SYDNEY PRIEST BLOCKS REPORT VATICAN COUNCIL II SAYS ALL MUSLIMS, JEWS IN ROME, ITALY ARE GOING TO HELL

On the internet-board True Catholic the report VATICAN COUNCIL II SAYS ALL MUSLIMS, JEWS IN ROME, ITALY ARE GOING TO HELL was blocked by the Administrator-priest.

Here is the report

VATICAN COUNCIL II SAYS ALL MUSLIMS, JEWS IN ROME, ITALY ARE GOING TO HELL
Contrary to what your parish priest has been saying Vatican Council II indicates that all Muslims and Jews in Rome and Italy are on the way to Hell.

So get this message across to the people so that they can conduct Catholic Mission and Evangelization based on the truth.

Do not hide it from Catholics in the parishes that the Bible, the Church and of course Vatican Council II says Jews and Muslims need to convert into the Catholic Church to go to Heaven. All of them.

The Council says this is in two important places .In Ad Gentes 7 it says all people need Catholic Faith and the Baptism of water for salvation. All means everyone with no exceptions.

Therefore, all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church's preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door.-Ad Gentes 7,Vatican Council II.

Then Ad Gentes 7 also says those who know about Jesus and the Catholic Church and yet do not enter are on the way to Hell. In Italy Muslims and Jews know about Jesus and the Catholic Church. It is a mortal sin of faith when they do not enter the Catholic Church.

Therefore those men cannot be saved, who though aware that God, through Jesus Christ founded the Church as something necessary, still do not wish to enter into it, or to persevere in it.-Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II
Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.-Lumen Gentium 14, Vatican Council II

So ask your parish priest why has he not spoken on this subject?

Is he trying to protect someone?

So many people are going to Hell and he does not speak or write about it?

Is he protecting himself?
_________________________________________

SYDNEY PRIEST AFFIRMS ALL THE TEACHINGS OF THE CHURCH IT IS CLAIMED (CHURCH WITHOUT EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS AND MORTAL SIN AND WITH SACRILEGOUS MASS?)

The Co Administrator of the Australian Internet-board True Catholic sent me a final note (Oct.24, 2010 ) to say that they affirm all the teachings of the Church. I had asked her, Julie, to ask the Co Administrator Fr. John George to affirm the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus , Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II, Dominus Iesus 20 and CCC 845,846. He would not.

Probably there could be other priests in the Archdiocese who will also say that they accept all the teachings of the Church. Their understanding of Church (ecclesiology) is that there is no mortal sin or if there is mortal sin no one can judge a mortal sin since we do not know the intentions of a person. Also, that  the Church has retracted extra ecclesiam nulla salus since Lumen Gentium 16 contradicts it. So for them since there is no more mortal sin there can be no accusation of a Sacrilegious Mass.

In the case of this Sydney priest the filth is all over the forum-board True Catholic and in full public view. He also controls the posts to the forum. Also his  cartoons, caricatures and photos are an example of the Archdiocese’s pastoral approach (Oct.23,2010).

lionel has a grave epistemological prob veering on delusion of reference

Posted by fr john george on October 23, 2010, 11:51 am

1 the fact that lionel doesnt know water baptisms in eg iraq doesnt mean they dont exist[try moral certitude] they are not to be relegated to lionels de iure concoction of figments, hypothesis and fantasy indeed non existence

2 existence of events doesnt hang on lionels knowledge of them[delusions of paranoid grandeur]

3 there is moral certitude of explicit baptism of desire[in fact infallible certitude since church doesnt define hypotheticals[bod and bob are explicitly defined

4.bod and bob are explicit de facto realities in past and present known with moral certitude

5 lionel overestimates his abilities in saying infallibly bod and bob people are known only to god

6.moral certitude is the bane of rigid jansenists[they atrociously lack common sense reject probablism -causing untold harm to confessional practice-wanting infallible certitude versus moral certitude or common sense[or aquinas' synderisis]-they leave a devastating trail of despairing scruple cases

the infallible definitions of bod and bob supplement eens definitions

In the October 21, 2010, 8:32 pm, post in reply to "Re: I HAVE PROVEN IN ENCHIRIDION…

He is asked:

Here is the dogma text referred to in the Denzinger and the Haec Suprema.

Do you acknowledge that it exists and do you as a Catholic affirm it?

If not simply say no.

COUNCIL OF TRENT INFALLIBLY TAUGHT SALVATION THROUGH BAP OF DESIRE Posted by fr john george on October 21, 2010, 5:26 pm, in reply to "Re: Mr. Andrades and Mr. George, Baptists don't go to Hell. Salvation only comes through Jesus Christ"

TO SAY WE CANT KNOW PEIOLE SAVED BY BAPOF DESIRE IS LIKE SAYING YOUUPHOLD SACRAMENT OF CONFESSION BUT YOU CANT TELL WHO HA BEEN RESTORED TO SANCTIFYING GRACE[THERE ARE TELL TALE SIGNS=RECEPTION OF COMMUNION BUT ONLY MORAL CERTITUDE AS THERE CAN BE SACRILEGES

So how can this priest in the Archdiocese of Sydney reject an ex cathedra dogma and still offer Mass as if all is normal.

To not affirm the dogma text when repeatedly asked is a mortal sin. A priest Fr.Tissia Balasuriya OMI was formally excommunicated by Pope John Paul II for rejecting the ex cathedra dogma of the Immaculate Conception of Our Lady.

Why is Fr.John permitted to offer Mass ?

Divorcees and married priests in the Archdiocese of Sydney or the rest of Australia  who are not permitted to receive the Eucharist or in the case of ex priests not permitted to offer Mass could ask why  an exception is being made for Fr.John George?. Fr.John is a retired supplementary priest of the Archdiocese.

Canon Law states that a priest in public mortal sin is not to offer Mass. Veritatis Splendor states that a mortal sin is a mortal sin and the exterior action indicates the inner intention.

How can he claim that there is a visible,knowable baptism of desire ?

Why should implicit baptism of desire be in conflict with the ex cathedra dogma. If there are any persons saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance it will be known to God only.So it does not conflict with the dogmatic teaching that every one  with no exception needs to be a formal member of the Cathoilc Church to go to Heaven avoid Hell.

In no Magisterial texts including Vatican Council II is it said that invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire refer to 'explicit' knowable cases. Even the Popes and their Councils which gave us the infallible teaching knew that baptism of desire is always implicit  and so unknown to us. So why make it an issue?

Why use a false interpretation to commit a mortal sin and then offer Mass in Sydney which is a sacrilege known to many people through the Internet forum and through these posts sent to them in the offices of the Archdiocese asking them to stop this sacrilege of the Eucharist.

_________________________________________________________________

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2010/10/sydney-priest-affirms-all-teachings-of.html