Tuesday, January 24, 2017

Catechism of the Catholic Church says Orthodox Christians and Protestants oriented to Hell



Image result for Photo logo Prayers for Christian Unity

Image result for Photos of catechism of the catholic church bookIt depends upon how you interpret the Catechism of the Catholic Church 1.
With invisible cases being invisible all the members of the Christian denominations are on the way to Hell.
1.Since they die with mortal sin on their soul without having received absolution in the Sacrament of Confession and the three conditions for mortal sin are invisible for us in personal cases.
2.They do not have faith and baptism in the Catholic Church and if there was any one saved with the baptism of desire, invincible ignorance or some other condition without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church it would be invisible for us in 2017.So there are no known Christians who are exceptions to Vatican Council iI(AG 7, LG 14- all need the faith and baptism.).
So according to the Catechism of the Catholic Church all Pentecostals, Protestants and Orthodox Christians need to convert into the Catholic Church with 'faith and baptism' to avoid the fires of Hell, for salvation.
Image result for Photo logo Prayers for Christian UnityImage result for Photo logo Prayers for Christian UnityImage result for Photo logo Prayers for Christian Unity
During this week of Prayers for Christian Unity we need to remember that there can only be an ecumenism of return according to the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
Image result for Photo women bishop Christian churchImage result for Photo women bishop Christian church
 
The other option; the common interpretation is irrational.Since it assumes invisible people or invisible subjective factors in personal cases are visible and personally known. Then it has to be inferred wrongly that these factors and unknown people are visible and known exceptions  to the traditional teachings on morals and salvation.
Image result for Photo new evangelisation Catholics and Orthodox Christians togetherImage result for Photo new evangelisation Catholics and Orthodox Christians together
The irrational approach, the one which is a rupture with Tradition, which does not have the hermeneutic of continuity, is the one used by the CDF and the two popes.
It is part of the doctrinally unsound New Evangelisation of Pope Benedict XVI and liberal pro-Mason cardinals.
-Lionel Andrades
 
 
1.
 
January 24, 2017
CCC 846 and 1257 support the 'rigorist interpretation' of the dogma EENS.

  
January 24, 2017

Dipende da come si interpreta il Catechismo della Chiesa Cattolica/It depends upon how you interpret the Catechism of the Catholic Church

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/01/dipende-da-come-si-interpreta-il.html
  
 
January 24, 2017

Catechism's philosophical subjectivism in morals is repeated in Amoris Laetitia.

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/01/catechisms-philosophical-subjectivism.html

____________________________




 

 

CCC 846 and 1257 support the 'rigorist interpretation' of the dogma EENS.

Image result for Photos of catechism of the catholic church book
What is interesting about the Catechism is that it can be interpreted in two ways.
I
If you consider the three conditions for mortal sin as objective,judgeable and manifest then the Catechism is a rupture with the old 'fixed' teachings on morals. There is a new moral theology. A mortal sin is not aways a mortal sin.
II
If you consider the three conditions as subjective,non judgeable and invisible for us human beings, then the Catechism is not a rupture with the traditional teachings on morals. It is irrelevant to mortal sin. A mortal sin is always a mortal sin and the outward action indicates the subjective state of sin(Veritatis Splendor).
 
 
 
____________________
I
Similarly if you consider CCC 846( Outside the Church No Salvation) as referring to known cases of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance, then the Catechism is a rupture with the centuries old interpretation of the dogma EENS. Since there are exceptions and so every one does not need to be incorporated into the Church for salvation.This was said boldly and heretically in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.

II
If you consider them as being hypothetical, theoretical and invisible for us human beings then the Catechism(846) is not a rupture with the dogma WEENS according to the 16th century missionaries.It does not contradict St. Francis Xavier and St. Ignatius of Loyola.
______________________

This same reasoning can be used with CCC 1257 on the necessity of the baptism of water for all for salvation.
I
If there are personally known cases of people saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church, since God is not limited to the Sacraments, then the Catechism is a rupture with the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma EENS.There is an exception.
II
If you consider being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire(without the baptism of water) or because God is not limited to the Sacraments, as referring to hypothetical, speculative and personally unknown cases in our reality in 2017,then the Catechism is not a rupture with the dogma EENS.
Then CCC 846 and 1257 support the 'rigorist interpretation' of the dogma EENS.There can be no known exceptions to the dogma.
This is why I often affirm Feeneyite EENS and use CCC 846 and 1257 as a supporting reference.
For many readers all this could be new and hard to believe.'It could not be all that simple '' they ask.'Why didn't someone mention this before?'.
Yet the proof is there before our very eyes.We can check it out.
-Lionel Andrades



January 24, 2017

Dipende da come si interpreta il Catechismo della Chiesa Cattolica/It depends upon how you interpret the Catechism of the Catholic Church

Catechismo della Chiesa cattolica. Compendio

a comment …
Lionel L. Andrades
Dipende da come si interpreta il Catechismo della Chiesa Cattolica.
Se si assume casi ipotetici sono pratici eccezioni al dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS), poi il Catechismo contraddice il dogma sulla salvezza nei numeri 846 (fuori della Chiesa non c'è salvezza) e 1257 (la necessità del Battesimo).
Se si assume casi ipotetici non sono eccezioni pratici al dogma EENS il Catechismo (846,1257) non contraddice il dogma EENS come era conosciuto per i missionari gesuiti nel secolo 16 °.
È possibile controllare sul mio blog l'Eucaristia e Missione per più detagli.Per favore vedere le etichette(tags) sul Catechismo della Chiesa Cattolica, Feeneyismo, Cushingismo, irrazionale inferenza et ecc.

___________________

Image result for Photos of catechism of the catholic church book

It depends upon how you interpret the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
If you assume hypothetical cases are practical exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) , then the Catechism contradicts the dogma on salvation in numbers 846 ( outside the Church no salvation) and 1257( the necessity of baptism).
If you assume hypothetical cases are not practical exceptions to the dogma EENS the Catechism (846,1257) does not contradict the dogma EENS as it was known to the 16th century Jesuit missionaries.
You can check the blog Eucharist and Mission for more details.Please see the tags on Catechism of the Catholic Church, Feeneyism, Cushngism, Irrational Inference etc.
-Lionel Andrades
 
 

Catechism's philosophical subjectivism in morals is repeated in Amoris Laetitia.

Image result for photos of the catechism of the catholic churchPhilosophical subjectivism is there in the Catechism of the Catholic Church(1995).It is there in morals and salvation.So faith and morals have been changed by the Masons.
THREE CONDITIONS OF MORTAL SIN SUPERFLOUS
The Catechism mentions three conditions to determine a mortal sin.But they are not really conditions.Since they can only be known to God with reference to salvation.So they are irrelevant to judgeing mortal sin.They are not exceptions to the traditional teachings on morals and mortal sin.
Similarly on salvation, the Catechism mentions being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire, which really refer to invisible and unknown cases.So they are not relevant or exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
So there really is no change on the traditional teachings on morals and salvation in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, for me.
However with the present magisterium considering invisible cases as being visible( unlike me) we now don't just have morals and salvation.We now have 'moral theology' and 'salvation theology.' Since we have a new theology based on invisible cases being visible.Theoretical cases are now considered practical exceptions to the traditional teaching on faith( salvation) and morals.
Image result for pHOTOS OF aMORIS lAETITIASo this new theology on morals which is an innovation and is irrational has been placed in Amoris Laetitia, of course with the approval of the two liberal popes.
Amoris Laetitia suggests that a priest or bishop could know of a few cases, extraordinary cases of a couple who have divorced and remarried and who are not in mortal sin and who can be given the Eucharist.This can be judged!It can be subjectively known by a priest or bishop.The couple also can subjectively know it by following their individual conscience.
So the old 'fixed' objective teaching on morals and faith no more exists in Amoris Laetitia and the Catechism of the Catholic Church for those who can judge  conditions and exceptions, which would only be known to God.
What is interesting about the Catechism is that it can be interpreted in two ways.
If you consider the three conditions for mortal sin as objective,judgeable and manifest then the Catechism is a rupture with the old 'fixed' teachings on morals. There is a new moral theology. A mortal sin is not aways a mortal sin.
If you consider the three conditions as subjective,non judgeable and invisible for us human beings, then the Catechism is not a rupture with the traditional teachings on morals. It is irrelevant to mortal sin. A mortal sin is always a mortal sin and the outward action indicates the subjective state of sin(Veritatis Splendor).
Similarly if you consider CCC 846( Outside the Church No Salvation) as referring to known cases of the baoptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance, then the Catechism is a rupture with the centuries old interpretation of the dogma EENS. Since there are exceptions and so every one does not need to be incorporated into the Church for salvation.This was said boldly and heretically in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.
If you consider them as being hypothetical, theoretical and invisible for us human beings then the Catechism(846) is not a rupture with the dogma WEENS according to the 16th century missionaries.It does not contradict St. Francis Xavier and St. Ignatius of Loyola.
This same reasoning can be used with CCC 1257 on the necessity of the baptism of water for all for salvation.
If there are personally known cases of people saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church, since God is not limited to the Sacraments, then the Catechism is a rupture with the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma EENS.There is an exception.
If you consider being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire(without the baptism of water) or because God is not limited to the Sacraments, as referring to hypothetical, speculative and personally unknown cases in our reality in 2017,then the Catechism is not a rupture with the dogma EENS.
Then CCC 846 and 1257 support the 'rigorist interpretation' of the dogma EENS.There can be no known exceptions to the dogma.
This is why I often affirm Feeneyite EENS and use CCC 846 and 1257 as a supporting reference.
For many readers all this could be new and hard to believe.'It could not be all that simple '' they ask.'Why didn't someone mention this before?'.
Yet the proof is there before our very eyes.We can check it out.
Cardinal Ratzinger and Schonborn assumed  what is invisible is visible, since this was the reasoning in Vatican Council II(1965) and the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.There was no correction or clarification in the Catechism which they approved.
Now if you consider what is invisible as just being invisible you neutralize their error and have a hermeneutic of continuity.The same approach can be used with Vatican Council II.
 We have to be aware of the new philosophical subjectivism in faith and morals.The same subjectivism is there in Pope Francis' Amoris Laetitia.
The Catechism should not have mentioned the three conditions of mortal sin nor being saved in invincible ignorance the baptism of desire.
In the past they(three conditions/invincible ignorance etc) have been referred to by popes and catechisms in answer to questions from persons, who were a part of a long campaign, by enemies of the Church, to change the basic teachings of the Catholic Church.
They succeeded with philosophical subjectivism.
-Lionel Andrades
 
 
January 23, 2017
dubia-brothers

La Stampa still trying to white wash the error of Amoris Laetitia http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/01/la-stampa-still-trying-to-white-wash.html





January 23, 2017
Bloggers are not discussing the real issue in the Rockford diocese http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/01/bloggers-are-not-discussing-real-issue.html



January 21, 2017
Image result for Photos Cardinal Muller
By now the CDF should have been able to accept that there are two interpretations of Vatican Council II and one has the hermeneutic of continuity and the other does not. http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/01/by-now-cdf-should-have-been-able-to.html
 
 
 
January 21, 2017
All non Catholic immigrants in Rome, Italy are on the way to Hell unless they convert into the Catholic Church: this is Catholic teaching according to Lega Nord?

Monday, January 23, 2017

La Stampa still trying to white wash the error of Amoris Laetitia

La Stampa has posted an editorial Amoris Laetitia: Where Truth and Mercy Embrace 1 justifying 'philosophical subjectivism' and playing God.The writer tries to answer the questions of the four cardinals in the dubbia.
dubia-brothers
Philosophical subjectivism is common in the Catholic Church after the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston was issued and not corrected.It suggests that we can subjectively identify non Catholics saved  without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.It considered the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance as not being theoretical and hypothetical.Instead ,it postulated them as being practical exceptions to the Feeneyite and traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.For the cardinals in Rome and Boston in 1949 the Letter referred to defacto and known cases of a catechumen who desired the baptism of water and died before receiving it and is now in Heaven.
So with this irrational subjectivism in salvation theology for the ideological magisterium, we now have subjectivism in moral theology being taught at pontifical universities.This moral subjectivism,is the norm.
An extraordinary case is mentioned by moral theologians Fr.Curran and Fr.Harding and they judge that this theoretical and unknown person has been saved, or will be saved and is an exception to the traditional teaching on mortal sin.Then they insist, they judge,that we cannot judge moral cases in general according to the traditional teachings of the Church.
This is the error of Amoris Laetitia and which La Stampa is still trying to white wash.The editorial like Amoris Laetitia assumes we can judge exceptions to the general moral teachings of the Church and so there are exceptions to the norm given by Bible and interpreted by the popes and Tradition.This is the new moral theology of Pope Benedict and Pope Francis.
It directly contradicts Ecclesia di Eucharestia and Veritatis Splendor of Pope John Paul II and Catholic Tradition in general.
This new faith ( salvation) and moral theology is the work of the Devil,through the usual Leftist sources and especially the Synagogue of Satan.They control the mainstream media.Catholics are given this false narrative on morals, supported by the present ideological magisterium of the Catholic Church.
La Stampa cites Vatican Council II.The writer is unable to see that there are many errors in the Council based on philosophical subjectivism.The wrong inference is that LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc are practical exceptions, known to us human beings, to the dogma EENS.
Since there is a change in the exclusivist ecclesiocentrism of the past, Cardinal Walter Kasper in an interview before the Synod, said there could be changes in other areas of Church teaching and that the Eucharist could be given to the divorced and remarried.
He meant if no one objects to the philosophical subjectivism in Vatican Council II and the 1949 Letter then why object to it in moral theology.
The editorial in La Stampa too agrees.For them a Confessor would be able to detect exceptions to the general moral teaching and these exceptions would be the new general rule in Catholic moral theology.The Maltese and German bishops have confirmed.This is the new norm and it has been supported by L'Osservatore Romano and the one world religion people.
Praxis and doctrine has been changed and they do not consider it heresy.They do not say that Pope Francis is supporting heresy.
There is a new doctrine in faith(salvation) and morals, based on subjectively being able to know practical exceptions  to the general rule . This is enforced pastorally and now it has been legitimized, made official, by Pope Francis in Amoris Laetitia.
It is a rejection of the Church's teachings on mortal sin, the Eucharist and the sanctity of marriage.-Lionel Andrades

1

https://mobile.twitter.com/EdwardPentin/status/823277663246843905?p=v

Bloggers are not discussing the real issue in the Rockford diocese


None of the traditionalists bloggers are concerned that the Most Rev. David J. Malloy the Bishop of Rockford is not permitting priests to offer the Traditional Latin Mass and affirm in public the old ecclesiology associated with this Mass.None of them are saying that the priest should be able to say that outside the Church there is no salvation since this was how Mass was offered over the centuries.
None of them are saying that Vatican Council II must be interpreted with Feeneyism and in harmony with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was known and offered by the priests in the 16th century.
None of them are saying that Lumen Gentium 16(invincible ignorance), Lumen Gentium 14( catechist with the desire for the baptism) refer to invisible, hypothetical and theoretical cases. So they are not exceptions to all needing to be incorporated into the Church as members in 2017 to avoid the fires of Hell.

Zero cases of something are not exceptions to the dogma EENS says the apologist John Martignoni.
None of them are saying that Vatican Council II (Feeneyite) is in harmony with extra ecclesiam nulla salus ( Feeneyite) and so there is no change in ecclesiology of the Catholic Church before and after Vatican Council II.
Instead like the Bishop of Rockford and Pope Francis they have accepted an extra ecclesiam nulla salus in which invisible cases are supposed to be known exceptions to all needing to be incorporated into the Church for salvaton.
Like the liberals and the Masons the traditionalists have accepted that Vatican Council II is break with Tradition and in particular the dogma EENS , since LG 16, LG 14,LG 8 refer to visible and personally known cases in 2017 saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
They like to refer to themself as traditionalists and criticize 'those modernists' when they themself  approve of the standard modernism of the liberals like EENS ( Cushngite) and Vatican Council(Cushingit).They interpret all magisterial documents using an irrational premise to create an innovated and non traditional conclusion.
When writing about the Rockford issue these points are not mentioned by Fr.John Zuhlsdord, Joseph Shaw ,New Catholic at Rorate Caeili and others.
Since in their personal life and on their media they would not like to affirm extra ecclesiam nulla salus (Feeneyite) and Vatican Council II(Feeneyite).
So with this silence EENS (Cushingite) and Vatican Council II ( Cushingite) is not an issue with the Rockford diocese Bishop and priests.

For the priests of the Institute of Christ the King the baptism of desire is an explicit exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. This is Cushingism.
For these traditionalist priests Vatican Council II,LG 16 etc refers to explicit cases objectively seen in 2017.This again is Cushingism.It is also fantasy theology.
It is a deception and a lie.It is worldly prudency, syncretism and indifferentism.It is faking it to maintain the peace and their status quo.
They know that if they say that the baptism of desire is always invisible for us and never was an exception to the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma EENS, then Bishop Malloy would not give them permission to offer the Latin Mass.Since this would be Feeneyism. It would be rational and Catholic.
They know that if they had said in public that Vatican Council II(LG 16 etc) does not contradict the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma EENS since invisible cases cannot be exceptions, they would not be allowed to offer Holy Mass.Even though they would be traditional and non heretical.
So the bloggers also maintain this silence and protect their reputation and status quo.
-Lionel Andrades



January 22, 2017

Catholic bishops and priests affirm the old ecclesiology in public,do not use the irrational premise, then we have the Mass of the Ages, the Traditional Latin Mass

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/01/when-catholic-bishops-and-priests-agree.html