Monday, January 8, 2018
The SSPX and the Franciscans of the Immaculate(F.I) must ask Pope Benedict and the College of Cardinals to recant
Pope Benedict must be asked to admit that he made an error in March 2016 (Avvenire).He must be asked to affirm the dogma EENS like the missionaries and magisterium of the 16th century.Since there is a change in doctrine and discipline which is heretical.
The Holy Spirit cannot teach that invisible for us cases of someone saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16) are visible exceptions to the old exclusivist ecclesiology. This contradicts the Principle of Non Contradiction. It cannot be the teaching of the Holy Spirit.
Pope Benedict should be asked to recant and correct his error in public.
(Continued)
(5). The first paragraph states: “With firm faith, I also believe everything contained in the Word of God, whether written or handed down in Tradition, which the Church, either by a solemn judgment or by the ordinary and universal Magisterium, sets forth to be believed as divinely revealed.” The object taught in this paragraph is constituted by all those doctrines of divine and catholic faith which the Church proposes as divinely and formally revealed and, as such, as irreformable.
Lionel: The SSPX and the Franciscans of the Immaculate(F.I) could ask Pope Benedict and the College of Cardinals to affirm extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) as it was known to the missionaries in the 16th century. Since invisible for us baptism of desire(BOD),baptis,m of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) never were visible exceptions.So the present position of the two popes and the CDF is heretical.
____________________________________
These doctrines are contained in the Word of God, written or handed down, and defined with a solemn judgment as divinely revealed truths either by the Roman Pontiff when he speaks ‘ex cathedra,’ or by the College of Bishops gathered in council, or infallibly proposed for belief by the ordinary and universal Magisterium.
Lionel: The dogma EENS is based on Scripture (John 3:5,Mark 16:16) and has been defined by three Church Councils..Popes in the ordinary and extraordinary magisterium have said that it was obligatory for all Catholics to believe in it.Pope Benedict must be asked to admit that he made an error in March 2016 (Avvenire).He must be asked to affirm the dogma EENS like the missionaries and magisterium of the 16th century.
_______________________
These doctrines require the assent of theological faith by all members of the faithful. Thus, whoever obstinately places them in doubt or denies them falls under the censure of heresy, as indicated by the respective canons of the Codes of Canon Law.12
Lionel: So presently Pope Benedict is in heresy since he has stated in public that for him EENS is no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century. For me EENS is like it is for the missionaries in the 16th century.
These doctrines are contained in the Word of God, written or handed down, and defined with a solemn judgment as divinely revealed truths either by the Roman Pontiff when he speaks ‘ex cathedra,’ or by the College of Bishops gathered in council, or infallibly proposed for belief by the ordinary and universal Magisterium.
Lionel: The dogma EENS is based on Scripture (John 3:5,Mark 16:16) and has been defined by three Church Councils..Popes in the ordinary and extraordinary magisterium have said that it was obligatory for all Catholics to believe in it.Pope Benedict must be asked to admit that he made an error in March 2016 (Avvenire).He must be asked to affirm the dogma EENS like the missionaries and magisterium of the 16th century.
_______________________
These doctrines require the assent of theological faith by all members of the faithful. Thus, whoever obstinately places them in doubt or denies them falls under the censure of heresy, as indicated by the respective canons of the Codes of Canon Law.12
Lionel: So presently Pope Benedict is in heresy since he has stated in public that for him EENS is no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century. For me EENS is like it is for the missionaries in the 16th century.
For him there was a development with Vatican Council II since LG 16,GS 22 etc ( See Christianity and the World Religions, ITC) is a rupture with Feeneyite and EENS and as it was known in the 16th century..For me invisible and unknown cases of LG 16 and GS 22 in 2016-2018 cannot be an exception to EENS. So there is no development of the dogma in Vatican Council II for me.
Pope Benedict needs to recant.
____________________________________
(6). The second proposition of the Professio fidei states: “I also firmly accept and hold each and everything definitively proposed by the Church regarding teaching on faith and morals.”
Lionel: In faith ( salvation theology) he has taught heresy in public(March 2016,Avvenire).
In morals the Catechism of the Catholic Church (846) suggests that there are three conditions for mortal sins which we can know of, which we can judge.So mortal sin is not a mortal sin always.This is philosophical subjectivism which is also there in Amoris Laetitia.
If there are exceptions to the general teaching on faith and morals it would be known only to God and not Pope Benedict.
_______________________________
The object taught by this formula includes all those teachings belonging to the dogmatic or moral area, which are necessary for faithfully keeping and expounding the deposit of faith, even if they have not been proposed by the Magisterium of the Church as formally revealed.
Lionel: Again he is saying that the new salvation and new moral theology has to be accepted by all as a schism with the past magisterium of the Catholic Church. This is how he interprets it and so does Cardinal Walter Kasper, Fr.Hans Kung S.j and others. etc.
________________________________
Such doctrines can be defined solemnly by the Roman Pontiff when he speaks ‘ex cathedra’ or by the College of Bishops gathered in council, or they can be taught infallibly by the ordinary and universal Magisterium of the Church as a “sententia definitive tenenda”. Every believer, therefore, is required to give firm and definitive assent to these truths, based on faith in the Holy Spirit’s assistance to the Church’s Magisterium, and on the Catholic doctrine of the infallibility of the Magisterium in these matters. Whoever denies these truths would be in a position of rejecting a truth of Catholic doctrine and would therefore no longer be in full communion with the Catholic Church.
Lionel: Pope Benedict has rejected the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus with alleged invisible for us baptism of desire etc being visible exceptions to the traditional interpretation.He is not in full communion with the magisterium of the 16th century. He has admitted this in March 2016. He is in a rupture with the authentic magisterium of the past and the teachings of the Holy Spirit on this issue over the centuries. This is a doctrinal issue.
Lionel: Pope Benedict has rejected the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus with alleged invisible for us baptism of desire etc being visible exceptions to the traditional interpretation.He is not in full communion with the magisterium of the 16th century. He has admitted this in March 2016. He is in a rupture with the authentic magisterium of the past and the teachings of the Holy Spirit on this issue over the centuries. This is a doctrinal issue.
It is expressed practically, when inter-faith marriages were not considered adultery, since Cardinal Ratzinger and his Curia believed there was known salvation outside the Church.So the non Catholic spouse could be saved outside the Church was the reasoning.
Similarly Pope Benedict has said during the controversy of the Revised Good Fraiday Prayer for the Jews, that Jews do not have to convert in the present times. He has repeated this practical expression of his doctrinal heresy.He suggested in March 2016 that there is known salvation outside the Church and he calls it a development in Vatican Council II.
So there is a change in doctrine and discipline which is heretical.
______________________________
(7). The truths belonging to this second paragraph can be of various natures, thus giving different qualities to their relationship with revelation. There are truths which are necessarily connected with revelation by virtue of an historical relationship; while other truths evince a logical connection that expresses a stage in the maturation of understanding of revelation which the Church is called to undertake. The fact that these doctrines may not be proposed as formally revealed, insofar as they add to the data of faith elements that are not revealed or which are not yet expressly recognized as such, in no way diminishes their definitive character, which is required at least by their intrinsic connection with revealed truth. Moreover, it cannot be excluded that at a certain point in dogmatic development, the understanding of the realities and the words of the deposit of faith can progress in the life of the Church, and the Magisterium may proclaim some of these doctrines as also dogmas of divine and catholic faith.
Lionel: 'dogmatic development'.
So when Pope Benedict said that EENS was no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century it was a dogmatic development which we all have to accept. All religious communities have to accept it including the SSPX and F.I.Even though this would be a rupture with the 16th century, a hermeneutic of rupture.
Archbishop Pozzo has stated that Vatican Council II has a hermeneutic of continuity with the past. This is false.There is no continuity with this interpretation.Neither is Archbishop Pozzo or Pope Benedict affirming EENS according to the magisterium of the 16th century.
_____________________________________
(8). With regard to the nature of the assent owed to the truths set forth by the Church as divinely revealed (those of the first paragraph) or to be held definitively (those of the second paragraph), it is important to emphasize that there is no difference with respect to the full and irrevocable character of the assent which is owed to these teachings. The difference concerns the supernatural virtue of faith: in the case of truths of the first paragraph, the assent is based directly on faith in the authority of the Word of God (doctrines de fide credenda); in the case of the truths of the second paragraph, the assent is based on faith in the Holy Spirit’s assistance to the Magisterium and on the Catholic doctrine of the infallibility of the Magisterium (doctrines de fide tenenda).
Lionel:The Holy Spirit cannot teach that invisible for us cases of someone saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16) are visible exceptions to the old exclusivist ecclesiology. This contradicts the Principle of Non Contradiction. It cannot be the teaching of the Holy Spirit.
____________________________________
(9). The Magisterium of the Church, however, teaches a doctrine to be believed as divinely revealed (first paragraph) or to be held definitively (second paragraph) with an act which is either defining or non-defining. In the case of a defining act, a truth is solemnly defined by an “ex cathedra” pronouncement by the Roman Pontiff or by the action of an ecumenical council. In the case of a non-defining act, a doctrine is taught infallibly by the ordinary and universal Magisterium of the Bishops dispersed throughout the world who are in communion with the Successor of Peter. Such a doctrine can be confirmed or reaffirmed by the Roman Pontiff, even without recourse to a solemn definition, by declaring explicitly that it belongs to the teaching of the ordinary and universal Magisterium as a truth that is divinely revealed (first paragraph) or as a truth of Catholic doctrine (second paragraph). Consequently, when there has not been a judgment on a doctrine in the solemn form of a definition, but this doctrine, belonging to the inheritance of the depositum fidei, is taught by the ordinary and universal Magisterium, which necessarily includes the Pope, such a doctrine is to be understood as having been set forth infallibly. The declaration of confirmation or reaffirmation by the Roman Pontiff in this case is not a new dogmatic definition, but a formal attestation of a truth already possessed and infallibly transmitted by the Church.
Lionel : 'such a doctrine is to be understood as having been set forth infallibly.' The false new doctrines on faith and morals ,created with the use of an irrational premise, are to be considered infallible.
So when Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre refused to affirm Vatican Council II with the new false doctrine he was excommunicated.He had to accept that unknown cases of someone saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16) was a manifest exception to the traditional teaching, on all needing to enter the Church for salvation.He did not accept the heresy of Cardinal Ratzinger/Pope Benedict._______________________
(10). The third proposition of the Professio fidei states: “Moreover, I adhere with religious 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.” To this paragraph belong all those teachings on faith and morals – presented as true or at least as sure, even if they have not been defined with a solemn judgment or proposed as definitive by the ordinary and universal Magisterium. Such teachings are, however, an authentic expression of the ordinary Magisterium of the Roman Pontiff or of the College of Bishops and therefore require religious submission of will and intellect. They are set forth in order to arrive at a deeper understanding of revelation, or to recall the conformity of a teaching with the truths of faith, or lastly to warn against ideas incompatible with these truths or against dangerous opinions that can lead to error. A proposition contrary to these doctrines can be qualified as erroneous or, in the case of teachings of the prudential order, as rash or dangerous and therefore “tuto decor non potest”.
Lionel:' their authentic Magisterium'
The authentic Magisterium cannot state that Fr. Leonard Feeney was wrong for not accepting invisible and hypothetical cases of the baptism of desire etc as being actual and known exceptions, in the present times, to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.This is the false magisterium of Cardinal Ratzinger/Pope Benedict.
How can unknown people be exceptions to all needing to enter the Church for salvation ? How can people allegedly saved in this way be visible exceptions on earth to all needing to be incorporated into the Church for salvation? How can a possibility in the past be a known exception to the dogma on exclusive salvation in 2016-18?
This was the reasoning accepted by Cardinal Ratzinger and he considers it the 'authentic magisterium'.Pope Benedict should be asked to recant and correct his error in public.________________________________
(11). Examples. Without any intention of completeness or exhaustiveness, some examples of doctrines relative to the three paragraphs described above can be recalled.
To the truths of the first paragraph belong the articles of faith of the Creed, the various Christological dogmas and Marian dogmas; the doctrine of the institution of the sacraments by Christ and their efficacy with regard to grace; the doctrine of the real and substantial presence of Christ in the Eucharist and the sacrificial nature of the eucharistic celebration; the foundation of the Church by the will of Christ; the doctrine on the primacy and infallibility of the Roman Pontiff; the doctrine on the existence of original sin; the doctrine on the immortality of the spiritual soul and on the immediate recompense after death; the absence of error in the inspired sacred texts; the doctrine on the grave immorality of direct and voluntary killing of an innocent human being.
Lionel: 'The various Christological dogmas' without the exclusivist ecclesiology! This is a rupture with the magisterium of the 16th century.
________________________________
With respect to the truths of the second paragraph, with reference to those connected with revelation by a logical necessity, one can consider, for example, the development in the understanding of the doctrine connected with the definition of papal infallibility, prior to the dogmatic definition of the First Vatican Council. The primacy of the Successor of Peter was always believed as a revealed fact, although until Vatican I the discussion remained open as to whether the conceptual elaboration of what is understood by the terms ‘jurisdiction’ and ‘infallibility’ was to be considered an intrinsic part of revelation or only a logical consequence. On the other hand, although its character as a divinely revealed truth was defined in the First Vatican Council, the doctrine on the infallibility and primacy of jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff was already recognized as definitive in the period before the council. History clearly shows, therefore, that what was accepted into the consciousness of the Church was considered a true doctrine from the beginning, and was subsequently held to be definitive; however, only in the final stage – the definition of Vatican I – was it also accepted as a divinely revealed truth.
Lionel: Pope Pius XII in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 referred to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as an 'infallible teaching'.Cardinal Ratzinger calls it an aphorism. He has also changed its meaning by accepting invisible- for- us cases as being examples of salvation outside the Church. This is heresy.
With this change the Nicene Creed has a new meaning and the Athanasius Creed which says outside the Church there is no salvation has been rejected.This is first class heresy.
He has interpreted Vatican Council II as a rupture with Tradition when there was an alternative interpretation which was rational, traditional and non heretical, which he has avoided.So he does not affirm Vatican Council II as I do. This is heresy for me.It is a rejection of Vatican Council II( without the false premise).
He also did not tell Archbishop Lefebvre that he could interpret Vatican Council II without the false premise and the Council would emerge traditional.Instead he excommunicated him. This was being irresponsible as the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
The Prefect of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith did not help out Archbiship Lefebvre for some reason or because the CDF Prefect was in ignorance about Catholic theology and doctrine.
________________________________
A similar process can be observed in the more recent teaching regarding the doctrine that priestly ordination is reserved only to men. The Supreme Pontiff, while not wishing to proceed to a dogmatic definition, intended to reaffirm that this doctrine is to be held definitively, since, founded on the written Word of God, constantly preserved and applied in the Tradition of the Church, it has been set forth infallibly by the ordinary and universal Magisterium. As the prior example illustrates, this does not foreclose the possibility that, in the future, the consciousness of the Church might progress to the point where this teaching could be defined as a doctrine to be believed as divinely revealed.
Lionel: So like the liberal he always was, Cardinal Ratzinger is saying that there is a possibility that 'this teaching' could be defined as a doctrine in the future and be considered divinely revealed even though it is not so at present.
Similarly in one of the theological papers of the International Theological Commission he supported 'a theology of religions'.
This was like he said last year that EENS was no more like it was in the 16th century and there was a development with Vatican Council II (interpreted with the premise). This was his liberal understanding and he was not going to affirm EENS in public without the false premise and neither was be going to affirm Vatican Council II ,without the false premise and in harmony with EENS( without the premise). He was as usual going to support liberalism and heresy in public. Officially he remains a modernist. This cannot be the authentic Magisterium of the Catholic Church.-Lionel Andrades
The Prefect of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith did not help out Archbiship Lefebvre for some reason or because the CDF Prefect was in ignorance about Catholic theology and doctrine.
________________________________
A similar process can be observed in the more recent teaching regarding the doctrine that priestly ordination is reserved only to men. The Supreme Pontiff, while not wishing to proceed to a dogmatic definition, intended to reaffirm that this doctrine is to be held definitively, since, founded on the written Word of God, constantly preserved and applied in the Tradition of the Church, it has been set forth infallibly by the ordinary and universal Magisterium. As the prior example illustrates, this does not foreclose the possibility that, in the future, the consciousness of the Church might progress to the point where this teaching could be defined as a doctrine to be believed as divinely revealed.
Lionel: So like the liberal he always was, Cardinal Ratzinger is saying that there is a possibility that 'this teaching' could be defined as a doctrine in the future and be considered divinely revealed even though it is not so at present.
Similarly in one of the theological papers of the International Theological Commission he supported 'a theology of religions'.
This was like he said last year that EENS was no more like it was in the 16th century and there was a development with Vatican Council II (interpreted with the premise). This was his liberal understanding and he was not going to affirm EENS in public without the false premise and neither was be going to affirm Vatican Council II ,without the false premise and in harmony with EENS( without the premise). He was as usual going to support liberalism and heresy in public. Officially he remains a modernist. This cannot be the authentic Magisterium of the Catholic Church.-Lionel Andrades
JANUARY 8, 2018
CDF Doctrinal Professio Fidei is a scandal
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/01/cdf-doctrinal-professio-fidei-is-scandal.html
JANUARY 8, 2018
CDF Doctrinal Commentary – Professio fidei is meaningless and heretical
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/01/cdf-doctrinal-commentary-professio.html
JANUARY 8, 2018
Misleading and meaningless Profession of Faith is being made in the churches
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/01/misleading-and-meaningless-profession.html
JANUARY 7, 2018
So we are all in the same Church but the Profession of Faith does not have the same meaning
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/01/so-we-are-all-in-same-church-but.html
JANUARY 7, 2018
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
