.it entro e non oltre le ore 14:00 del 10 aprile 2022.
Per maggiori informazioni consultare il bando.
Graduatoria.
È aperta la selezione, per titoli e colloquio, di un catalogatore da impiegare con contratto di collaborazione coordinata e continuativa alla catalogazione in SBN del fondo antico della Biblioteca Dossetti.
Per partecipare è richiesto l’invio della domanda con cv allegato a segreteria@fscire.it e in cc a biblioteca@fscire.it o posta ordinaria in via San Vitale 114, 40125 Bologna.
La domanda dovrà pervenire entro le ore 12:30 del 15 febbraio 2022.
Per maggiori informazioni consultare il bando.
Terminata la fase di valutazione dei curricula e in seguito ai colloqui in risposta al bando di selezione per la stipula di un contratto di collaborazione coordinata e continuativa per la catalogazione del fondo antico della Biblioteca Dossetti, la commissione ha ritenuto idoneo il candidato: Gianluca D’Elia.
È aperta la call for paper dell'incontro annuale dell'International Qur’anic Studies Association (IQSA), che sarà ospitato dalla Biblioteca La Pira a Palermo dal 5 al 7 settembre 2022. Le proposte di presentazione, su argomenti che riguardano il testo coranico, devono essere inviate a iqsa@fscire.it entro il 7 marzo 2022.
Per maggiori informazioni consultare il bando.
Per informazioni su organizzazione dei panel contattare Alba Fedeli e Devin Stewart.
Per informazioni su aspetti logistici contattare Francesca Badini.
Per informazioni su registrazioni e pagamenti scrivere a contactus@iqsaweb.org.
È sempre aperta la call dell’International fellowship.
Tutti i dettagli qui.
FSCIRE e Banca d’Italia offrono una Postdoctoral felloswhip sul tema Teologia, pensiero economico e prassi commerciali. Feneratio, ribā e tasso d’interesse fra cristianesimo e islam.
Call 2020 for Senior research fellowship 2020.
Graduatoria.
Call 2019 for Postdoctoral fellowship.
https://www.fscire.it/ricerca/call-e-bandi
_____________________________________
She features on leftist TV in Italy and would be welcome at any of the pontifical universities like the Biblicum, which also interpret Vatican Council II with the common fake premise, inference and non traditional conclusion.
She has written books on fighting religious illiteracy, while she does not seem to know that the Council can be interpreted rationally and is in harmony with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus of Pope Honorious and the Order of Preachers in 1215.
Melloni is the founder of the European Academy of Religion. Since 2020 he has been the Chief Scientific Advisor of the European Commission according to his biodata. His interpretation of Vatican Council II is as irrational and unscientific as that of Ursula Von der Leyden, the President of the European Union.There is no denial from the FSCIRE, the EU or the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican. - Lionel Andrades
https://www.fscire.it/card-1619078544
https://berkleycenter.georgetown.edu/people/francesca-cadeddu
https://www.religiousstudiesproject.com/persons/francesca-cadeddu/
___________________________________________________
Euractiv Italia | EURACTIV Italia
13 lug 2023
Professor Alberto Melloni, membro della Fondazione per le scienze religiose
Giovanni XXIII (FSCIRE) e European Commission Chief scientific advisor,
interviene sulle sfide e le opportunità tra religione e Unione Europea in
occasione del dibattito organizzato
il 9 maggio per la festa dell’Europa.
Alberto Melloni and the FSCIRE correspondents and staff agree with me. The FSCIRE and the European Union have been interpreting Vatican Council II irrationally i.e. LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, do not refer to hypothetical and invisible cases in 1965-2023 for them. They are physically visible cases. Only in this way they can be made exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS). So for the FSCIRE and EU , LG 8,14,15,16 etc, are objective examples of salvation outside the Church and are practical exceptions for the dogma EENS. This is irrational and it is their mistake.There are no denials or clarifications from the FSCIRE. For me LG 8 etc refer to invisible cases. This is common sense. They are not objective exceptions for the dogma EENS, for me.
The FSCIRE and the European Union have all these years interpreted LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc as being physically visible examples of salvation outside the Church. This was their false premise. So they inferred that these cases were practical exceptions for the dogma EENS, which had become obsolete. This was their irrational premise and inference.It was irrational and unscientific.
For me LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, GS 22 etc, refer to hypothetical cases only. They cannot be physically visible in 1965-2023.If anyone is saved outside the Catholic Church it could only be known to God. We cannot say that any particular person has been saved or will be saved with the baptism of desire (LG 14) and invincible ignorance (I.I). No one saw St. Emerentiana in Heaven without the baptism of water.
So for me, Vatican Council II does not mention any exceptions for the dogma EENS and the Athanasius Creed, which says all need the Catholic faith for salvation. Vatican Council II has the hermeneutic of continuity with the Syllabus of Errors and the Catechisms of Pope Pius X and Trent. The Councils supports the past exclusivist ecclesiology. There is no rupture with the ecclesiocentrism of the missionaries of the 16th century.
The interpretation of Vatican Council II by the FSCIRE (Bologna School) is now obsolete.It is political.It is not Catholic. It is unethical. Since intentionally the FSCIRE chooses a false premise and inference. This is even after they are informed.
Vatican Council II has to be interpreted only rationally and so there cannot be a New Theology, New Ecumenism, New Ecclesiology, New Evangelization and New Canon Law. Since this New Theology is based upon Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally and this is dishonest. The New Theology separates Jesus from the necessity of the Catholic Church for salvation.It does this with alleged exceptions for EENS.
But now we know that the Council no more has exceptions for the dogma EENS. So there no more is a separation ( when speaking about salvation) between Jesus and the Catholic Church. Membership in the Catholic Church is needed for salvation.It is not enough to believe in Jesus, according to the Christian denonominations.
So how can Alberto Melloni and the European Union, with their books, articles and reports on Vatican Council II, project the Council as a break with Tradition and then give the green light for liberalism, like homosexual unions?
Vatican Council II is no more ‘a revolution’ in the Church but a continuation with Tradition. The Ratzinger liberal theology made a mistake. It had its foundation upon the error in the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston. This Letter, projected invisible cases of the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance, as being visible exceptions for Feeneyite EENS. This remained the error of the popes from Pius XII to Francis and the European Union and Alberto Melloni follow it. All the reports and videos on the Vatican website follow this mistake.This is being tacitly acknowledged by Alberto Melloni. - Lionel Andrades
Trent Horn says that Protestants and other Christians are part of the Catholic Church because of their baptism even though they do not have Catholic faith and do not accept the Sacraments. This is a new doctrine. It is possible for him to say this since he interprets Vatican Council II (UR 3 etc) irrationally.
Trent Horn says that Protestants and other Christians are part of the Catholic Church because of their baptism even though they do not have Catholic faith and do not accept the Sacraments. This is a new doctrine. It is possible for him to say this since he interprets Vatican Council II (UR 3 etc) irrationally.
Vatican Council II says Protestants can be saved in ‘imperfect communion’ ( UR 3) and God has not restricted them from salvation.UR 3 states this, since outside the Church there is known salvation was the new teaching of the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office. It was accepted by Pope Paul VI.
So Rahner, Ratzinger, Bea and others at Vatican Council II, in principle, believe that outside the Catholic Church there is known salvation. They allege irrationally that there are personally known non Catholics saved.In other words there are visible people saved without the baptism of water.The dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus was made obsolete in 1949-Boston by the Americanists.
But we know practically, there can be no known case of a Protestant being in Heaven who is saved outside the Catholic Church. In our human reality there is no such person visible - who can contradict the dogma EENS.
So it is wrong for Trent Horn to interpret LG 15 as a visible case in 1965-2023 and an exception for the dogma EENS.We do not know any one in particular who is saved in imperfect communion with the Catholic Church ( UR 3 etc). It is wrong to assume that the Mystical Body of Christ exists in general, outside the visible boundaries of the Church .There are no objective cases. It is irrational for him to suggest that there is known salvation outside the institutional Church. We do not know of any such case in 2023.
The 1949 mistake of the Letter of the Holy Office (LOHO) was repeated by Rahner and Ratzinger in 1965.This is unacceptable.The 1949 LOHO was irrational, non traditional, heretical and schismatic.
For me LG 8,14,15 and 16 refer to hypothetical cases.So there is nothing in the text of Vatican Council II to contradict the Athanasius Creed.This Creed says all need to be members of the Catholic Church for salvation. All need Catholic faith and the baptism of water for salvation ( AG 7, LG 14). All.So Vatican Council II ( AG 7, LG 14) does not exclude Catholic faith.
Without the Catholic Sacraments, Protestants cannot be saved. They are outside the Church without Catholic faith.The Council is saying that only the baptism of water is not sufficient. Since over time a person can commit mortal sins of faith in ignorance or other reason. The Catholic Church is the Mystical Body of Christ and this does not include all the Christian denominations.
This is the Conciliar teaching when UR 3 etc are interpreted only rationally i.e invisible cases are invisible and not visible.
There were some or many in 1965 who were using the New Theology of the 1949 LOHO, based upon the invisible-visible confusion, to suggest that there is known salvation outside the Catholic Church.So it was wrongly inferred that there are objective exceptions for the traditional interpretation of the dogma EENS.
Trent Horn is interpreting Vatican Council II with this hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition.I interpret the Council with the hermeneutic of continuity with the dogma EENS, the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors , the Catechism of Pope Pius X and the rest of Tradition.
For me UR 3 is not break with Tradition as cited by Brother Peter Dimond.LG 8,14, 15 and 16 are also only hypothetical cases. So they cannot be objective exceptions for EENS in 2023.- Lionel Andrades
In this video Trent Horn is irrational and political. He is projecting Lumen Gentium (8, 14, 15,16 etc) as being physically visible examples of salvation outside the Church in 1965-2023.So for him these are exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS). So he criticizes Brother Peter Dimond.
But Peter Dimond corrects Trent Horn by quoting traditional sources, which do not mention any exceptions.
HOW CAN LUMEN GENTIUM 8,14,15 & 16 REFER TO PHYSICALLY VISIBLE CASES
How can Lumen Gentium 16 for example, refer to a physically visible non Catholic saved outside the Church? How can it be a visible exception for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) ?.Common sense tells us that these are invisible cases for us human beings.They can only be known to God. For us humans these are only hypothetical and theoretical cases. But this was not known to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith when they issued their Letter to the Archbishop of Boston with reference to Fr. Leonard Feeney. It was also not known to the CDF in 1965. The CDF did not interpret Vatican Council II rationally.
The Church Fathers interpreted the baptism of desire , baptism of blood etc rationally like me and not irrationally like Jimmy Akins and Trent Horn
So like Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the Prefect of the CDF, Catholic Answers interprets Vatican Council II irrationally They also reject the Church Councils on EENS which Brother Peter Dimond quotes.
Trent Horn interprets Vatican Council II as a rupture with Tradition but for me there is continuity with Tradition.
Catholic Answers accepts the 1949 Letter of the CDF which confuses invisible cases of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance as being visible exceptions for Feeneyite EENS.I avoid this mistake.
I AVOID THE INVISIBLE PEOPLE ARE VISIBLE CONFUSION
So for me what Rahner, Ratzinger, Congar, Murray, Kung, Ottaviani, Bea and Lefebvre said or did at Vatican Council II is irrelevant. Since I can interpret Vatican Council II rationally in harmony with Feeneyite EENS. I simply avoid the invisible people are visible confusion. The Council then supports EENS according to the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) of Pope Honorius III.It did not mention any exceptions. This was the understanding EENS also of St. Dominic Guzman and his friends who founded the Dominican Order at that time.
The Bible supports the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus. It is Feeneyite like Brother Peter Dimond and not Cushingite, like it is for Catholic Answers.
WHEN I MEET A HINDU, BUDDHIST OR SIKH
So when I meet Hindus, Buddhists or Sikhs I know that they are oriented to Hell without faith and baptism (AG 7, LG 14, CCC 845,846, 1257). Catholic faith and the baptism of water are the ordinary means of salvation. I cannot know of any extraordinary means of salvation.Only God can know of an extraordinary means of salvation.
Since ethically, Vatican Council II can only be interpreted rationally, there can only be the past exclusivist ecclesiology at Mass, in Latin or the vernacular. We have only one interpretation of the Council and it is rational. With the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) today the same as it was for the missionaries in the 16th century, we can only have the lex orandi of the past. Since the Council is in harmony with the ecclesiology of the 16th century Roman Missal. The New Missal does not affirm the dogma EENS since it interprets Vatican Council II rationally.
AN APOLOGIST HERE CHANGES THE INTERPRETATION OF THE CREEDS
How can an apologist of Catholic Answers be called Catholic, when he changes the interpretation of the Creeds etc for political - Left reasons? This is ideological and not Catholic.
Peter Dimond did not correct him on this point since the Most Holy Family Monastery also interprets the baptism of desire (BOD), baptism of blood (BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance (I.I) irrationally and so Vatican Council II is a break with Tradition for him too.
AT VATICAN COUNCIL II THE ATTACK WAS ON EENS
At Vatican Council II the attack was on EENS. They thought they could get rid of the salvation dogma by re-interpreting invisible cases of BOD, BOB and I.I as being visible examples of salvation outside the Church. So there were allegedly known people, non Catholics, saved without Catholic faith and the baptism of water.
So there are many statements in Vatican Council II based upon this error. Otherwise why would they have to mention LG 8, 14, 15 and 16?
The popes only have teaching authority today when they affirm the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus like the Church Councils. It is not magisterial or apostolic to re-interpret the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance irrationally to produce a rupture with the popes and saints over the centuries on the salvation dogma.There is no teaching authority when Vatican Council II is interpreted irrationally.
However, we have undone their bad work. Their bad philosophy and theology which is not Catholic can be replaced. We have made Rahner, Congar, Ratzinger, Balthazar and others obsolete now. We now have to go back to the old moral and faith theology. Since the New Theology and New Ecclesiology is based upon Vatican Council II irrational. So we are not obliged to follow them.
CATHOLIC ANSWERS WOULD ONLY BE MAGISTERIAL WITH VATICAN COUNCIL II RATIONAL
Pope Francis, the cardinals, bishops and Catholic Answers would be Magisterial on Vatican Council II only when they interpret the Council rationally. They are irrational presently.
When they interpret the Creeds, Councils and Catechisms irrationally they are not magisterial. Instead they are heretical and schismatic. This is a mortal sin of faith.
Jimmy Akins and Trent Horn and the other apologists at Catholic Answers are also unethical when they choose an irrational premise (invisible people are visible, LG 16 refers to a visible non Catholic saved outside the Church), irrational inference (LG 8, 14, 16 etc are visible examples of salvation outside the Church and so are objective exceptions for the dogma EENS) and non-traditional conclusion (Vatican Council II is a rupture with Tradition, EENS, original interpretation of the Creeds etc).
I CHOOSE THE ETHICAL OPTION
I choose the ethical option. I choose a rational premise (invisible people are invisible, LG 16 refers to an invisible non Catholic saved outside the Church), irrational inference (LG 8, 14, 16 etc are invisible examples of salvation outside the Church and so are non objective. Invisible cases cannot be practical exceptions for the dogma EENS. I choose the rational and non-traditional conclusion (Vatican Council II is not a rupture with Tradition ( EENS, original interpretation of the Creeds etc).It has the hermeneutic of continuity with the Fourth Lateran Council II ( 1215) and the Council of Florence (1442) which defined the dogma EENS.
Catholic Answers is not telling the truth to Catholics so that their apologists can be politically correct with the Left. -Lionel Andrades
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/07/message-incomplete-in-this-video-trent.html
Posts
